Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi Mango,   Please don't post in large blocks of text as it's far harder to read. Spacing added for you in the post above.   Please give brief answers to UncleB's Q's above so we can better assess your case, thanks.
    • "These are certainly not the persuasive decisions that this Claimant may suggest." Well worded.   I would add that as VCS have been  active in Airports over the years  that one would  expect they would be familiar with the Airports Act which would call into question the accuracy of their WS.   By questioning their WS you are hoping that VCS might decide not to turn up in Court [giving you a walkover] as they might not want the Judge looking closely at their WS. Also it would not be good for them should you win your case based on the Airports Act as it will have other Courts  kicking out other Airport cases hitting them in the pocket.    
    • Hi,   Still no response. I have my Liability Order hearing in a few days time, I was hoping I might have been able to receive a response from either my local councillor or the leader of the council before then. I wonder if they are just going to ignore my email?   Walshy    
    • I have got an  independent expert report which clearly states it is a manufacturing fault, which DFS have been made aware of.   My point is that as a huge retailer of leather sofas with leather peeling  being a common complaint to me it seems evident they are aware it is a manufacturing fault on their side. Yet they play games with customers and worse of all try their level best to get the customer to believe that it is their fault due to oils or creams they are using.   Even if one is to believe that every day creams etc can cause this damage then in any event the sofas are not fit for purpose.   Surely they are merely playing a numbers game banking on the fact that most complainants will not follow through with legal action. Yet what about the anguish and distress they cause to customers in the process.   To me this shows alot of contempt towards consumers and is clearly unethical.
    • I would if I could tobyjugg  Did the same run today over an hour quicker than yesterday, thats what happens when you know where to go and not just try finding places with the postcode as I was yesterday
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

HPH2/Cohen Claimform - old Barclay Partner finance Loan Debt


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 939 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

Good afternoon,

 

Any help would really be appreciated.

 

This relates to a loan that was taken out years ago and prior to 2009.

I cannot be more precise at this moment.

I got into financial difficulty and defaulted on the payments.

This has been in the hands of a number of companies.

 

I do not recall getting regular correspondence and I believe the last payment ever made was 2014.

This has dropped off my credit file.

 

I did receive a letter I August 2015 to say that I was entitled to redress on my loan as the discovered following changes of CCA (1/8/08) that they sent customers incorrect information about their loan and in some cases did not send information they should have done and as such were not entitled to charge interest and default fees from the initial error of 31/1/2009 until today.

 

I then received a letter March 2017 advising that they did not send some documents that they were required to do and sent notice of sums of arrears we should have sent me. The arrears notice is again dated March 2017 and dates back to November 2014.

 

Well today I have received a Claim Form issued on the 9th Jan 2018 for the sum of £8076.85.

 

The particulars of claim state the debt was legally assigned by Barclays Bank Plc (Ex Barclays) to the claimant and notice was 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.

 

Now I believe that I will need to do the following:-

 

- Acknowledge Service advising I intend to dispute and ask for 28 days to file a defence

- Send a request to Howard Cohen & Co for CCA Request with a £1.00 cheque

 

I there anything else I should be doing at this stage?

 

Regards,

 

Colin

-

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

its the CCA to Hoist Portfolio with a blank £1 postal order

 

And a CPR 31.14 to Cohen

 

Neither of these are signed by you just printed name

 

Please read this link and post up the relevant details https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-2016**(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

Did you receive a Pre action Protocol letter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I intend to dispute and ask for 28 days to file a defence

 

you done defend all

nothing more you need to do or send other than the CPR 31:14

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

Name of the Claimant ? Hoist Portfolio Holding Ltd

 

Date of issue – 09/01/2018

What is the claim for –

1.This claim is for the sum of £8078.95 in respect of monies owing under a Agreement with the account no......... pursuant to the consumer creditlink3.gif Act 1974 (CCA).

The debt was legally assigned by Barclays Bank Plc (Ex Barclays) to the Claimant and notice has been served.

2.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.

3. The Claimant claims

1. The sum of £ 8076.95

2. Costs

What is the value of the claim? £8078.95

 

Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? loan.

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? Not sure would have been around this time

 

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. HPH2

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Do not recall

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Cannot recall

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? Do not think so

 

Why did you cease payments? Financial Problems

 

What was the date of your last payment? November 2014

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes

Link to post
Share on other sites

particulars of claim exactly as they are written on the claimform please

just minus account number

 

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.

.

register as an individual

note the long gateway number given

then log in

.

select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.

.

then using the details required from the claimform

.

defend all

leave jurisdiction unticked.

click thru to the end

confirm and exit MCOL.

.

get a CCA Request running to the claimant

leave the £1PO blank and uncrossed

.

get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors

.

type your name ONLY

 

no need to sign anything

.

you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.

you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform.

