Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Court hearing today. WON on all counts of claim. The win though is not the interesting bit, but the ‘why’ is really useful. We were allocated 90 minutes but it took two hours by telephone . The defense were represented but I failed to note whether by a solicitor, barrister or other advocate.   As soon as the judge finished the introductions and before he had time to pass the time over to me to explain my case, the defense interrupted and asked the claim be struck out. He then spent the next 40 minutes discussing with the judge that I had failed to properly serve my bundle upon which I intended to rely. The judge asked me to explain and I said I had served the bundle to them and the court 3 days before the deadline, by signed for post with a tracking number to the address named in the summons being the Royal Mail Head Office in London. I said it was a bit rich that they were making this request when they had failed to serve me and the court with their bundle within the deadline and that I had only just received it. They quoted a certain principle of law (which I failed to write down) which explained that service of documents must be made to the address which either party may request service to be made. They claimed that six months earlier when they lodged their defense to my summons, the covering letter had been sent from their Sheffield office and it constituted the address for future service of documents. I of course had no idea of such a requirement and said that a simple letter heading on a piece of correspondence was not the same as a formal sentence in a letter requesting such future service. It gave the judge some concern but he decided to park the issue and allow the hearing to continue.   I was able to explain my case for the £50 compensation for the lost parcel using the evidence from the defense bundle referencing the Overseas Post Scheme. It was all straight forward. I explained the facts and let them speak for themselves. I then moved on to the delayed Special Delivery items. This is where the fun began because I had to argue against their terms and conditions. I used the defense bundle referencing the UK Post Scheme. I quoted from various clauses which explained the rules relating to claims. That ALL delay claims must be made within 3 months, then that Special Delivery was actually 14 days so not 3 months after all, then another clause which confirmed the deadline was 3 months for all delay claims. I quoted further that these were “common terms” and that some services (Special Delivery was one) had additional terms which were called “specific terms”. Another clause stated that where a conflict arises between common and specific terms, then specific terms took priority. So I turned to the Special Delivery section to quote the specific terms as these would have priority. There was only one term that referenced claims. It simply said If we do not succeed in attempting to deliver by this time (being the next day) we will refund your postage. I used this single phrase to take priority over the 3 months  or 14 day deadline mentioned in the common terms. I discussed how the various clauses conflicted with themselves as if the clauses themselves did not know what the deadlines were and how ambiguous and confusing it was.   The time was then past to the defense and he started to argue there was no contract nor liability in tort (a substantial portion of their written defense document and bundle discussed this argument). It made me smile because I was ready for that. The judge though was ahead of the game and (especially because 40 minutes had been wasted at the beginning) he did not want to hear of it. After about one minute, he stopped the defense by saying exactly what I was preparing to say. Simply that I was not suing under contract or tort but under the conditions of the various postal schemes for which they were liable. He asked the defense to answer my claims. The defense then prevaricated trying to argue the clause that distinctly mentioned the 14 day time limit within which to make a claim for delay (which of course it did) ( as an aside, most people might accept that deadline and not bother to pursue a claim). He had nothing to add about the lost parcel.   Time had run out, we had no questioning and the judge said he was summing up. He was quite happy I had served my documents sufficiently well and took the view that the defense had fallen foul of the court order so he was cancelling out the question about valid service. He had no difficulty in accepting the claim that the lost parcel was valid and awarded me the £50 compensation. He then spoke at longer length about the delay claims and the conflict in the clauses. (at this point I had no idea which way this bit would go). Then, he spoke of how a business such as Royal Mail should not be accepting clauses in their contracts which were clearly inconsistant. (that’s when I started to relax), (and then the best takeaway of the hearing), He said that common law provides in the event of a standard contract if there is any ambiguity, the interpretation should be judged against the person drafting the contract. He called it Contra Proferendem. (I had no idea of that concept but had effectively explained it anyway). I was awarded the whole claim plus costs. The defense asked for permission to appeal which was refused.    Remember the phrase “Contra Proferendem” . I shall be looking more into it. I am sure it will come in handy against any institution that have drafted contracts that cannot be individually negotiated. And will certainly be useful for a long while yet against Royal Mail et al.
    • Original loan was £5000 unsecured over 5 years, 28 payments remaining, he wanted to extend it back up to 5 year.........the bank offered him £6700 to clear his credit card and the bank loan, £135 per month from the original figure of £121    One debt of two years old and one debt of 15 months        
    • Probably a good thing in disguise. Its never a good idea to bundle up everything to one creditor.   How big was the loan to be and would it have been secured? And how old are all his other debts? Who says they even enforceable?   Dx
    • My son was offered an extension to his current loan, with Barclays, they saw him as a good risk due to surplus money still in his account each month, the extension was to include his Barclay Card, all finances including external credit loans and personal circumstances were taken into consideration, and they still saw him as a good risk.......   he was declined today....He didn't ask to have his loan extended but they said he was pre approved and they could help him and he would be financially better off, which is true he would be.......apparently his outgoings were to much in relation to his income which is totally rubbish..its only 47% out goings    So we would like to make an official hard hitting complaint   Thanks to all who read my jottings  
    • Can you make them road legal by placing a sticker on them with the relevant info?  Just a thought...
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • Ebay Packlink and Hermes - destroyed item as it was "damaged". https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/430396-ebay-packlink-and-hermes-destroyed-item-as-it-was-damaged/&do=findComment&comment=5087347
      • 33 replies
    • 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
  • Recommended Topics

