Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


roland60

Cabot/Mortimer claimform - old Capital One branded Luma Credit Card

Recommended Posts

I suppose what I was trying to elude too was don't rock up with the card and say here it is judge the actual card..bang you've shot yourself in the foot! you did have one.. saying you think you remember signing and returning a luna card agreement by post is as far as you need to go...and close to admittance.

 

I was once sitting in the public section of a very small and intimate Scottish court a few years back.

guy was in court at the 3rd and final hearing about a FlyBe credit card debt claim from cabot/nolans.

they had produced a recon agreement, DN and statements stating FlyBe sygma bank with payments within 5yrs.

 

the defendant staunchly claimed he never had a flybe card, but if he did it was last paid outside of 5yrs producing his bank statements proving such but with the only card payments showing being to Creation Finance.  (**the link had not been made by the fleecers nor the sheriff - creation is sygma bank)!!

 

after a much drooling and boring verbal submission by nolans, the sheriff was not convinced they held enough proof and after several pushbacks he called time on them and addressed the defendant. seeing the defendant was rather flustered and desperately searching paperwork the sheriff said..please take your time to get yourself together and chatted to the clerk about something.

 

i noticed the defendant reach into his pocket and produce the actual card itself, I whispered put this in your pocket [and that card too] and handed him a CAG card . (**the flybe card would have the 16 digit number which would match everything up and sink the defendant) the sheriff smiled at me as I quite often helped people over the time ive been living up here and we 'know' each other quite well now socially too.

he did well and the sheriff dismissed the case.

 

some months later I met the sheriff at a very well attended local funeral. he knows who i am here and often comments when i'm wrong. during the wake we were talking about some of my comments on nolans and their tactics. his passing comment made me laugh.. "I was quite aware sygma were creation by the way - shame nolans weren't but i heard what you said...be a bit more discrete next time!! we both burst out laughing...

 

dx

 


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy and DX

 

@Andyorch I have removed Point 16 as suggested and emailed it over to the court.

 

@dx100uk Gosh! That was an interesting case post #76! Rest assured I would never take the card with me, very informative for other readers here too. 

 

Many thanks,

Roland

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone

 

I today have received a further WS (Second WS) and schedule of costs from Mortimer Clarke Sols regarding the upcoming hearing 31st Jan 2020, 11 days before the hearing. Please see attached 2nd WS MCSols.

 

According to the Court Order attached in post #69 i filed my Amended Defence as ordered by 18th Dec 2019. The court order also mentioned that each party must deliver to the other party and to the court copies of all the documents on which that party intends to rely at the hearing no later than 14 days before the hearing. I obviously haven't sent anything else in after the Amended Defence to them or court. A WS was permitted if we needed to send anything further.  

 

They have sent their 2nd WS replying to my Amended Defence and have added no further documents but attached the whole of the previous Exhibit JK1 to it again. 

 

Surely i didn't need to send my amended defence and previous WS again to them and court when the Amended Defence was filed according to the Order in Dec.......

 

Their point 16 refers in their WS2 regarding the question by the judge on the validity of the signature on the Recon agreement to which the claimants sol at the hearing stated it was an online application, which is not true as it was a signed postal Luma Card Application and not a Capital One Credit Card online application.   

 

In their point 23 they mention that I have not provided any supporting evidence that this was for an application for a LUMA Credit Card and stick by that its a Capital One Credit Card. 

 

In point 24 they are using the Carey v HSBC Plc [2009] EWHC 3417 that a firm is able to reconstitute a copy of the agreement and they have no obligation to provide a copy which includes a copy of the signature. But if its a recon then why have they applied an electronic signature to it? 

 

Point 25 regarding the 16 digit apparent account number on the recon is now just a 'document number' and the agreement number is the blank page added in the original attached exhibit which has just my name and an account number from the letters. 

 

Can you please advice me on whether i need to file another WS now with regards to theirs i have received today, and why is it that i have to provide the evidence for the LUMA card, surely that was for them to sort out as that is why the hearing came to an end in Dec as the judge wasn't happy with the recon agreement......

