Jump to content


Drydens/Erudio claimform - old slc loan


billywilder
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

its not inevitable

 

I don't think we've seen a 'win' on that issue for them yet. 

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

been reading up on like threads ....

like post 8 here?

 

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...

doing fine

look at other erudio claimform threads

find the holding/no paperwork defence ready for friday

read that thread ive linked to above

some good points to understand there upon how these claim rollout eventually

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

Reading through other similar defences it appears that the holding defence relies on having applied for paperwork and not having received it.

 

I sent my CPR 31.14 yesterday and haven't sent a CCA request as I already sent one a few years ago to Erudio.

 

Is it worth sending another CCA request now to make this defence more congruent or just leave it relient on the CPR 31.14 request?

Link to post
Share on other sites

No need as long as you retained proof of the original request and any response.

 

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 OTHERS

 

 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

1.The Claimant claims 4540 for monies due from the defendant

 

2. This debt was pursuant to a regulated agreement(s) between the Defendant and The Student Loans Company.

Each agreement had an individual account number as follows

 

3. The defendant failed to make payments as per the terms resulting in the agreement(s) being terminated.

Notice of such is served by a Default or Termination Notice subject to the terms of the agreement(s).

 

4.The debt was assigned to the Claimant on 22/11/2013 with a notice provided to the Defendant.

A new master reference number gfjsdhgskjdfhskjdfhskj was also applied upon assignment.

 

The Claimant has complied with the Pre Action Protocol for Debt Claims

 

The Defendant contends that the Particulars of 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.

 

1. Paragraph 1 & 2 are noted the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor - The Student Loans Company. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or debt nor do I recognise the agreement numbers the claimant refers to .The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default.

 

2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1).

 

3. On receipt of the claim, requests for information pursuant to CPR 31.14 were posted to the Claimant’s address on 3rd July 2019. To date the claimant is in default of my Section 78 request and their solicitors have yet to reply to my CPR request.

 

4. It is not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

 

b) show how the Defendant’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and

 

c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and

 

d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

 

 

5. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant proves the allegation that the money is owed.

 

 

6. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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.

 

 

7. 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

 

 
Link to post
Share on other sites

they are all part of the arrows group [erudio too]

 

 

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

keep them to yourself them.

leave the defence as is .

 

but you need to address your no.2 as that doesn't refer to the correct NOA para from their poc

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

Defence checked and edited in post #60

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 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

Thanks andy

 

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

file post 60 on mcol website

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...

Hello again. I just received this and need to know if I need to respond. It implies that they are looking to lift the stay if they can. Possibly because I last deferred in 2016 and so the debt will become statute barred this year potentially? Happy to be corrected if I'm wrong. 

 

Because I messed up and logged into the mcol claim with the wrong account before my previous defence. I need to do more research to follow it up and check on its status. 

 

Any advice greatly appreciated.

The letter from Drydens

20220307_091141.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cant be sb'd

claimform stopped the clock.

 

safe to wait just trying to intimidate and harass you

 

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

eh?

cant be SB'd a claim has been raised that stopped the clock upon issuance and has not be struck out nor discontinued.

 

get reading up on SLC claimform threads.

 

nothing you can do, let it run

see if they follow through their 'threat'

many times they do NOT.

and they have no DN's either.

 

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...