Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • The important thing to know is that MET - although they will send you threat after threat about how they will divert a drone from Ukraine and make it fall on your home - hardly ever do court. Even in the very small number of cases where they send court papers, if the Cagger defends, they drop the matter before the hearing.  They have no real intention of putting their rubbish claim before a judge.  The aim is to find motorists who are terrified of the idea of going to court and who will give in when the court papers arrive. Thanks for doing the sticky and well done on finding F18's thread.  Do what they did.  On the first page - I think post 19 - there is the address of the CEO of BP.  Write to them, lay it on thick about being genuine customers in the various premises, mention the small kids, the very short stay time, attach any proof of purchase - and request that they get the invoice cancelled.
    • Thank you for that, I have obviously already been convicted so I think the appeal lodged is for the previous offence? Sorry if that doesn’t make sense. I suppose my only concern is that weds I go there and they don’t let a stat dec happen. If they do then as you say and solicitor says it’s highly likely I’ll be happy with the outcome. But I’m being told there’s no guarantee for the stat dec to be hard Weds as that’s not what the hearing is proposed for. Solicitor has stated that you can put a stat dec before a magistrates at any time so it shouldn’t be a problem.   
    • I re-read the extract from your  solicitor's letter this morning and think I might understand what they have in mind. I believe (and it’s only a guess) their strategy is this: 1.    You will make your SD 2.    You will enter fresh pleas to the four charges (not guilty) but will offer to plead guilty to speeding on the understanding that the FtP charges are dropped. 3.    If this is accepted they will attempt to argue that the two offences were committed “on the same occasion” 4.    You will be sentenced for those two offences (the sentence depending on whether the “same occasion” argument succeeds). They also have a plan in the event that your offer at (2) is unsuccessful and you are convicted again of the 2xFtP charges (and so face disqualification under “totting up”): 5.    They will make an “exceptional hardship” argument to avoid a ban. 6.    If that is unsuccessful they have already lodged an appeal in the Crown Court against that decision. (This is the only “appeal” I can think of). 7.    They plan to ask the court to suspend your ban pending that appeal. If I’m correct, I’m surprised the Crown Court has agreed to accept a speculative appeal (against something that hasn’t happened). The solicitor says this is to lodge it within the normal timescales. But you will have 21 days from the date of your conviction (which will be next Wednesday) to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court, so there is no need for a speculative appeal. I have to say that an application to have your ban suspended pending an appeal is unlikely to succeed. The Magistrates Court is unlikely to agree to it for one very good reason: if they make such an order (suspending your ban until your appeal is heard), all you need to do is not to pursue the appeal and the Magistrates order suspending your ban will remain in place. Hey Presto! No ban and no need for you to trouble with an appeal. Perhaps he will ask for your ban to be suspended for (say) three months or until your appeal is heard (whichever occurs first). This potentially creates a problem because if your appeal is not heard in that time either your ban will kick in or you will have o go back to court to get the suspension extended. But the solicitor obviously knows more about these things than I do. I would want to be very clear about this solicitor’s fees and what he proposes to charge you for. As I said, there is absolutely no need to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court. That can be done if and when it becomes required. But I am still firmly of the opinion that it is overwhelmingly likely that you will not need to progress beyond point 2 above. Point 3 is optional and I don’t know whether he solicitor has made It clear to you that the only thing you will avoid in the event of success is three penalty points. You will still be fined for the second offence and your driving record will still be endorsed with the details, but no penalty points will be imposed. Do let us know how it goes.  
    • I'm really trying, but worst case I can't find what are my options?
    • John Lewis' Privacy Notice states that their CCTV Systems does not use facial recognition or collect biometric data - so I assume it should be fine?    Thank you a lot for your reply. I've scheduled my first therapy session ne t week. Really the time to turn my life around..
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Backdoor cabot/mortimer CCJ for aqua credit card knew nothing about


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1973 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

Wonder if you can help, as received a letter from a creditor saying I had not responded to a claim form served on me and the creditor is now applying for default judgement.

