Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm sure I've said before that it's fine and dandy bringing in rules that favour you or your party, but you have to consider how it would play out if your opponents get in and want to use the same rules...
    • Its Gaelic celebration and bonfires today - Beltane Quite fortuitous for tomorrow lets hope
    • look on the bright side - it would allow Biden to do what he likes ...
    • Few tweaks as the run order was completely messed up and the main point of your defence (reconstituted agreement) pushed to the bottom of the statement.   I, XXXXXX, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim and further to my set aside application dated 1 November 2022. 1.The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts in person in the opening paragraph. It is my understanding they must serve notice to any hearsay evidence pursuant to CPR 33.2(1)(B) (notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence) and Section 2 (1) (A) of the Civil Evidence Act. 2.  I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. 3. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights.  This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information).  The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 4.  I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 5. 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.  I have attached a copy of my tenancy agreement which is marked ‘Appendix 1’ and shows I was residing at a difference address as of 11 December 2018 and was therefore not at the service address at the time the proceedings were served.  I have also attached an email from my solicitors to the Claimants solicitors dated 14 July 2022 which was sent to them requesting that they disclose the trace of evidence they utilised prior to issuing the proceedings against me.  This is marked ‘Appendix 2’. The claimants solicitors did not provide me with these documents. 6. Under The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 a Debt Buyer must undertake all reasonable enquiries to ensure the correct address of a debtor, this can be as simple as a credit file search. The Claimant failed to carry out such basic checks. Subsequently all letters prior to and including ,The Pre action Protocol letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 and the claim form dated 14th February 2020 were all served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018. 7. Upon the discovery of the Judgement debt, I made immediate contact with the Court and the Claimant Solicitors, putting them on notice that I was making investigations in relation to the Judgement debt as it was not familiar to me.  I asked them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.   The correspondence to the Claimant Solicitor's is attached and marked ‘Appendix 3’ 8. On (insert date) I successfully made application to set a side the judgment. The claim proceeded to allocation, 9. The claimant failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis on the 2 February 2024 'The Claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents.' None of these documents were received by the court nor the defendant by that date. (insert date you did receive the documents) I then sent a Data Subject Access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided. Details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 4’and the copies of correspondence between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 5’. Remove irrelevant 10.The claimant relies upon and has exhibited a reconstituted version of the alleged agreement. It is again denied that I have ever entered into an agreement with Barclaycard on or around 2000.  It is admitted that I did hold other credit agreements with other creditors and as such should this be a debt that was assigned to Barclaycard from another brand therefore the reconstituted agreement disclosed is invalid being pre April 2007 and not legally enforceable pursuant to HHJ Judge Waksman in Carey v HSBC 2009 EWHC3417.  Details of this are attached and marked ‘Appendix 6’. The original credit agreement must be provided along with any reconstituted version on a modified credit agreement and must contain the names and address of debtor and creditor, agreement number and cancelation clause. 11. Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to disclose a true executed legible agreement on which its claim relies upon and not mislead the court. 12. It is denied I have ever received a default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) CCA1974.The claimant is put to strict proof to evidence from the original creditors internal document software the trigger of said notice.  13.   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. 14. Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the original assigned agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. 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. Signed                 ………………………………………………….. Name                  XXXX Date                     30 April 2024   Run 3 copies Court /Claimants Sol/File
    • As one of you mentioned above I've been in a mess for nearly 20 years now and I'm ready to sort my credit report out now - the main reason I got into second round of debt is my kids being unwell and the state considering them not unwell enough for extra help so despite my son being in hospital for 3 months in one year we got extra zero help and I eventually lost my job and got into debt to just so I can be تا my sons hospital bed at his time of need - my life basically fell apart and all these debts got me again 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Car pile up on A road, car written off, TPFT only


The Phantom
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1406 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

I should have warned you by the way that if you send a letter like this with a threat like this then you must follow it through. Be aware that there will be a fee because you will have to make an application notice for summary judgement.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Summary judgment is a high risk manoeuvre.

 

”We do not dispute liability, but need the court to rule on quantum (and / or contributory negligence)” will scupper a request for summary judgement and leave you liable for the application costs (yours AND THEIRS)
 

I’m not saying they’ll try for contributory negligence, but if they might claim either : summary judgment is a high hurdle to clear.

