Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
        • Thanks
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Note from bailiff for someone that does not live at my home


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2546 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Came home and found a folded bit of paper in my porch thought its another flyer but before consigning to bin unfolded it and

 

it was a note headed

HM Courts and Tribunals Service

xxxx Combined Court

 

The Bailiff needs to serve you some paperwork please call the Bailiff to arrange service

Name.....xxxxxxxxx...........

 

If this person no longer lives here please advise the Court immediately

Case Numberxxxxxxxxxx

Big letters URGENT CONTACT REQUIRED

xxxxxxxxxx

Court Bailiff

 

The person named has never lived at my address and is not on electoral roll and I have never had any paperwork for that name

 

When I rang Bailiff

started that you need to prove they don't live here

er no I don't

did you do any checks i electoral roll

er no

so why are you leaving details about someone else at my address

didn't seem to think there was anything wrong with doing this despite the guidelines

 

Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

acting in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor either

 

deliberately or through lack of care,

e.g. by not putting correspondence in a sealed envelope

and putting it through a letterbox,

thereby running the risk that it could be read by third parties.

not impressed

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Mrs Hobbit

I would making a complaint to the Court Manager and also to the ICO. Don't know if it would gt any results but this is the behaviour of those so called field agents employed by DCA's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like they want to serve a notice to attend a court hearing, to the person they are looking for.

 

Phone the court and when you do ask for the full name and full address of the person they are looking for. Also if the address is yours, ask them what records did they use for tracing, as you want to make a complaint to the ICO, if there has been an error in handling data.

 

Won't be the first time that a wrong address has been found. It might be a similar address in your area. I had similar years ago, when the local court selected a wrong address on a drop down box on their system. So instead of x Hanbury Drive, they selected x Highbury Drive. Of course the bailiff will just go to the address they are given.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus, what are you all on about. Making a mountain ut of a mole hill.

Its very likely that the debtor gave the address as his address.

Just send proof of occupancy to the court or the EA and it will go away.

 

Just phone the court, check it is a court matter and ot a [problem], and then email council tax letter, tenancy agreement or something similar to them.

 

Or you could ignore, it could progress to a fine, if ita not already there, and things get a whole lot worse then.

Or alternatively, if the debtor fails to accept service, or cant be contacted, a warrant could be issued for his arrest AT YOUR ADDRESS. So you would then have to prove occupancy to a copper on the doorstep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Calm down dear !

 

If this is the first time that any attempt has been made to contact the person at this address and according to the OP they have never lived at the address, then i would think it was unlikely the address has been given as their residential address. The OP would be wise to ensure they get to the bottom of this to see why the address has been contacted and to ensure they nip in the bud, to save any future annoyance.

 

I don't see why they have to start sending off information to prove this other person does not live there, if they genuinely have no clue who they are.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does every innocent person have to prove who they are now,

 

It seems everyone is Guilty, in the eyes of authority, this is not how it should work

 

Just because the EA has not done the checks before hand,

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a quick electoral roll check no trace of name and Court Bailiff admitted no checks are done to verify.

 

As for Police turning up they are welcome, I probably will know them as a result of my work, they usually turn up at the wrong house because they miss read or dont see the right number not because PNC is inaccurate

 

what got up my nose was this wasn't a cowboy but a court officer and the possible effect if there was a house share and another person or a landlord came round and read it when in fact it might not even be a valid claim.

 

Made complaint to Court

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does every innocent person have to prove who they are now,

 

It seems everyone is Guilty, in the eyes of authority, this is not how it should work

 

Just because the EA has not done the checks before hand,

 

Can quote morality and stuff all day. The court has issues a warrant to that address. The bailiff will keep contacting and coming until court calls him off. Otherwise it would be stupidly easy to escape justice.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The court has issues a warrant to that address".

 

The court issues civil warrants to a Person or Company at the address given by the plaintiff

often the last known address if the person or company is not there

 

 

repeat visits are not likely because it wastes the Bailiffs time and is against the collection protocols as in this case

 

 

the Court has been advised by the Bailiffs superior that the address for service is incorrect

and the matter has been returned to the plaintiff,

the breach of collection guidelines is ongoing.

 

Its not morality its law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well may be we need a bit of Morality back in our lives,

Some times the law can be an a ss

Warrants not needed to be shown, why have we let it become this way,

I know my rant is not going to change any thing, but if it is not said then it will only get worse

 

 

Leakie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Mrs Hobbit

I don't need to know my neighbour is debtor, yet i was told this by a field agent from a certain company. he was demanding, not asking where she worked and other personal details. i told him on his bike he is trespassing on my property and on hers as he has not been invited by either of us. I rang the company he is representing and have followed this up with a letter citing the relevant legislation he has breached. I contacted my neighbour, let her know what is happening, she will be returning back to the UK in two weeks. She said they are looking for someone with a similar name and she has been trying to sort this for nearly six months on her own. she is not on her own now...I am also informing the ICO about the behaviour of this person and the DCA concerned.

 

I learnt a lot about the person he is trying to contact, recorded it all on my phone.

 

We do need MORALITY.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When one of my relative moved abroad they used my address to forward on correspondence. Unknown to me a few debts were left behind, most of which were contested amounts after services stopped, because they were no longer required. These debts were chased for years. I gave them the foreign address, so many times, all ignored.

 

As a third party, i had the following.

 

Asked to pay my relatives debts by several DCA's, but never in writing. Several times by phone and one cheeky b*gger of a doorstep collector who said wasn't it embarrassing to have a relative with debts, we will blacklist your address. Told them to go away and pester mugs that would believe their rubbish. Never heard again.

 

One DCA even phoned neighbours asking who lived at my address. Phoned their compliance manager and gave them a b*llocking. Never heard from them again and amounts written off.

 

This is the reason, i don't think we should tolerate any problems, as if you let it drag on, it just gets worse. As a third party it is difficult getting people looking for money to leave you alone, so you must be very agressive from the very beginning. I made the mistake of being nice to start of with and it did not work. I learnt that you must go for the jugular at the start and make a formal complaint, elevating it if necessary.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Note from bailiff for someone that does not live at my home
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...