  • Recommended Topics

Cabot/Restons ClaimForm - old Tesco credit card debt


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 993 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

Name of the Claimant ? Cabot Financial UK Limited

 

Date of issue – 17th January 2018

 

What is the claim for –

 

 

1.The claimant claims payment of the overdue balance due from the Defendant(s) under a contract between the Defendant(s) and Tesco Personal Finance Plc dated on or around Oct 20 2012 and assigned to the claimant on Aug 14 2017. Particulars are a/c no xxxxxxxxxxx

 

DATE 11/12/2017 ITEM Default Balance Value

 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? I received a PAP and responded with a CCA (postal order etc)

 

What is the value of the claim? Between 3 and 4 k

 

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

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? After

 

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. Assigned to Cabot who are the claimant.

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Yes probably, didnt keep letters, was in a bad way.

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? I believe I did.

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? I do not recall getting these.

 

Why did you cease payments? Financial hardship, Mortgage arrears accumulating

 

What was the date of your last payment? Some time in 2014

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Not that I am aware of

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? NO unfortunately.

 

 

Hi all,

thanks for being here for those of us who are having a hard time..

 

 

..Before Xmas (so that postal delays were at the maximum)

I received a PAP from Restons/Cabot to which I responded with the CCA according to the forum guidelines.

 

 

Within a day or two of this I received a Claim Letter from Restons

 

I am trying to prepare the CPR31 but the particulars dont really amount to much so what should I request in respect of the evidence they may be presenting?

 

The clock is ticking and I am yet to post the Acknowledgement of Service.

The claim also doesnt give a court 'name' as such,

just a county court business centre and a number. Is this correct?

 

Thank you for any help/reassurance you could give me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Dialatron and Welcome to CAG

 

You should not be getting a claim form a day or two after notification (PaP) there must be 30 days for allowance of exchange of information.

 

You state a court claim from Restons ? Not posted to you from Northampton ?

 

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 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

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 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.

 

I would inc it all in the cpr 31:14 reston wont respond anyway.

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

Apologies for my confusion

- the PAP letter and Claim letters were about 30 days apart maybe less, I don't have them to hand.

 

It may have been under 30 days in my 'possession' as they used 2nd class post during Xmas and the letter date was some days earlier than when I received it.

 

I did respond with the CCA within the 30 days but it looks like they sent the claim letter regardless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

And the claim form....from Restons or from the court direct (Northampton MCOL CCBC) ?

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

so innocent typos

as post 3 then

 

get moving you've already lost +1 week of your 33 days

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

follow post 3

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

Apologies - service has been acknowledged and the CPR 31.14 is ready to send today.

 

Without getting maudlin its a comfort to have help - won't deny that I'm still pretty scared by all this and what might happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

nothing to be scared of

dentist is far worse

 

who did you send the cca request too?

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

ok good

get read !!

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
  • 2 weeks later...

std reply reston send to every CPR if you go read like threads!!

 

don't miss your defence filing date!

 

post it up here first and we'll check it for you.

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
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi, been looking through some other cases and here is my first draft of the defence - hoping to get it up very soon...

