received unknown Link Financial tomlin for GE Money loan

[eoghan]

Hi, I have attached a cca I filled in back in 2008,

I came apon hard times and my 'debt' has been passed onto Link Financial who have written to ask me if I'd like to accept a Tomlin Order.

From reading the threads, this seems like a bad idea.

 

Before I progress can someone have a look over my CCA and let me know if they can find fault with it,

 

I suspect thay may have added the fee before calculating the interest, but not sure if calculating it correctly.

 

All help of course greatly appreciated.

 

Best Regards,

Eoghan

ge_money_link_financial1.pdf

[42man]

Is this the subject of legal action ????!!!

 

Please report Link to the Office Of Fair Trading,....they seem to think they can ask you to sign a Tomlin Order which is completely against the OFT's guidelines on debt collection -

d. unnecessary and unhelpful use of legal and technical language,

 

I would also say this is also against CPUTR2008 which clearly states...

 

(b)it concerns any failure by a trader to comply with a commitment contained in a code of conduct which the trader has undertaken to comply with, if—

(i)the trader indicates in a commercial practice that he is bound by that code of conduct, and

(ii)the commitment is firm and capable of being verified and is not aspirational,

and it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise, taking account of its factual context and of all its features and circumstances.

 

Link are a member of the Credit Services Association which has it's own code of conduct.....in it's code it clearly states -

" Comply with Debt Collection Guidance as Published by the Office of Fair Trading" - their actions are a clear breach of their so called associations code.

[eoghan]

@42man. Thanks for your response. How do you think I should play this. When you say give the link to the office of fair trading do you mean this post here at CAG or do you mean something else.

Should I write a formal complaint to the fos as well citing the legislation above?

 

Cheers.

Eoghan.

[eoghan]

Where are the terms and conditions on the document ? is there a reference to them anywhere?

 

I'll get them posted tomorrow.

 

Here's the T's and C's

 

Anyone reckon they've added the charge before calculating the interest as per the 1st post?

 

Cheers,

Eoghan

ge_money_link_financial_tcsandcs.pdf

[batman1956]

Not sure about this but as there is no reference to the terms and conditions on the agreement it may not be enforceable. I am sure that someone more knowledgable will be along soon to either confirm this or shoot me down in flames

[eoghan]

Oft have got back to me and say they won't look at individual cases, so they're no longer interested. Should I write to the financial ombudsman?

 

Can someone have a look at the attached PDF in post 1 to see if the cca is ok?

 

Cheers.

[eoghan]

Is there anyone that help me find out if this is an enforceable CCA?

[manchestman]

Hi Eoghan

I found it difficult to read your PDF as it is very faint, but from what I can see it seems to be enforcable. I think what 42man refers to is that Link should not be asking you to comply with a tomlin order as tomlins should only be used when legal action is underway. (Has a court claim been brought against you?) Link are breaking oft guidelines about debt collection and it is to this that 42man refers, not about the enforcability of the agreement. Also, in what they are suggesting, they are operating unfairly and may be breaking CPUTR2008 statute. Are you paying anything to Link at the moment? What is your hopeful outcome here? Have you suggested a payment plan yourself to Link (in writing)?

Remember, don't talk to Link on the telephone under any circumstances. Keep everything to writing only.

[eoghan]

Link picked the debt up from GE Money after I wrote asking for confirmation of the debt using a templated letter from the Freeman site - the debt was then sold to Link who did send me a copy of the deed of assignment and the copy of the CCA I uploaded. I have made no offer to pay Link anything, nor will I do so while they are unable to substantiate that the debt is actually mine.

 

I suppose the best outcome would be I don't have to pay anything out to Link. They bought the debt and cleared it - it shows on my credit file GE Money Satisfied, then a new entry for Link for which I have no CCA... I don't get his at all - that's like me paying of your debts without your permission and then asking you for the money without any proof of who I am and why I paid the debt off - it's nuts.

Ultimately if I have to pay then I'll pay - I just want to know if it's enforceable before I go down the legal route.