 

Many thanks 

Roland 

 

 

 

 

 

 

WS 2 Cabot.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wont harm you if you wish to submit a further statement in response.You have picked up on the main points of contention......and their backtracking.....attack just those points.

 

With regards to Carey v HSBC Plc [2009] EWHC 3417...thats quite correct re signatures.....but you didnt state that ...you stated address account number.

 

" In a nutshell, the ‘no copy’ contention failed. The judge concluded that a creditor can satisfy the provisions of section 78 by providing a ‘reconstituted version’ of the original agreement. That copy must contain the name and address of the debtor as it was originally, but it can provide that information from whatever source it has. It does not have to come from the original agreement. "

 

by Judge Waksman QC,


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 thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy for getting back to me.

 

Regarding the signature on the recon agreement,

 

the judge on the day wasn't happy about it as i told him it wasn't my signature and that they had just typed my name making it look like an online application which it wasn't, hence why the judge didn't accept the recon agreement.

Yes they have added my name and address, but then signed my name in the signature strip too.

 

I will do another WS in response to theirs which arrived today.

 

Regarding me providing evidence to support the LUMA Card postal application,

how am i supposed to do that?...

. that was something the judge asked the advocate they sent and why would the judge say he wanted to see the original at the next hearing.....

 

I'll construct my WS 2 and post it here later today.

 

Thanks,

Roland 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

 

The following is my WS2 in reply to their WS2, please do let me know if i need to mention/amend/add anything to it, the attachments are in my previous post #78.

 

Can i add my costs as this is the second hearing for it?

 

Also i don't know if this will help but i also have an old Capital One Credit Card which i don't use anymore, so how can i possibly have 2 Capital One Credit Cards as this claim is clearly for the Luma Credit Card....

 

SECOND SUPPLIMENTARY WITNESS STATEMENT OF ROLAND

I, Roland, the Defendant in this case, will state as follows; I make this second Witness Statement as a supplementary to my first Witness Statement dated 22ndNovember 2019 Page 1-2 and Amended Defence dated 17thDecember 2019 page 3-4 in Exhibit xx1 in response to the claimant’s second witness statement dated 14thJanuary 2020. 

 

THE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT 

1. The claimant failed to comply with my Section CPR 31.14 and Section 78 of the Credit Card Act 1974 request and their claim remained stayed for over one and half years. I can only assume as this was due to the claimant not having any of the requested documentation below and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.  

 

2. The stay was lifted by Deputy District Judge Mitchell 4thDecember 2019 and the Claimant’s application for summary judgment and/or strike out was dismissed.

 

3. My amended defence was filed and served 17thDecember 2019. 

 

4. I received the Claimant’s Second Witness statement 21stJanuary 2020.

 

5. It is accepted as per my Amended Defence para 2 insofar that I have once held a contractual relationship with Capital One Bank (Europe) Plc for a LUMA Credit Card and not a Capital One Credit Card. 

 

6. The Claimant’s point 23 in their second witness statement dated 14thJanuary 2020 refers to me providing supporting evidence that my application was for a LUMA Credit Card, and that their position that it is for a Capital One Credit Card. This is for the Claimant to prove it’s a Capital One Credit Card and not a Luma Credit Card, when this matter was heard by Deputy District Judge Mitchell 4thDecember 2019 he also questioned the Claimant’s advocate the same.

 

7. The Claimant’s point 24 refers to the Reconstituted Capital One Credit Card Agreement in their Exhibit JK1 pages 2-3, that a firm is able to reconstitute a copy of the agreement and that there is no obligation to provide a copy which includes a copy of the signature, then why has an electronic signature and date been applied…regarding the same question by Deputy District Judge Mitchell on the validity of the signature on this Reconstituted agreement to which the claimant’s advocate stated that it may have been an online application, which is not true as it was a signed postal Luma Card Application and not a Capital One Credit Card online application. 