 

Particulars of claim (for reference only)

 

1.The claimant claims payment of the overdue balance due from the Defendant(s) under a contract between the Defendant(s) and Tesco Personal Finance Plc dated on or around Oct 20 2012

 

2. And assigned to the claimant on Aug 14 2017. Particulars are a/c no xxxxxxxxxxx

DATE 11/12/2017 ITEM Default Balance Value

 

 

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 and it is accepted insofar that I have once held a contractual relationship with Tesco Personal Finance Plc. I do not recollect the details nor am I aware of any outstanding balance that the claimant refers to and have therefore sought clarity from the claimant. I am unaware of any missed minimum payments,.the service of a valid Default Notice and the alleged agreement being terminated, and

 

3.Paragraph 2 is denied.I am unaware of any alleged legal assignment or Notice of Assignment from the Claimant.

 

It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant.

 

4. On the 10th January 2018 I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a Section 78 request to the Claimant Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd to gain further details.

5. On the 24th January 2018 I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request to Restons Solicitors Ltd to gain further details.

 

6. It is therefore denied the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant must provide evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

(b) show and evidence the nature of the breach and service of a valid default notice;

© show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

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

 

7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

8. 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.

 

9. 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.

Edited by Andyorch
Edited
Link to post
Share on other sites

A few edits...I would remove the point in blue above..the particulars do not refer to any default or termination of the agreement.

 

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 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

Thanks Andy, update below. Is there any need/benefit to point out that I have had no response to my letter to Cabot and/or that my request predates the action?

 

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 and it is accepted insofar that I have once held a contractual relationship with Tesco Personal Finance Plc. I do not recollect the details nor am I aware of any outstanding balance that the claimant refers to and have therefore sought clarity from the claimant.

3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of any alleged legal assignment or Notice of Assignment from the Claimant.

It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant.

4. On the 10th January 2018 I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a Section 78 request to the Claimant Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd to gain further details.

5. On the 24th January 2018 I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request to Restons Solicitors Ltd to gain further details.

6. It is therefore denied the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant must provide evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

(b) show and evidence the nature of the breach and service of a valid default notice;

© show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

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

7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

8. 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.

9. 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

No not really...the court will order disclosure of all the documents further into the process.

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 months later...

Hello again,

 

So to bring things up to date with this one...

 

Defence was submitted online and shortly after I received written acknowledgement from the court stating that the claimant now had 28 days to act.

 

I received a letter from Restons stating that they had seen my defence and that I should have had possession of all the requested documents but that they would seek to provide these. In the meantime they asked me to contact them to agree a settlement within the next 14 days and they would not proceed with the claim. I made no contact with them.

 

Some 3 weeks later I was sent copies of the notice of assignment which look to me to be correct - again they offered a 14-day period for agreeing a settlement and dropping my defence. They also stated that they were still pursuing the credit agreement and statements as I had requested. Again I did not respond.

 

Checking MCOL through this period showed no changes to the status of the claim although by no it must have passed the date by which Restons should have acted.

 

Then on Saturday I received a bumper pack of documents from Restons. The covering letter is attached. The pack contained the notice of assignments (again), a couple of years worth of account statements (only the last period, the earlier statement comprising the majority of the debt have not been sent) and crucially a copy of the Credit Agreement. Interestingly there is no default notice letter and I can't remember if this was a request/requirement.

 

Now the agreement has an electronic signature only - it comprises only of a surname with no other initials, a DoB and a line saying that this is the equivalent of a signature. The agreement itself appears to be in order - nothing missing or any amendments to it.

 

On the face of it they look to have a case to me - have I missed anything? Is that electronic signature sufficient with only a surname and DoB?

 

How should I proceed at this point - withdraw and agree a settlement (which would probably mean paying for the rest of my working life) or is there life in my defence?

 

Thanks once again for your assistance.

letterx4.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they can produce a default notice then it does look like you'll struggle to get anywhere with this.

 

Tick box agreement is ok post-April 2007.

 

The advice you will get on what to do from here differs from person to person on this forum, but my own view is to use the fact the claim hasn't progressed too far and, therefore, not incurred them too much cost, to attempt a settlement via Tomlin Order for a nicely reduced amount. They'll be aware of the cost advantages of settling early under a TO, and also prevents any situation whereby you may pull something from up your sleeve later in the process.

 

What is the amount of the claim? (round it to nearest £100)

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

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...