Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah which I expected when paying early, I was just wondering if there was anything I could do with regards to the unaffordable loan?   sassy
    • Sounds like you passed the "attitude test" then. Hopefully you should be OK.
    • Thanks for your detail response,   my car was registered in Cambridge and incident happened in london, he asked i did told him i comes london quote often , he laughed and said probably cos of good food.   He didn’t said anything you say maybe given in evidence etc After that he said you know you jumped redlight and u must have read in theory test you should slow down as approaching to signal, i did politely said yeh i know tht but this time i didn’t realised and after that he just handed over my license and we both left…he told me it’s dangerous to pass junction like this…
    • @dx100uk - hi, started new thread here.
    • Name of the Claimant ? Hoist finance UK holdings  Date of issue – 05 May 2021   Particulars of Claim  What is the claim for –  1.The Claim is for the sum of £2291 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under bank account no.<redacted> 2. The debt was legally assigned by Lloyds Bank (EX LLOYDS TSB) 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.    4.The claimant claims The sum of £2291 Costs   What is the total value of the claim?    Account Claimed £2291 Court Fee – £105.00 Legal representation - £80   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? Yes   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? No (did inform Lloyds, not Hoist) Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Overdraft   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? after    Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In branch   Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes   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. Debt purchaser has issued claim   Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? No   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? No   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Started receiving communications in 2019   Why did you cease payments? Last payment was in 2014 to Lloyds. I was unable to make payments as I had just finished my studies and wasn’t working. The account was then removed from my online banking and I had no access online or in branch. The next correspondence I received was from Robinsons Way/Hoist asking for payment 2019.   In addition, I responded to Robinsons Way/Hoist requesting the CCA on 19/02/2020. Hoist then sent correspondence on 23/02/2021 that Lloyds were unable to provide this documentation and that until Hoist received further information from Lloyds, they would temporarily cease action on the account whilst Hoist “waited for a resolution”. I have not received an update since then (except for this claim).   What was the date of your last payment? 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 a debt management plan? No       Starting a new thread following on from this thread.   Background:   Student account overdraft with Lloyds Last payment made was in 2014 Robinsons Way/Hoist contacted in late 2019 Asked for CCA 19th February 2020 Received communication stating they were trying to obtain CCA 23rd February 2021  Robinsons Way/Hoist said they would cease action until they obtained information from Lloyds Heard nothing from Robinsons Way/Hoist until the CCJ claim Despite the lack of relevant information from Lloyds as per the above, Robinsons Way/Hoist marked the account as defaulted on credit file 11th March 2016  No idea how they came up with this date if they don't have necessary paperwork from Lloyds   Here are the Particulars of Claim for the OD:
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 952 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

Kindly show me where in the LA there is statutory provision to prevent the isuing of a warrant of execution.

 

Bet you cannot.

 

The reason being is that it's actually in the Civil Procedure Rules: CPR Schedule 2 CCR Order 26 Rule 5

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 117
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I think someone is banging their head here, the Brigg does not want to look at case law for some reason.

 

The facts are as Sequency stated, the SOL does not apply to county court judgment enforcement, because the judgment and enforcement are the same process, if another action was brought about using the judgment as cause of action, perhaps bankruptcy proceedings for instance then section 24 would be relevant, as it stands all that is required is permission from the court, this is unlikely for the reason stated but has absolutely nothing to do with the SOl.

Edited by Dodgeball

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thanks to all involved in the discussion. Unfortunately I'm not sure if I'm any the wiser.

 

Should I respond to the letter from Hapless? Or should I sit tight and hope that a warrant will not be issued?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

sit tight.

 

its an if maybe letter.

 

if they wanted to enforce it

they've had 6yrs to do so.

 

they haven't.

 

dx

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

Agreed :)

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just use the letter drafted but edit out the ref to LA 1980 so this should shut up Hapless an Useless of Banbury:madgrin:

Edited by ims21

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hello folks,

 

262 days since their last letter I have received a new one from DLC, heralding the advent of silly season.

This letter is a fun one - "you owe us 10.5K, so pay us £5/month alternatively we will settle for 2.6K - if you don't, we might think about doing some stuff!"

 

Can any one provide an address for the Compliance Manager of DLC please? I need to tell them that I have not had any dealings with them or their client and have bank statements going back 7.5 years to prove it (he he) - so any alleged debt is completely and utterly SB. Just in case any one asks there is nothing on my credit report and nothing on Trust Online - I am, mostly, a good boy.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just address any communication to their head office.

 

Buckingham Road

Brackly

 

Northants,

NN13 7 DN

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ah, ok - thanks again Brigadier.

 

You're welcome.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

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

Hi,

 

I'm looking for some advice in respect of a CCJ that came to light a little while back. First, if I may give a little potted history of this situation:

 

2010/11 Letters from DLC saying that a CC debt was owed. Asked for evidence as was surprised by this. Nothing was forth coming.

 

2012/12 Letter from DLC saying that there was a CCJ and that they must be contacted with in 14 days with an offer. Rang Northampton and was told that the CCJ was a week (might have been 2 weeks) from being 6 years old.

 

2018/08 Letter from Mortimore Clarke saying the MEIII had been assigned the debt and that they had "been told of the CCJ".

 

2018/09 Two letters 14 days apart saying that MCS should be contacted to arrange payment, otherwise options like charging orders would be considered.

 

So, my question is: how do should the problem be approached?

 

The CCJ is nearly 12 years old. There have only been a few letters (as listed above), so how does this stand? Are the letters attempted enforcement? What is the likelihood of MCS achieving anything?

 

EDIT: Additional info. We have moved 3 times since the events started - 2011 / 2013 / 2017. We have always been on the electoral register. We were renting until 2017, when we bought a house.

 

Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well B*gger me! I asked this question 5 years ago and was told to sit tight.

 

I'll do this again I think. Although, if things have changed I would still appreciate some advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Download your free noddle or Experian Credit report. The public information section will list all CCJ's. If it is more than 6 years old it will not be listed there anymore.

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

They're chancing their arm, they will need to go back to court to explain why it has taken them12 years to enforce, bunch of jokers.... personally I'd ignore them.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

7 threads merged on same debt

 

dx

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

ignore!!

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...