Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5  
    • stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return   dx  
    • 1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them   you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too?   also I notice you've  played with our std OD defence above too...   pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons.   your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33]   here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system    dx   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] . .  2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account. .  3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. .  4. 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 crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. .  5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. .  6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. .  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-. .  (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.  (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.  (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. .  7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. .  By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. .  .............. or  Particulars of Claim  1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.  2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.   3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.   The Claimant claims:  The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54  Costs Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of the 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.   1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.   2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. 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 crediticon Act 1974. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974  Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.  4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.  The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.  (a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.  (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.  (c) Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.   (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.  (e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.  5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.   By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  Regards  Andy    
    • Hi   Just read your thread and looked at the Docs posted in your PDF.   1. from AST to rent a Car Parking space you need to have signed a Car Parking Agreement for a Space and for visitors you should have asked permission for another space in advance with a fee to pay. (i also assume renting a parking space would be at a cost)   2. You have no signed Car Parking Agreement nor visitor space agreement.   Did you not fully read that AST before you signed it and pick up what is stated about parking and ask them about this Car Parking Agreement and if you need one to park in the car park?   You could formally complain to them about what was verbally said to you but unless you have evidence of this it may be hard to prove.   You should also contact them and ask how you go about renting a Car Parking space/costs and about the Car Parking Agreement also what the process is for a visitor car parking space/costs.   You need to be aware that they could class you and your visitor as illegally parking in there car park without consent nor a signed car parking agreement which they could use as a Breach of your Tenancy Agreement so you need to be careful in how you are approaching this and where you are parking.   Just for info on checking Manchester Life website they have numerous buildings/apartments/car parks but you may be in a building where some of the apartments are leasehold and as part of there leasehold they may have purchased a car parking space in that building. (so how do you know you are not parking in a space that someone in the building has legally purchased?)
  • Our picks

Lillychick

Welcome Finance PPI Offsetting advice needed Please

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 338 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

Hello

 

Not been on the forum for a while. I hope everyone is well.

 

I recently made 4 sperate claims for PPI to Welcome for unsecured loans taken out in 2001/2/3/4.

I successfully claimed for 2001/2 loans through Aviva as the underwriters of the insurance.

These have been settled and paid to me.

 

I’ve received correspondence from WF about the 2003/4 loans.

They have upheld my complaint on both and the sum due is around £2.5 K.

They have also said however that my account was sold to a third party with a balance of over £3K and that the intend to re-purchase the account and apply my compensation to that balance.

They have sent me a form to sign to agree to this, which obviously I’m not going to do.

 

Firstly

I’m unable to verify the amount they say is outstanding on my account.

 

When my SAR arrived it contained all of the loan agreements and 3 printed statements pertaining to the first three loans but not the final one which I obviously defaulted on.

 

When I queried this they said they had sent everything that they held for me.

How they’ve managed to arrive at how much was owed when they’ve said that 4th statement didn’t exist is one thing.

 

The amount does seem high to me as the 4th loan was for just over £4K and I was paying it (albeit it an agreed reduced rate) until at least mid 2008.

 

Is there any further I can go with this or it the end of the line?

I’ve read about Welcome offsetting on some other threads so I’m not hopeful.

 

Also

I assume the paperwork they’ve sent is with the intention of resurrecting the debt if anyone is daft enough to sign and send it back.

 

Are they likely or even can they resurrect the debt on the back of the successful claim without the signed paperwork?

 

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Edited by dx100uk
Spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you've not paid in 6yrs the debt is SB'd so cant coneback

 

As for the offset

There is little you can do about it sadly

Other than complain its not fair

You could mention they are sb'd

But an OC can do so even if it is

 

I will assume you are in E&W and not Scotland


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick reply.

 

That’s pretty much what I thought but just needed it confirming. Oh well. Strangely I don’t recall ever being pursued for this debt by a third party after I defaulted

 

And yes I’m in E&W

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably because you moved?


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably because you moved?

 

Possibly. I did move around a lot back then. I felt sure I was still paying WF when I moved to my current place, but I can’t be absolutely certain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incidentally has anyone ever asked WF in this situation for proof that they did ‘re-purchase’ the debt and are indeed the legal owners? I’ve been thinking about how difficult it must be to track such a debt down after all that time. Not only that but surely there is no guarantee they will be able to re-purchase?

 

Not straw clutching just genuinely curious about why they are so confident they can easily re-purchase a debt and if people are being put off taking it further because they think it’s a lost cause. Surely they would need to prove ownership of the debt to justify keeping any compensation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

twill be easy for them to track it down

 

you could ask them to provide a notice of assignment under the law of properties act 1925 before they do so.

and they must produce it too.


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello

 

I thought I’d just report my partial success with this matter after taking it to the FOS. I’ve not had the paper work through yet, just a phonecall with an adjudicator at the FOS.

 

As I understand it the amount awarded and subsequently being used to offset the original debt was in respect of loans 3 & 4 joined together.

 

As loan 4 was a rollover and partially used to pay off the balance on loan 3, the FOS have advised WF that they shouldnt withhold the PPI refund due in respect of loan 3.

 

WF have agreed and will be making an offer of just short of £600.

The amount used to offset is now just over £1000.

The difference is because the PPI was front loaded and loan 3 paid off early with loan 4. I hope that makes sense?

 

The adjudicator advised that as offsetting is standard and accepted I’d be unlikely to be successful with pursuing that angle for the balance. I can of course take it on to an ombudsman if I wanted to. I won’t be though.

 

So whilst my offsetting complaint wasn’t a success, it was worth taking it further and having the sums looked at properly. I just thought that this info may be useful to others pursuing WF for multiple claims.

 

Thank you again for the advice. I will make a donation to help you great people keep helping the rest of us. Take Care

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...