Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Probably to do with the Creditor accepting the reduced payments claim as part of the IVA. - Thats my guess anyway.  As for the mount outstanding... 60k is incredible and im pretty sure a DRO wouldnt cover that much even after the new legislation.    For you @Alfy - Please stay headstrong and stop worrying. My viewpoint on debt with debt collectors is simple. You are a figure on a spreadsheet loaded into a database for them to run a collection cycle through.  They dont care about emotions or your situation, they just care about paying off their shareholders and trying to turn a profit.  They use varying tactics to increase the pressure on you to the point where you will break. People then fall for this an either cave in to DCAs before doing their own due diligence on the debts that are purchased or turn to IVAs like you have.    They are better ways to handle this and Im glad you feel better after a good nights sleep - I hope you can keep it up. 
    • Good afternoon,    I am writing in reference to the retail dispute number ****, between myself and Newton Autos concerning the sale of a Toyota Avensis which has been found to have serious mechanical faults.    As explained previously the car was found to be faulty just six days after purchase. The car had numerous fault codes that appeared on the dash board and went into limp mode. This required assistance from the AA and this evidence has already been provided. The car continues to exhibit these faults and has been diagnosed as having faults with the fuel injectors which will require major mechanical investigation and repairs.    Newton Autos did not make me aware of any faults upon purchase of the vehicle and sold it as being in good condition.    Newton Autos have also refused to honour their responsibilities under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires them to refund the customer if the goods are found to be faulty and not fit for purpose within 30 days of purchase.    Newton Autos also refused to accept my rejection of the vehicle and refused to refund the car and accept the return of the vehicle.    It is clear to me that the car is not fit for purpose as these mechanical faults occurred so soon after purchase and have been shown to be present by both the AA and an independent mechanic.   Kind regards
    • Commercial Landlords are legally allowed to sue for early cancellation of the lease. You can only surrender your lease if your landlord agrees to your doing so. They are under no obligation even to consider your request and are entitled to refuse. You cannot use this as an excuse not to pay your rent. Your landlord is most likely to agree to your surrendering the lease if they want the property back in order to redevelop it, or if they wants to rent it to what they regards as a better tenant or at a higher rent. There are two types of surrender: Express surrender in writing. This is a written document which sets out the terms of the surrender. Implied surrender by conduct. (applies to your position) You can move out of the property you leased, simply hand your keys back and the lease will come to an end, but only if the landlord agrees to accept your surrender. Many tenants have thought they can simply post the keys through the landlord's letter box and the lease is ended. This is not true and without a document from the landlord, not only do you not know if the landlord has accepted the surrender, you also do not know on what basis they have accepted and could find they sue you for rent arrears, service charge arrears, damage to the property and compensation for your attempt to leave the property without the landlord's agreement. Unless you are absolutely certain that the landlord is agreeable to your departure, you should not attempt to imply a surrender by relying on your and the landlord's conduct.  
    • I had to deal with these last year worst DCA I have ever dealt with. Just wait for the constant threats of CCJ and how you'll lose in court and how they won't do mediation and they want the judge to question you with a load of "BIG" words to boot with the letter. My case was struck out in the end, stupidity on their part as I admitted to owing the debt in the end going through the court process was just a formality as they wouldn't let it drop despite me admitting the debt regardless. They didn't send the last part of the court paper work in so it ended up being struck out     .
    • Well, that's it then. Clear proof of the rubbish cameras. Clear proof of double dipping. G24 won't be getting a penny. Belt & braces, I would write to the address LFI has found, include the evidence of double dipping, and ask Fraser Group to call their dogs off.
  • 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 1937 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

You need to add the following as your point 2....

 

2. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.

 

 

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

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

If this card was taken out in 2017 it couldn't of been issued by SAV credit

 

SAV credit was changed to New Day Cards in 2014

 

bear this in mind with what ever documents they produce

 

As DX says above only refer to the account by the way Reston's do on the claim form

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guy's - I will double check the claim form when i get home tonight before I submit any defence Friday.

 

Edit - just checked from a email and this is what the claim is based on...