 

As stated in an earlier post - OFT have written back - they don't look at individual cases... So here's an Financial Institution in clear breach of the OFT guidelines and they don't care. Madness.

 

The question is where do I go from here - FOS complaint or bite the bullet?

 

Regards.

[hammyhound]

I hate Link but did win against them in court, did you receive a Default Notice from G E Money?

 

HH

[eoghan]

I don't recall a Default Notice - would have thought so though. What tactic did you use to win?

[manchestman]

I wouldn't bother with FOS. You could write to Credit Services Association, but I'd be tempted to simply sit on it for now and await further action.

 

I'm not quite sure what you want to achieve as everything so far seems to be above board and legit. A debt can legally be sold on and they have sent you the assignment to show the new owners. They shouldn't have sent you a tomlin order, but now that they have, its done and if oft aren't interested then not much you can do, though you might try trading standards?

 

I would suspect the best you could hope for would be some kind of deal to pay off the full debt at maybe 40% eventually? Otherwise, as sure as eggs is eggs they will take you to court unless you are paying something and have some kind of plan in place. Also, if you are paying nothing, the judge will not look as kindly on you as if you do try and keep up some kind of payment.

Of course, this is all my own opinion and is not expert advice at all.

[eoghan]

Ok I have an update on this one.

Received an allocation questionnaire from the court, case to be heard on the 18 th April.

 

I wrote to the return address on the Tomlin Order outlining a defence, I had no contract with Link, trying to use a statute route to defend. Link then then failed to respond within the time frame and a stay was put n the case. Link then applied to av the stay lifted as they were sorry and inadvertantly let the date slip by without filing. So the court has lifted the stay and now we go o court. Thing is, the Tomlin Order was sent to me before any legal action was started...

 

Anyone see a way of defending this action...

 

OK, here's the response to the questionnaire, this will be added under section G, further information... Comments please!

 

For and on the record:

The defendant has at all times acted with honour by offering conditional agreement to pay the alleged debt, thus removing any controversy in this matter.

The claimant has systematically blocked and dodged the open and proper procedures in relation to this case.

He who brings the liability must also bring the remedy, therefore under CPR 18 all paperwork in relation to the case to be submitted to the defendant. Nothing relevant was forthcoming therefore deliberately disadvantaging the defendant, for example the claimant references a Notice of Assignment issued to them, but still provide no evidence of the actual deed of assignment.

I would argue that this is a very important piece of evidence that the claimant should have provided when so requested under CPR18.

It is not the defendants position to prove their innocence in this matter when clearly the burden of proof rests squarely with the claimant, therefore it is the Claimants responsibility in this matter to prove the debt exists between the defendant and the claimant and at no time have they done this even when requested via proper channels eg the Notices sent to the Claimant requesting proof of the debt and CPR18.

Also, for and on the record without Disclosure of the relevant requested documentation the defendant is unable to assess if the defendant is indeed liable to the claimant, nor is the defendant able to assess if the alleged agreement has been properly executed, contains the required prescribed terms, or correct figures to make such an agreement enforceable by virtue of s127 consumer credit act 1974.

 

 

For example:

• Use of unfair terms and conditions in the underwriting of agreements.

• Annual Percentage Rate (APR) being unclear or wrong.

• Important information missing from the agreement.

• Use of misleading and / or incorrect information or figures.

At no time has any contract between the Claimant and the Defendant been shown to exist.

If indeed the Claimant has purchased the alleged debt from a 3rd Party; the original liability between the Defendant and the 3rd Party has been discharged as demonstrated by the Defendants Credit Record which clearly shows the debt as dissolved, therefore ensuring there is no further liability on the defendant’s part.

 

Furthermore, at no time has the Defendant given the claimant permission to process her data pursuant to the Data Protection Act 1998. Furthermore, if the Claimant has indeed purchased the alleged debt, how much did they actually pay for it, when did they pay for it and by what means was the payment made and recorded, as surely it would be improper for a company to purchase an alleged debt for say £100 and then claim that the person they paid on behalf of still owed them the original £200. This is tantamount to a fraud. Can the claimant prove they bought the alleged debt and if so for how much?

