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

Hoist claimform - ex barclaycard Debt *** Claim Discontinued***


Nurselayer
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1131 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

Particulars of Claim (for Reference - not to be submitted with defence)

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim?


1.The Claim is for the sum of £2722 arising from the Defendant's breach of a regulated consumer credit agreement referenced Under no xxxxxxxxxxxx

 

2.The Defendant has failed to remedy the breach in accordance with a Default Notice issued pursuant to ss.87(1) and 88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

3.The Claimant claims the sums due from the Defendant following the legal assignment of the agreement from Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd (EX BARCLAYCARD)

Written notice of the assignment has been given.


The Claimant claims
1.The sum of £2792
2. Costs



Defence

 

1.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.

 

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.


3. Paragraph 1 is denied. Whilst I have had dealings with Barclaycard  in the past I cannot recall the specifics of the alleged agreement.

 

4.Paragraph 2  is denied.I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor or Legal Assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars of claim .

 

5. Paragraph 3 is denied .I have no knowledge of who the claimant is nor have I been provided with any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

6. It is denied that any amounts are due under any agreement.

 

7. On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Howard Cohen & Co Solicitors by way of a CPR 31:14 request sent via 1st class recorded post on 19/11/2019.Further to the above I sent Hoist Finance UK Holdings 3 LTD a section 78 request via 1st class recorded post on 19/11/2019.

 To date, neither Howard Cohen nor Hoist Portfolio are yet to furnish me with the requested information .

 

8.Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to

 

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

b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for;

c) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice pursuant to Sec 87 (1) CCA1974.

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

 

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

 

10. On the alternative, if 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 crediticon Act 1974.6.

 

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.


(Defence mainly taken straight from Micky the Hippo's similar defence)

 

On 07/12/2019 at 11:40, dx100uk said:

what was the defaulted date?

no nothing to do with the court case


Interestingly I've just had another alert on my Clear Score report:
 

Upcoming Updates

A new credit or store card will be added to your January report.

Organisation Name: BAIA0090
Account Number: ****9048
Company Type: finance house

What does this mean?

This could mean that you’ve recently opened a new account, or it might be because a lender has just shared some information relating to an old account.

Why is this change not on my report yet?

We get your credit report every month from Equifax, a credit reference agency. This update can be seen on your Equifax credit report now but will only be reflected in your ClearScore report when your report is next updated, which is on 2 January. If you apply for credit now, lenders will see this update on your Equifax credit report.


Now, this looks very much as if Hoist have taken my agreement off and transferred it to whoever BAIA0090 are.  I've not seen any new notice of assignment or anything.

 

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

so what is the defaulted date

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

There doesn't seem to be any default date given specifically. 

 

According to Clear Score on my Barclaycard it looks as if there were late payments in Jan, Feb, Mar 2015 and then a missed payment in Apr 2015.

 

But then it says that a payment was made in May 2015 which is exactly the time that it appears on my Clear Score report as Hoist with a missed payment also in May 2015.

Should there be something that says when this was officially defaulted?

Also, does the above defence look ok?

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

cant litigate without a default notice.

 

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

Defence checked.

 

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

yes

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 submitted.

On my clear score report there doesn't seem to be any date of default noted, nor can I see where that might appear.

When they responded to my CCA and CPR requests they didn't give me a default date either.

So, what happens now? Is it likely that I'll actually have to go to court over this?

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

The court will acknowledge your defence and within that acknowledgment it informs you of the next stage of what may happen.

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...

Hi folks,

I submitted my defence and have now had a response from Cohen and Co.

They have attached printouts of copy statements purportedly from Barclaycard from April 2010 to April 2015. 

From the looks of them the last payment made on these statements was August 2014.

They have also sent a notice of Assignment from Barclaycard dated November 2015 telling me that it has been assigned to Hoist in  October 2015, and then a letter from Hoist saying that they bought the debt in October 2015, and that letter is dated November 2015.

 

Bear in mind that according to Clear Score on my Barclaycard it looks as if there were late payments in Jan, Feb, Mar 2015 and then a missed payment in Apr 2015. But then it says that a payment was made in May 2015 which is exactly the time that it appears on my Clear Score report as Hoist with a missed payment also in May 2015.

There is no letter of default in the pack.  

The letter from Cohen and Co. does offer the chance to avoid further court action by allowing me the opportunity to repay the debt in instalments.

Also, on the statements there seem to be a number of Late payment fees and Returned DD fees.

Advice please.

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

so no sign of an agreement yet nor a default notice then.

this could get interesting as per the bottom of my post 13.

 

 

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

hello Nurseslayer, Hoist/Cohen have just discontinued on my case, also without an agreement ever being produced, I had a court date set for next month. I appreciate our cases are different but as per the mods' advice, it's a matter of sticking with it and calling their bluff. I was expecting them to go a lot closer to the wire, perhaps they're having a pre crimbo tidy up, good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

so looks like it's stayed then?

 

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

You can log into MCOL and check the status of the claim......it should finish with defence received.

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

On MCOL it says - 

Your defence was submitted on 09/12/2019 at 20:03:59

Your defence was received on 10/12/2019 at 08:06:06

DQ sent to you on 09/01/2020


 


I don't know what DQ stands for? And I've not received it as yet.

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

N180/n149a

so not stayed

 

get reading up n180 use our search

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

 just to be sure I fill in all my details on the N180 including my phone number and email address and sent that both to the court and Howard Cohen and Co? 

What's to stop them then putting that information on file or sharing it with other companies?

Or will they not do that?  

I agree to Small Claims Mediation
I fill in all my details
I agree it should be small claims.
I ask for my local County Court.
I don't need an expert.
I am the only witness
I put in unavailable dates.
I sign the form.

I send it to the court and Hoist's lawyers by recorded delivery.

Is that all right?  I did search on N180 but it comes up with '00's of threads where it just says "search on N180". 

As always, your advice is hugely appreciated.

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

you don't need to inc sig/email/phone on cohen's copy.

 

and keep a copy for yourself too.

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

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...

Just a quick update.  I submitted my N180 forms both to the court (in full) and their solicitors (no signature/phone number/email).  I said yes to mediation and asked for the hearing to be held in my local County Court.

I have received their N180 forms from their solicitors too. They have also asked for mediation and say they will consider "any reasonable proposal". They have asked for the hearing to be held in my local court.

Having looked at Micky The Hippo's similar case, it looks as if I now wait for a mediation date to be given.  Once that is given I agree to be willing to negotiate but I DO NOT confirm that I have enough information from Cohen and Co as they have not complied with my CCA/CPR requests.

Is that all correct?

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

you agree to mediation right up until the ACTUAL DAY of the 3 way conf call by the mediation service.

if at that time you have still not, in your view, received enough information to make an informed decision, when the mediator asks the same questions as on the N180 re mediation again, you will say no quoting as above .

 

dx

 

  • Like 1

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...

Just had an email
 

The above parties have all filed a Directions Questionnaire (N180) and have all requested mediation.

Provisional Appointment Time & Date

 

A telephone mediation session of up to one hour is available to you on XX/XX/XX between Time  and Time.

Please can you phone us on 0300 123 4593 before the XX/02/2020 between the times of 09:00 and 17:00.

 

Owing to a high level of referrals, mediation appointments are limited and are offered on a first come first served basis.

your case will be transferred to a court to be listed for allocation if we do not hear from you, or all appointments are taken.

 

Please note that this is NOT a confirmed appointment, if we are able to secure a mediation appointment we will send you confirmation.

So, do I phone them asap to arrange and appointment?

Do I get to choose the appointment time for the date they've offered?

Nurselayer v Natwest - Settled in Full :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...