Hoist claimform - old Sky barclaycard debt ***Claim Discontinued***

[Micky the Hippo]

That figures, thanks

 

Any idea on the print out of the web form data, quite apart that it could have come from anywhere as it's not signed by anyone. Does the Subject to Credit Approval stamp mean that's it's not an actual agreement?

 

Thanks

Edited November 29, 2016 by Andyorch
Name removed

[Micky the Hippo]

gawd, 'I've sued the wrong nom de plume, how do i edit posts on here?

[dx100uk]

Scan it up the CCA return?

[martin2006]

Whats the date on it, the 2007 one thats xxed out?

[Micky the Hippo]

Hi,

apologies for the ridiculous delay in posting what they sent me,

 

anything blanked is correct and looks like what i might have entered on an online application,

 

the big lower left blanking is a handwritten 12 digit number.

 

I had no more communication from the people that were calling three times day for a couple of months

 

now btw.

Micky.pdf

[slick132]

Hi Micky,

 

There's no way that counts as an enforceable agreement.

 

Any progress yet about quantifying the amount of penalty charges you can reclaim ?

 

[Micky the Hippo]

Hi Slick, splendid news, I was a little unsure because it was an online type thing and the esignature angle. For my understanding though, why not? I appreciate there's no terms and conditions for one, is it even an agreement at all, is it just an application?

 

Umm, no other then i added up the charges from the statements that I did have, been working four months of seven day weeks so time has rather slipped by for me, Need to SAR still don't I? Now I can rest easy on this one I'll get on with the SARs etc, I've seen the other threads with people probaly getting them back at Comp Int which is good news, my charges are old charges.

 

Thanks again

Micky

[slick132]

Hi Micky,

 

Don't get too excited ye about the CCA issue. The CCA date is important here.

 

Sorry if this is already on-thread but what's the date on the document (which is not a credit agreement).

 

If your penalty charges are older, all the more reason to seek a refund from BC.

 

Have you done a compound int't spready yet. When you do, let us know how the reclaim figure compares with the amount due on the a/c.

 

[dx100uk]

https://cse.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-8889411648654839:6449422593&ie=UTF-8&q=Sky+Card&sa=Search+CAG#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=Sky%20Card&gsc.page=1

 

 

look at other CCA returns hippo

you'll understand better

[Micky the Hippo]

Hi Micky,

 

Don't get too excited ye about the CCA issue. The CCA date is important here.

 

Sorry if this is already on-thread but what's the date on the document (which is not a credit agreement).

 

If your penalty charges are older, all the more reason to seek a refund from BC.

 

Have you done a compound int't spready yet. When you do, let us know how the reclaim figure compares with the amount due on the a/c.

 

 

Slick, from memory it's June 2007, I can confirm that this evening, certainly 2007

 

dx, I've have seen plenty of the regular CCAs including a couple of my own, this document though is a new one on me and I've not seen them anywhere else yet

 

Thanks both

Micky

[slick132]

If the credit agreement was dated 6/4/2007 or later, challenging enforceability is more difficult.

 

You didn't reply to my comment about penalty charges above.

 

[Micky the Hippo]

It's defo stamped as June 2017. The older ones are harder to challenge? I though it was the opposite, the older the better as regards challenging. I've been assuming the deathly silence from the other side after the early flurry of activity was a good sign?

 

And I have done a spreadsheet of the statements that I had, a few years from seven or eight years ago when it was active, I'll SAR at the end of the month when I've got more then 10p, but i doubt that three years or maybe even six will add too much to the pot.

[martin2006]

Any agreement prior to 6/4/2007 must be a "true copy" of the agreement, anything after that date can be reconstituted but still needs all the prescribed terms including relevant and any amended t's and c's

 

Hence the importance of the date of the agreement

[Micky the Hippo]

Ah yes, thanks for that, that I do know already. None the less for the moment they have failed to return a valid CCA I assume and I can rest easy until they do, it's been quite a long time now.

 

Thanks all

Tynan

[Micky the Hippo]

Hello all, just an update to say not a cheep from anyone about this, nada, nothing, which is splendid

[slick132]

Hi Micky,

 

Sounding good ..............

 

[Micky the Hippo]

Hello all, a rather generic letter from Wescott encouraging me to get in touch within ten days without any actual threats of courts or balliffs. Cheerfully sling into the corner of my desk?

[Micky the Hippo]

have now read a few other threads on Westcott, ignore it is

[dx100uk]

and you've not learned that in being here 12yrs......:lol:

[Micky the Hippo]

hello all

 

Claimant - Hoist Finance UK Holdings 3 LI

 

Date of issue – 12 July 2019

 

What is the claim for –

 

The Claim is for the sum owing of £ 5xxx in respect of monies owing under an Agreement with the account no.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx pursuant to The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA).

 

 The debt was legally assigned by Barclays Bank plc (EX BARCLAYCARD) to the claimant and notice has been served. The Defendant has failed to make any contractual payments under the terms of the Agreement. A default notice has been served upon the Defendant pursuant to s.87(1) CCA.

 

The Claimant claims

1. The said sum of £ 5xxx

2. Costs

 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol)? I don't think so

 

What is the value of the claim? £5xxx

 

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 2007? June  2007

 

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. Debt purchaser

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I think so

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Unsure

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? I think so

 

Why did you cease payments? Upon not being sent a CCA following a request

 

What was the date of your last payment? Early 2016

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Yes in that no acceptable CCA was ever sent

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? in 2014/2015

........

 

hello every one again,

this account relates to a SKY card applied for online 2007,

 

along with all my other credit cards I sent off SARS etc in 2016 with routine success in that valid CCAs were not sent and I ignored all correspondence thereafter.

 

 

This week I got a claim from got HOIST FINANCE using Howard Cohen as the address. 

 

After skimming a few other threads it appears to be a case of responding online to the claim form stating an intention to defend the claim, send a CCA request to the claimant, Hoist and a CPR to the solicitors, Cohen?

 

And it's likely a case of following procedure until the discontinue?

 

As ever, thanks for all advice and support

 

I have acknowledged the claim online 

 

CCA and CPR are written and I'll post them tomorrow,

 

if the POC on the claim letter do not mention any documents beyond a reference to a default notice being served and an agreement, is that all I ask them to provide or should I leave the whole default list in?

 

Thanks

Micky

[dx100uk]

pers i'd keep all the list in on the CPR cant hurt.

 

 

[Micky the Hippo]

Thank-you, off in the post they go tomorrow then.

[Micky the Hippo]

CCA plus PO and CPR both just posted second class with proof of posting.

[Micky the Hippo]

hello all, the defence is more or less boilerplate isn't it, essentially stating that the original CCA cannot be produced by the claimant?

[AndyOrch]

Indicatively yes but not entirely...they may try a reconstituted version