Furthermore, the debt collection practices of the Claimant have been aggressive and vexatious. The claimant sent a pre-filled out Tomlin Order to the Defendant which is completely against the OFT's guidelines on debt collection -

d. unnecessary and unhelpful use of legal and technical language,

 

I would further argue this is debt collection practice is against CPUTR2008 which clearly states...

 

(b)it concerns any failure by a trader to comply with a commitment contained in a code of conduct which the trader has undertaken to comply with, if—

(i)the trader indicates in a commercial practice that he is bound by that code of conduct, and

(ii)the commitment is firm and capable of being verified and is not aspirational,

and it causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision he would not have taken otherwise, taking account of its factual context and of all its features and circumstances.

 

The Claimant is a member of the Credit Services Association which has it's own code of conduct.....in it's code it clearly states -

"Comply with Debt Collection Guidance as Published by the Office of Fair Trading" – quite clearly demonstrating their actions are a clear breach of their so called association’s code.

 

Furthermore, the Claimant has been sending correspondence that states the amount owed is varied – that is, in one document dated 29th Sep 2010 the amount owed is £2879.66 and in another document dated 7th Feb 2011 the amount owed is £3173.69. It is therefore unreasonable to expect the Defendant to know exactly how much she is allegedly liable for.

 

Finally, the Claimant has failed to follow proper Court Procedure Rules by filing documentation under CPR31 and 18 and filing paperwork within the agreed timelines set down by the court.

 

It is my belief that the claimant has no prospect of success in this matter and asks the court to file for the defendant upon which we will serve a counter claim against the Claimant for three times the presented liability plus costs for researching this matter, court appearance, and undue distress caused to the defendant during the last few months.

[eoghan]

Hi,

 

Was wondering if anyone can help with the following response I got from the court?

 

1. Does he admit the agreement with British Gas dated 02 April 2008?

2. Does he admit service of the default notice?

3. Does he admit the arrangement of the debt to the claimant?

4. If not in respect of 1-3, why not?

5. If the documents were admitted the defendant must set out concisely the nature of his defence to the claim.

 

This information and any accompanying documents should be delivered to the court on or before 4pm on 11 May 2011

[hammyhound]

What happened at the hearing on 18th April. Did you attend, I presume it was a CMC?

 

Having looked at your agreement I don't think it can be challenged except for the fact that the T&Cs are missing so may be you could point this out

 

Did you receive the DN - if not say "I do not recall receiving a DN and put the Claimant to strict proof that a DN was ever sent. Link will s##t one when they realise one has not been sent and will try their best to pretend one has. I would only say this if you are certain that no DN was sent to you.

 

Sorry have you had an arrangement with GE Money/Link - where did this question come from.

[eoghan]

Hi hammyhound thanks for the reply, glad to know someone's out there...

 

A default notice was received from GE Money before it was sold to Link, but I have never got one from Link... The first I knew Link were involved a letter stating that I owed them x amount of £s and then the Tomlin Order came shortly after when I ignored their letters, let's face it, some company out of the blue claiming I owed them money, oh yeah sure here ya go even though I've never heard of ya ever!

 

I never had an arrangement to pay Link, there is no contract between Link and myself, never has been, no special arrangement to pay GE Money was ever put in place either...

 

Got my dates mixed up, the 18 th was for filing the AQ not a hearing...

 

Thanks again.

[eoghan]

Update:

 

Apologies for the very late notice on this one.

 

The court received my response from post a above and asked Link to provide proof of Assignment, Letters basically everything they are relying on for the court hearing.

 

My response needs to be filed tomorrow!!!!

 

I've got so many of these cases I just lost track of this one.

 

They sent me a copy of the orignal credit agreement which is in the 1st post above, they also sent me copies of the default notices that were sent by GE Money (NONE were ever sent by Link), and a copy ofthe Assignment of Debt with a letter dated 25th August notifying me that this had occured and that I now owed Link the money (don't ever remember getting this one in particular)

 

So now I need to file my defence in response to those documents by 4pm tomorrow... Any ideas?