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

That makes your defence due by 4pm 9th Feb

 

Have a look through the forums and see what the process is and have a look at defences use the search bar

 

Make sure you get those letters off as soon as possible

Link to post
Share on other sites

Particulars of Claim are as follows:-

 

This claim is for the sum of £8078.95 in respect of monies owing under a Agreement with the account no......... pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA).

The debt was legally assigned by Barclays Bank Plc (Ex Barclays) 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 £ 8076.95

2. Costs

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Evening,

 

So far not replies from CCA Request and also CPR 31:14 although early days.

 

I have started to think about Defence and done some research and come up with the following. Your thoughts would be appreciated.

 

1. The Defendant avers that the Claimants pleadings are an abuse of process. The Claimants pleadings are lacking in detail, there are no details as to what the debt relates excepting that the original debt is alleged to be owed to Barclays Partner Finance.

 

2. The Particulars of Claim do not specify the type of account or give any reference number to assist the Defendant identifying the account. The particulars of claim appear to only relate to a single contract between himself and Barclays Partner Finance.

 

The particulars of claim appear to relate to a single contract between himself and Barclays Partner Finance and the Defendant does not hold any records.

 

3. The Defendant believes the claim may relate to a Loan however is not aware of any remaining debt owed on the account.

 

4. Due to the confusion as to what the claim relates, the Defendant has requested further information from the Claimants.

 

The Defendant requested this information on the 12th January 2018 as under CPR 31:14 and requested a copy of the agreement/contract, default notice and notice of assignment.

The Claimant has not suppled any documentation to the Defendant.

 

5. The Defendant has also formally requested on the 15th January 2018 a copy of any consumer credit Agreement applicable to the claim under section 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

The Claimant has not supplied any documentation in response to the request.

 

6. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation.

 

Therefore it is expected that the Claimant required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed.

 

7. The Defendant would prefer to sort any outstanding debt out if any exits but feels unable to as the Claimants have not identified the account/s the Claim is based upon so is unable to plead effectively.

 

8. The Defendant denies the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed.

 

Accordingly, the Defendant avers that

 

9. The Claimant has failed to plead properly in this matter.

 

10. Therefore, the Claimant Claim should be dismissed.

 

11. In the alternative, should the Claimant evidence their claim properly the Defendant reserves the right to plead further and the Claimant bear the costs.

 

Statement of Truth

The Defendant believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

 

Signed

 

Dated

Link to post
Share on other sites

but the poc does give account number etc etc.

 

not sure where you've got that defence from but its not one of recent from here

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

Far too much information...respond to the particulars of claim only.

 

 

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 OTHERS

 

 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
  • 2 weeks later...

Time is approaching to file the defence. All I have heard is an acknowledgment to say that they are asking their client for the documents I have requested.

 

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 Finance 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 under the consumer credit Act 1974

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied I have not been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of a legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1)……….

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine so far...now add the rest which puts thew claimant to strict proof if the claim progresses.......

 

5. On receipt of the claim form, I the Defendant sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement. To date, nothing has been received.

 

6. A further request was sent via CPR 31.14 to the claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. To date nothing has been received.

 

7. 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 and;

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 87 CCA1974

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

 

8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed

 

9. 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 and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

10. 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.

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 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

Thank you Andy,

 

Defence should read as follows?

 

Do I need Sign and date or just put Defence on line?

 

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 Finance 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 under the consumer credit Act 1974

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied I have not been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of a legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1)……….

5. On receipt of the claim form , I the Defendant sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the consumer credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement. To date, nothing has been received.

 

6. A further request was sent via CPR 31.14 to the claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. To date nothing has been received.

 

7. 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 and;

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 87 CCA1974

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

 

8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed

 

9. 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 and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

10. 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are filing via a website...MCOL

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

so they have 28 days to do something.

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
  • 4 weeks later...

nope

next move is theirs.

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

Nothing heard at all. Assume that Proceedings now stayed and would have to pay to resurrect?

 

Assume you cannot apply to try and bring this matter to a resolution?

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes

no

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

Just received this morning a notice from the Court, can you let me know what if anything I should be doing

 

"Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Small Claims Track" "Important Notice - If you do not comply with this notice the court will make such an order as appears to be appropriate. This could include striking out the claim or entering judgement."

 

Take Notice that:

 

1. This is now a defended claim.

The defendant has filed a defence

 

2. It appears that this case is suitable for allocation to the small claims track.

If you believe that this s not appropriate track for the claim, you must complete box C1 on the Small Claims Direction Questionnaire (Form N180) and explain why.

 

3. You must by 25th March 2018 complete the Small Claims Directions Questionnaire (Form N180) and file it with the court office

the County Court Business Centre, 4th Floor St Katherine's House, 21-27 St Katherine's Street, Northampton, NN1 2LH

 

and serve copies on all other parties.

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...