Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I don't understand the bit about looking after your own being criminal, TJ. Could you expand on that please?
    • A somewhat good result. After more chasing, they've sent me a spreadsheet of the accounts for fire protection, water charges and electric.  Communal Electricity - Estimated £45.00, Actual £241.73 - Revised: £41.63 Communal Water - Estimated £3.66, Actual £234.91 - Revised: £76.96 Fire Protection - Estimated £2.08, Actual £147.65 - Revised: £51.15 Still it seems too high, the total for this estate alone for water charges came to £62,950.07 last year. The thing is, they've listed blocks that don't seem to exist on our estate. Possibly from the new development that has only just been built on the estate, which was finished in the summer this year.     
    • The largest ever amount that went into that account was £500 which was about 7 months before it was blocked.    There was no going forward income as the 1st lockdown came 6 weeks later and I went straight onto universal credit after that and have been on it ever since.    Bottom line, at the time it was the only account I had add and all of my savings of £16500 were in there which I had no access to after it was blocked. Tried to contact the car finance company but no one was available throughout the pandemic likewise many other companies who registered a default
    • so you got the original letter asking for your side of the story and replied by email. post up what you said in your reply by email please and their reply.   you later got a letter stating this will be heard by the simple justice proceedure at xyz court on xyz date but still inviting you comment or plea?   how many time and how many days did you use this for and WHAT EXCATLY (the bit in black) on the letter from the SJP court have you been charged with..??   one specific event on xyz date ,...with other uses being by tickboxes to be taken into consideration and wiped if you agree?   what DATE is the court hearing?
    • A more controversial point is that Johnson has made it illegal to look after your family, requiring you to choose between them.   No one I know doubts or questions that people hosting raves and such like should be prosecuted given the situation, just as those gathering for fox hunts and grouse shoots should be, but effectively making people who are simply trying to safely and sensibly look after their own into criminals while the government pals do whatever they like and are thrown taxpayer money by the BILLION for nothing is obnoxious and abhorrent, especially when you can go to a restaurant or supermarket or transport hub and be in close contact with hundreds of strangers.     Oh look - 6 + 1 in close contact from 14+ households and only one wearing a mask - leading by appallingly bad example.    
  • Our picks

Link/idr/Barclaycard...***Claim Dismissed***

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1106 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

yesterday I had a case dismissed in the County Court brought by IDR via Kearns.


A quick run down of the case:

Following the sale of a Barclaycard debt to IDR, a letter was received from Link demanding money together with a default placed on my credit record.


[removed] I challenged the allegation.

This seemed to put them off - or so I thought.


A year later I received a hearing letter via the Northampton courts and subsequently submitted a defence.

This led to the case being successfully stayed.

At this point I submitted a CCA and S78 request to Link via Kearns.


Kearns reply was that they did not need to apply the time constraints I had specified.


It took them almost six months to provide this information and at the same time they (without notice) successfully applied to have the stay lifted.


My first mistake was not applying for the claim to be struck out following the specified time.


the claim was then directed to the fast track process due to the debt being in excess of 10k - which as we know has the added risk of costs!!!!

In deed a number of letters from Kearns continued to warn me that "costs were escalating".....


I decided to focus all my efforts into compiling what I considered a rock solid defence based upon the fact they had failed to send the correct doc stated.


What I did receive was a photocopy of a photocopy of an application form,

the "deed" of assignment and some letters allegedly sent from both Barclays and IDR.


Eventually, almost 18 months later I had my day in court.


Firstly the DJ was extremely accommodating and seemed to have an air of empathy with me

(maybe fed up with the likes of Kearns appearing in court (or their advocate) with no defence presented and therefore continually being awarded the case on default!




The case was planned for a day but was done and dusted within three hours.

It seemed the claimants main argument was based on a moral argument that I had paid some of the debt at some point and the address on the application married with my current address so therefore I owed the money.


I made no attempt to deny a barclaycard was at some point held but that the assignment and default process was not followed correctly.


I was shown copied of Barclaycard statements for a period of three months highlighting my address and the amount outstanding.

The counsel then stated that if they had provided ALL the statements for the life of the account then it would have been several folders worth...

the Judge then commented that they should in deed be there.

I thought nothing of this statement.....


We were told to leave for an hour to allow the DJ to read through the paperwork until judgement.


One coffee later we were called in and the DJ went on to say that she accepted the application form and that it seemed the deed of assignment were correct (despite being a pre 2007 agreement).


As she went through her findings I felt that I was now facing the judgement of awarding the case to IDR but possibly not the statuary interest.


It was at this point that I was then shell shocked went she went on to say

- "how could she possibly award an amount specified by Keanrs on behalf of IDR if she could not see how the debt was accrued

(by virtue of not seeing ALL statements) and announced case dismissed!!!


I was asked what costs I wanted to be considered and in the numbness said nothing and that I was just happy with the verdict.


The assigned debt was £13k, but with inflated costs from LINK had risen to £18.5 and was then looking at aprox £6k of legal costs....this was going to cost me in region of £25k


my lesson ere is never give up hope,

to do not crumble under pressure and present yourself in an amicable manner during court

(the DJ remarked on how well I conducted myself and that i was quite right in challenging any alleged debt!


Thanks to the likes of these forums I was able to see that there was another outcome than just allowing a default CCJ to be registered.


Now on to getting the default lifted!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Moving your thread to FLI for the time being dunker so posters have chance to view.





We could do with some help from you.



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


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

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...