Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Do you think I should send the CCA request now then instead of waiting? I really can do without the stress. Any advice would be appreciated. Thank you for responding.
    • How was the "receiver" appointed and what is their role? Appointed by the lender under the terms of their security on the loan (sometimes referred to as "LPA Receiver")? Or are they acting for you in insolveny? What's the current role of the agent?
    • Wait for more replies, but that letter to me can be interpreted as a letter before action. Ignoring it can have consequences. The court to impose sanctions for failure in responding to a letter of claim.
    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
  • 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 
      • 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

hoist/cohen claimform - barclaycard debt***Claim Discontinued***


joebloggs72
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2249 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

HI all

have a sepearte thread for another of these

 

hoist have sent me a claim form for a debt for a barclaycard pre 2007

 

i have already sent a cca request off to hoist which they have repsonded saying they are looking into it and a cpr request to cohen which they have ignored

 

i also sent off a SAR request to barclaycard via the online tool a few weeks back heard nothing and they havent called to take a £10 payment

 

the particulars of the claim are

 

This claim is for the sum of £5410.23 in respect of monies owing under an agreemen with the account number xxxxxx pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974 (CCA)

 

The debt was legally assigned by MKDP LLP (ex barclaycard) to the claimant and notice has been served the defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement

a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to s.87(1) CCA

The claimant claims

1. the sum of £5410.23

2.costs

 

just need help with defence

i already been a logged onto moneyclaim and did that ready to file the defence which i have another week or so to do i beleive the claim is dated 24 april

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Joe

 

If you could read the following link which explains the process and then copy and paste the Qs and your responses back here for further advice on how to proceed with the claim.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-2016**(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Name of the Claimant ? HOIST PORTFOLIO HOLDING 2 LTD

Date of issue – 24 april 2017

 

What is the claim for

1.This claim is for the sum of £5410.00 in respect of monies owing under an agreemen with the account number xxxxxx pursuant to the consumer crediticon act 1974 (CCA)

The debt was legally assigned by MKDP LLP (ex barclaycard) to the claimant and notice has been served

2.the defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement

 

3.a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to s.87(1) CCA

 

4.

The claimant claims

1. the sum of £5410.00

2.costs

 

What is the value of the claim? £5410 plus £510 costs

 

Is the claim for a current (Overdraft) or credit card /loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? creditcard

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? between 2002-2004

 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor

or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. HOIST

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? dont know been that long probably did and got filed under junk

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? honestly cant remember

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? not as far as i am aware

 

Why did you cease payments? my belief the last payment was november the 11 2011

What was the date of your last payment? nov 11 2011

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? dont believe so other then they wanted paying and i didnt have the funds to do so

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? yes told them i couldnt pay they accepted £50 per month but i had to still be charged interest for two months which was more then the payments made

 

What you need to do now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think i have a week left to sort my defense

 

 

this is what i used in the other thread

 

Defence

 

1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.

The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with Barclays but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request.

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) from either the original creditor or MKDP LLP or HPH2.

 

4. Paragraph 3 is further denied. I do not recall ever receiving a Default Notice pursuant to s.87(1) CCA. or any advance notice or warning.

 

5. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement

b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for and

c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974

d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim

 

6. As per Civil Procedureicon 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed

 

7. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act

 

8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

 

 

only problem is pretty much have no idea whats relevant and what isnt with the above defense so any help so i can submit i would be very greatful for

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

since i posted the defence on this back in may i havent heard anything else checking online at moneyclaim

A claim was issued against you on 24/04/2017

 

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 26/04/2017 at 19:04:11

 

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 27/04/2017 at 08:02:38

 

Your defence was submitted on 24/05/2017 at 10:14:20

 

Your defence was received on 24/05/2017 at 12:02:53

 

do they have a deadline to do something

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the deadline has been and gone....33 days after you submitted your defence...if they wish to proceed now they have to make application with fee (£255) to proceed and with good reason for the delay.

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

claims can remain stayed for years

there are reasoned arguments that if they do leave it years then pay the fee to lift the stay

that that's a bit unfair as although the SB clock stopped its now years SB'd if it had not.

 

it makes no diff to credit files

 

the debt will vanish from your file on the defaults 6th birthday regardless

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

typically they should have defaulted on the 3rd missed payment.

if a few months doesn't hurt you then leave alone. IMHO

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Well done...thread title amended to reflect the outcome.

 

Please consider making a donation to help us to continue to help others similar to yourself.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done everyone

 

Dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...