 

I know nothing about this, i will call the court at 9am - but reading around i can see i have to complete a N244 form and pay £255? is this correct as can't afford this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I suggest that you contact the claimant immediately – by email and inform them that no papers were served on you. They probably will still go ahead and apply for judgement but at least you will be able to show court that they had notice that there was a problem with the procedure and that they applied for judgement regardless.

 

Do it now – or even telephone them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks i have emailed Mortimer Clarke.

 

I will also phone the court to find out details shortly.

 

I'm worried though as the last thing I want is a ccj...

 

On the letter they sent there's no amounts or original creditor.

Edited by George20182
Link to post
Share on other sites

ok so got to the bottom of it.

 

A old creditor from 3 years ago, i had argued the default costs but they had obviously sold on.

 

Judgement was entered on 4th October - if i had know i would have disputed.

 

court has sent a n244 to complete

- but my worry is if it goes in front of a judge he will say you owe and tough?

Meanwhile this would cost me £255.

 

Or i have until 3rd November to pay off in full?

Link to post
Share on other sites

it was for a Aqua credit card, last paid May 2017. I asked them to stop piling on fees and help as credit limit was only £300, but no help and then obviously sold on. Looks like £250 costs and then court costs added.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much is the judgment for...round figure ?

 

If not much more than the fee to set a side you need to balance if its really worth while trying to set a side and worth the risk ?

 

Have you checked if your exempt from Court fees ?

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?406096-LEGAL-EX160-160A-160c-Court-Fees-are-you-exempt.-**Correct-as-at-April-2018**

 

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 OTHER

 

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

Its for £770 - not exempt from court fees so i think rather than pay another £255, and run the risk of the CCJ been enforced by the judge i will need to pay. As I don't want a CCJ on my record.

 

Can't believe this slipped through..

Edited by George20182
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should give more information about the original debt and the charges that you say they've applied to it. How much will the charges – each one and how much did they all add up to? Are they for late payment et cetera?

Link to post
Share on other sites

what reason do you have for setting this aside?

 

if you didn't update AQua with your change of address

then the DCA were quite correct to file everything to the old address.

 

you need a reason to set aside

and

a defence for the original claim

for a n244 to succeed else its money down the drain.

 

I cant see either here.

 

might be better to go for a variation order n245? if you cant afford the full £770 to stop it being registered by the 3rd

you'll still have the CCJ registered but atleast you could afford the monthly payment.

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

My address hasn't changed its been the same for a long time, so was surprised the court claim never arrived.

 

Had the claim arrived, I would have defended on charges (I don't dispute having a account with them). I haven't got the paperwork to hand but, the credit limit was £300 and the rest of the charges are made up with i assume default/late and missed payments interest.

 

I had tried to reason the OC but couldn't hence it being sold on.

 

Moving forward, i'm not sure how I can defend? As the judge might say - you had account - so CCJ is valid?

Link to post
Share on other sites

why don't you go ring northants bulk

ask for a copy of the claimform and the CCJ by email pdf.

 

thats way atleast you'll have all the available info, and we'll know which fleecer pulled this stunt.

 

you'll need the CCJ number from your credit file

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

I have the claim number from the letter from Mortimer Clarke which I received yesterday which alerted me to this. On the letter received there was no other information or figures, except saying they had asked the court to order me to pay £50 a month.

 

Claim was for £729 including court costs and then £50 added to the total by the court for judgement. I phoned the court and they emailed including a n244 form.

 

So it was Aqua who passed to Cabot and then to Mortimer Clarke.

 

So annoyed as never normally have a problem with my post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

cabot are a debt buyer Mortimer are their solicitors.

 

so you have a copy of the Claimform and it shows your correct address?

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

strange you never got anything then

as even prior to the claimform there should have been numerous letters

then the pre action protocol pack giving you 30 days to return it.

then the court claim issuance.

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

well disregarding all that for now...[the fact that their might be a reason here for the set aside]

 

there are 2 requirements for it to succeed...

 

the 2nd part is you'll still need a defence for the POC on the claimform were you to go for a set aside

as to date I cant see one,.

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...

ok guy's, to be honest I had resigned myself to paying to avoid the 'judgement' and had until 2nd November to pay. Northampton had sent me a copy via email so I thought i have to accept...

