Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
    • A set aside application costs £275 which is more than the judgement so not worth it. Not that they would grant a set aside anyway.  Set asides are granted, for example, to people who moved and didn't get the court papers, so have a genuine reason for not defending.  Forgetting doesn't count. Your only choices are to pay up within 30 days, or defy the court and not pay.  If the latter, we've never seen a PPC enforce judgement for a single ticket, ever, you would get away without paying - but you would have a CCJ and a knackered credit file for six years.
  • 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

Tomlin order - can monthly defaults still be recorded?


kp278
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1816 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

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

should we respond to this letter? thanks, kris

 

hi, belated scan

 

we've also had a letter from Kearns to the effect of:

 

"We write in relation to the above and further to instructions from our client that they have now dispatched a reply to your request under S78 Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

 

In the circumstances, and having regard to your previous open correspondence to our client in this matter accepting liability and offering £150 per month towards the debt, might we invite you to withdraw the defence filed or otherwise hear from you with your proposals for settlement of the balance outstanding and costs."

 

not sure if this was mentioned earlier or in another thread (or even on another site perhaps) but prior to the court papers my friend had offered £150/ month but was advised this would only be accepted if it was backed up by a CCJ.

 

 

i think she is happy to pay the £150, but she doesn't want a CCJ obviously

Link to post
Share on other sites

Willy waving

Who says the CCA is enforceable?

Unless it is

And they pay to lift the stay

That admittance letter means nowt

 

They are trying to fleece you

As link always do

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

should we respond to this letter? thanks, kris

 

Have you actually received the agreement?

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

  • 5 months later...

Hi

 

Received a wad of paperwork from Kearns - credit agreement, default, assignment, monthly statements, correspondence where we offered £150 (admittance, as they call it)

 

They agree to a Tomlin order for £150 a month, which is what we wanted in the first place to avoid a ccj.

 

On checking the £££

In July 2013 Barclays suspended the account with the balance at £13654. Interest and fees added until May 2014 when the balance hit £15480

In Jan 2014 Mercers DCA served default notice for balance of £14858

In Jun 2014 IDR/Link wrote to confirm account had been sold at £15480

The Tomlin order is asking for £16359, I'll need to check previous letters from Kearns on how 15480 became 16359

 

Shall I scan any of this?

 

On a positive note, the ex is off the mortgage and my friend got the share of equity required to cover his debt.

 

Thanks, Kris

Edited by kp278
accidentally left notes in
Link to post
Share on other sites

yes lets see it

who said the CCa was enforceable?

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

the CCA is the same one 6200000 that BC always send out as a CCA request return.

 

numerous hoist claims here have remained stayed despite the same being returned

 

imho if they are that confident

let them pay to lift the stay

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 would agree....possibly consider a Tomlin Order set at the default notice amount plus court fees...not a penny more.

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

  • 2 weeks later...

It does seem they are asking for default amount plus court fees : default £15480 + court fee £779 + legal rep costs £100 = the £16359 on the tomlin.

 

The amount claimed on the court claim form was £18207, and a statement of account from link dated July 2016 shows balance at £18704. I think we are going to bite at £16359.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so you've had a bit of too and fro on the tomlin?

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

No, original Tomlin was/is for £16359. We went back and looked at the different numbers on the different paperwork to understand how they got to the amounts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well they don't seem to be pushing this

which for me and knowing plink puzzles me

usually when they are on to a big debt like this

they go for the neck

and they didn't and haven't to date

that smacks that they know something is a miss that you've not spotted yet.

 

 

I take it from the SAR that the balance is 90% use of the card

and there not loads of penalty fees

and PPI and other stuff inflating it?

 

 

something's just not sitting right with me and the way they have[not] reacted.

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

Tomlin was received on 24th March giving us 21 days, we'll be at 14 days tomorrow. There is definitely some PPI, I'll need to look into the charges, I saw a couple of £12 in there, I'm sure there are more. This is something we thinking to do shortly, but likely after the Tomlin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you scanned the statements?

this might be the time to drive them down

 

 

the card is from about 2010 I think

so there wont be much

but it could give you room to drop it a few £k's even if that's inflated

and let them bat you back up a bit.

 

 

upto you but you'd get a far greater discount now than trying to reclaim after or even by trying to do a low F&F in the future

 

 

just musings

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 years later...

Hi

 

My friend has a Tomlin order that she has been paying off.  There's still a while to go on it, but we noticed Link are still recording a default each month. Do we just have to suck this up for a couple of years, or are Link being naughty?

 

Thanks, Kristian

Link to post
Share on other sites

The default must be shown for 6 years from its entry and only 6 years...irrespective of the Tomlin Order.

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

Ah I may not have been clear .She still owes money on the Tomlin and this is paid off monthly, and a default is recorded each month along with the reduced balance. Should a default be recorded each month even though the Tomlin is being paid off?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it should be shown...the default and tomlin order are not connected...the Default Must show for 6 years....whether its being paid or not paid.

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

Correct.....thats the law..if you default/breach on an agreement it must be registered and shown for 6 years from the date of placement. 

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

Thats placement by the original creditor...not from when Link bought the debt

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...