 

Details of claim - BY AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAV CREDIT RE AQUA & THE DEFENDANT ON OR AROUND xx/xx/2015 ('THE AGREEMENT') SAV CREDIT RE AQUA AGREED TO ISSUE THE DEFENDANT WITH A CREDIT CARD. THE DEFENDANT FAILED TO MAKE THE MINIMUM PAYMENTS DUE & THE AGREEMENT WAS TERMINATED.THE AGREEMENT WAS ASSIGNED TO THE CLAIMANT. THE CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS xxx + . COSTS

 

So i took the card out earlier than I thought, 2015 and the card was definitely a Aqua. Now it looks like my account was with NewDay and not Sav credit as they re named 2014?

Edited by George20182
Link to post
Share on other sites

so where did that poc in your org post come from please???

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

sav credit became newday 1st april 2014

 

this card was after that date

 

what are they going on about !!

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

So to confirm now I have checked the actual paperwork.

 

Account was opened 2015 and last payment was May 2017. The card was Aqua (i had previously had a Marbles as well so that's where I got confused). The POC do say Sav credit and not Newday.

 

Everything else is as original post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so which poc is the correct one!

 

sav credit did not exist when you took the card out in 2015!

 

so if its the one in post 28 then they are WRONG...and haven't a clue what they are litigating over.....

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

so to clarify (sorry for the confusion!).....

 

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 AQUA & THE DEFENDANT ON OR AROUND 00.00.2015 (THE AGREEMENT) SAV CREDIT RE AQUA 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 planicon? SENT A LETTER EXPLAINING PROBLEMS AND ALSO SPOKE ON TELEPHONE, BUT THEY SOLD ON QUICKLY.

 

So they have issued the claim from SAV credit and a Aqua card taken out in 2015 with the last payment 2017.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you indicate you might have letters to/from the original creditor.. ?? who is this on the letters?

who is stated as the original creditor on your credit file?

 

as long as you've done AOS CCA/CPR

 

your defence is not due till 15th nov...WAIT!!

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

AOS was done and emailed and posted last week as it wouldn't allow me to do online - it was due by today.

 

It will allow me to complete my defence online when the time comes.

 

* it says online - Your acknowledgment of service was received on 25/10/2018

Link to post
Share on other sites

So checking what little paper work I have (as account was online) - claim form is Sav credit and Aqua, and the account was with Newday.

 

Account was opened beginning of 2015 and last payment May 2017.

 

As you rightly pointed out, Sav became Newday in 2014.

 

Looking about though, it says Sav Credit renamed to Newday - so would this make a difference?

 

When they fulfil my requests for SAR etc I will be able to see for sure?

Link to post
Share on other sites

thread title updated

you need to get working on a defence which exposes these assignment/dates/owners issues.

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

Thanks DX - this is what I am thinking (I haven't yet had a reply to my cca and cpr).

 

*The card was Aqua and as I far I can see was with Newday although Sav Credit is claimed for..

 

1.BY AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN SAV CREDIT RE AQUA & THE DEFENDANT ON OR AROUND 00.00.2015 (THE AGREEMENT) SAV CREDIT RE AQUA 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 on 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
red poc
Link to post
Share on other sites

pers i'd put saV credit not Aqua.

and I would deny ever opening any agreement with sav credit ever..

 

2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have never held nor opened any credit agreement with SAV Credit. I am unaware of what alleged debt the claimant refers to having failed to adequately particularity its claim.

 

p'haps andy will pop along sometime when not so busy and advise if this is a good move?

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

But to be honest you dont really know who you are entering into agreement with in today's financial market with all the interconnected companies....have you not had a response to any CCA request ?

 

Did you get a default notice......which company defaulted you ?

 

Did you ever retain any paper statements......details of the creditor on the statements ?

 

 

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

I've hunted high and low as well as gone through emails and can't find anything - it was all online I recall so nothing paper.

 

No cca back yet.

 

Letters going back to late summer are from Mortimer Clark, refer to SAV credit and Aqua. I'm sure it was though, New Day as I remember looking them up...don't know though if this will make any difference as are SAV not the parent company?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tough luck for them then they aint getting any..

 

They issued a claim and they are not happy they know who you are!! How pathetic!!!

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

Your para 6 need a tidy and the above added

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

date of issue of claimform cant be the 14th oct that's a sunday...

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...