 

Anyway, I came home tonight and firstly, a letter from Northampton CC saying a claim was issued against me but due to technical problems it wasn't sent out to me. Telling me any judgements against me have been removed.

 

That explains this then.

 

Then as expected another envelope with the claim in and restarting the process, and giving me 19 days to defend or accept.

 

I bet Mortimer Clarke are not happy...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Read the following link and then copy and paste the Q,s and your responses back here for further advice on how to proceed.

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-2018**(1-Viewing)-nbsp

 

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 OTHER

 

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

That explains a lot!

 

No wonder you knew nothing!!

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 CABOT FINANCIAL (UK) LTD

 

Date of issue – 14th October 2018 (re issued from 13th September due to Court problem).

 

Particulars of Claim

 

1.BY AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAV CREDIT RE MARBLES & THE DEFENDANT ON OR AROUND 00.00.2017 (THE AGREEMENT) SAV CREDIT RE MARBLES AGREED TO ISSUE THE DEFENDANT WITH A CREDIT CARD.

 

2.THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO MAKE THE MINIMUM PAYMENTS DUE & THE AGREEMENT WAS TERMINATED.

 

3. THE AGREEMENT WAS ASSIGNED TO THE CLAIMANT.

 

4. THE CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS £599.70

 

2. COSTS

 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) NO

 

What is the total value of the claim? £729.70

 

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 April 2007 ? AFTER

 

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. ASSIGNED

 

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? I THINK SO, YES.

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? NO ITS ONLY BEEN MONTHS, SO NO.

 

Why did you cease payments? FINANCIAL PROBLEMS

What was the date of your last payment? CAN'T REMEMBER

 

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? SENT A LETTER EXPLAINING PROBLEMS AND ALSO SPOKE ON TELEPHONE, BUT THEY SOLD ON QUICKLY.

 

*Also I am unable to complete online - MCOL as it says ;

 

Claim Status

A claim was issued against you on 13/09/2018

 

A judgement was issued against you on 04/10/2018 at 19:08:46

 

An application to set aside (remove) judgement was submitted to the court on 12/10/2018

 

The application to set aside (remove) judgement was granted on 12/10/2018

 

 

Available options

A bar has been put in place on this claim. You cannot respond to the claim at this time.

Edited by dx100uk
format
Link to post
Share on other sites

give it midweek if MCOL not been reset then phone and ask when it will be as you need to ACK the claim.

 

for now get the CCA/CPR ready to post tomorrow as below info.

 

 

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.

 

…………..

 

was this card taken out since 2013

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...

So looking at entering the defence and looking around was thinking the below...

 

1.BY AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAV CREDIT RE MARBLES & THE DEFENDANT ON OR AROUND 00.00.2017 (THE AGREEMENT) SAV CREDIT RE MARBLES AGREED TO ISSUE THE DEFENDANT WITH A CREDIT CARD.

 

2.THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO MAKE THE MINIMUM PAYMENTS DUE & THE AGREEMENT WAS TERMINATED.

 

3. THE AGREEMENT WAS ASSIGNED TO THE CLAIMANT.

 

4. THE CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS £599.70

 

2. COSTS

 

1. 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.

 

2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings with Aqua. I am unaware of what alleged debt the claimant refers to having failed to adequately particularity its claim.

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I do not recall having received notification that the agreement was terminated.

 

4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I do not recall receiving any Notice of Assignment from either assignor or assignee pursuant to sec 136 of The Law of Property Act 1925.

 

5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has not yet provided any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, 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

© show and evidence the breach and that a Default Notice was issued pursuant to Sec87.1 CCA1974;

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

 

6. On receipt of this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have declined to comply to my section 78 request and remain in default and with regards to my CPR 31.14 request. Therefore, the claimant in their none compliance to my requests have frustrated my attempts to clarify their claim and failure to comply with Pre- Action Protocol should be considered when the question of costs arise.

 

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 dx100uk
poc added
Link to post
Share on other sites

looks okm

just one point.

 

its worthy to note there is much confusion regarding Marbles cards

some ARE NOT AQUA cards.

esp the ones originally HFC marbles cards.

and..some where sav credit were involved..they were not an aqua card either

 

pers id not put aqua but marbles

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...