 

8. The Claimant’s point 25 states that they would say that the 16 digit account number in the top left hand corner on the Reconstituted Agreement is now not the account number but a ‘document number’ and that the Account number is on Page 9 of their Exhibit JK1, which is a blank page with my name and a 16 digit Account number on it. The Claimant is backtracking and clearly16 digits are Credit Card/Bank Card numbers. 

 

9.  The Claimant’s reconstituted Agreement has failed to be a true reconstituted version and failed to provide any supporting document to confirm that this claim is for a Capital One Credit Card and not a Luma Credit Card.  

 

10. The evidence provided by way of Exhibit JK1 is woefully deficient and invalid and not pursuant to the CCA 1974 request.  Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the agreement complete with terms and conditions from inception which they refer to within the particulars of this claim and witness statement they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974.

 

11. For the reasons set out above I invite this court to strike out the claim and request my costs as litigant in person to be awarded. 

 

 

Many thanks,

Roland 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fine Roland......is your  old Capital One Credit Card still valid ?  I dont suppose the account number is similar to this one being claimed ?

 

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 thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

The old card is not active nor does it have a similar account number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks...may be prudent to drop a paragraph into the statement advising this ?


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 thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy

 

My only issue is that in my amended defence that i filed 17th Dec 2019 I had written the following which i was going to address in this WS2:

 

5. It is accepted as per my Amended Defence para 2 insofar that I have once held a contractual relationship with Capital One Bank (Europe) Plc for a LUMA Credit Card and not a Capital One Credit Card. 

 

How can i work around this?..... 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mmmm let me give this some thought.Would it confuse matters or simplify the defence...I'm wondering if what they have disclosed is for your Cap One Credit Card and they are cut and pasting to make it fit the Luma ?


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 thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thanks. You could be right about the cut & paste. LUMA was issued in 2012 and Cap One was 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what has happened to your Cap One card..you say its no longer active.....is it a nil balance or is there a debt on it ?


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 thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s inactive and there is a debt on it, and it has been with a company called Debt Management Operations for a while now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will guess you mean debt managers ltd ?

dx

 


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes that’s correct DX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

debt managers usually don't buy debts but typically chase on behalf of arrows group as they are a trading name of theirs

so no link to this claim/claimant.

 


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks DX for the info, I was worried there maybe a link but that clears that up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what about something along the lines of......

 

1. Since the last hearing dated xxxxx I have discovered that I have in fact held two agreements with Capital One credit cards in the past.One branded Luma account number xxxxxx which was issued in 2012 and a Capital One credit card account number xxxxxxx which was issued 2015 and is currently being serviced by  Arrow Global.Therefore the disclosed Capital One credit agreement presented in this claim cannot possibly be true or connected to the Luma branded card that this claim relies upon.

 

Its a risk but its honest and if accepted by the Judge then that proves the one being used here can't possibly be valid ?


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 thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy, I think it might be a good idea to put your post #94 in the WS2, what could be the possible risks with putting this in, just so that I am prepared for it.... 

 

Also I took an image off the internet for a Luma Card which actually shows the first 4 numbers of my Luma card, would this be useful at all? 

 

Thanks,

Roland 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not really a risk more of an oversight because throughout this claim you have stated you have never held a Cap One Credit Card.....now you find you did...but it helps prove thats theirs cant be valid because you would not have 2 credit agreements with Cap 1 unless one was for a Luma brand.

 

If your numbers in the screenshot are different to the ones they are quoting in this claim (they have given an account number ?) then yes it would be useful.

 

This is not about avoiding paying any debt its about proving to the court how DCAs are manufacturing documents to fit their claims.


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 thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy, the screenshot of the Luma Card from the internet bears the first 4 digits matching the account number they are using in this claim. There are other images with different numbers on them too...... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FYI: the 1st 4 digits poss even the 1st 8 will be the same

as its the designation for Cap1 issued cards.

 

 

 


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah ok DX, thanks for letting me know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

obv we don't know the 2 16 digit numbers nor need too..

but if you use them on this site.

https://www.bindb.com/bin-database.html

you'll see the info given.

 

dx


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

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s would collapse overnight.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...