Edited by BazzaS
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't aware of this. Please could you post a link to a source – and also County Court rules which suggest that it then is excluded from the usual cost rules for small claims

Link to post
Share on other sites

You would think they wouldn't try and defend all of the claim then but only part of it. 

However, strangely enough they intend to defend all of the claim, despite admitting liability.

 

(This is in response to bazzaS) 

Edited by The Phantom
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it excluded from the costs rules for small claims track of the county court?

Might there be a personal injury component?

Has it been allocated to a track?

 

If not allocated, you can’t insist on the small claims track rules......

 

As for “defend all” ; what is the downside to THEM of doing so AT THIS STAGE : they can always settle later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally think they just did this to buy themselves more time and to avoid a default judgement against their client, but I have no way of knowing what they are thinking.

It's Direct Lines Legal Team at Plexus Law in Birmingham, they may not even be aware that their Claims Department has admitted liability.

I would think they haven't even looked at all the paperwork their client no doubt has sent them.

They have at this stage simply extended the time frame by another two weeks in which to file a defense or maybe settle.

 

I am just thinking if they really wanted to file a defense they would have gone for "defend part of the claim" and not all of it.

How can you admit liability and then try and defend all of the claim, it seems a silly approach, unless of course they are just trying to buy time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, The Phantom said:

 

Yes this is what I found as well and there is nothing that indicate that you can't apply for a summary judgement in a small claim or that any of the small claims rules relating to costs are no longer valid.

In fact the second link specifically points out that a summary judgement procedure is not for complicated cases – and this particular story is not complicated because liability has been admitted.

However, the cost of £255 is certainly offputting. Let's wait and see what the defence eventually is – if there is one. Simply because they say there is an intention to defend – doesn't mean that they are going to go ahead and defend it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

You could always wait until it gets allocated to the small claims track, for the costs protection that grants, and THEN apply for SJ.

The issue is that until allocated you aren’t guaranteed the costs protection, and SJ has a high burden to demonstrate (unlike default judgment if they miss a deadline) 

 

(You can indeed apply for SJ in the small claims track).

 

I suspect they’ll settle before that.

Edited by BazzaS
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I think we are now all in agreement to sit back and wait for things to happen.

 

They now have an extended period until the 9th of March to do something. Either to file a defense or settle.

I'll wait and report back with any developments as they happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Received the attached letter today and also an e-mail stating :

 

 

Dear Ms XXXXXX

 

XXXXX v ZZZZZZ

 

I write in reference to the above matter.

 

Please be advised that we are on record as Mrs ZZZZZZ solicitors and therefore any correspondence or queries must be directed to us and all documents must be served on Plexus.  Please refer to our acknowledgement of service.

 

We kindly request that you refrain from contacting Mrs ZZZZZ by post, email, telephone or in person in relation to this matter.

 

Kind regards

BLAH BLAH / Paralegal

Scan1.pdf

 

 

 

Rattled someone's cage I suppose.

I think she gave them hell for getting letters from me ....   oh well....

Edited by The Phantom
Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep on contacting her directly. Anyway, what date should you be able to apply for judgement?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tick tock tick tock…

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would you want to keep contacting her directly?

 

You’ve lodged the claim. It won’t add anything (she’ll just pass the info to her solicitors), and it runs the risk of making you look unreasonable at court.

They’ve told you (and advised the court) they are acting for her. Communicate with them.

Edited by BazzaS
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just keep on contacting her directly. They put their hands up and instead of spending money on legal representation they should simply pay you out and bring an end to it. I don't think it will make anyone look at all unreasonable. If anybody is going to look unreasonable, it will be the defendant who has already admitted liability and yet goes on to delay things by saying they going to defend in full and then start instructing solicitors incurring unnecessary costs and even possibly causing trouble and inconvenience to all parties including the court

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think at the moment there is nothing more to say anyway.

They will need to file their defence before the 9th of March or settle this.

So the ball is in their court until a move is made to either settle or defend.

 

I am only guessing, but I suppose their legal team is only stalling the court case until their claims department has caught up with the paperwork.

 

Edited by The Phantom
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The defendant / Direct Line Legal Department has today filed the attached defence. I am not sure what to make of that

Any assistance would be appreciated

 

I also had a response to my enquiry about an accident collision report from the local Police and their collisions unit, they say as follows:

 

 

 

"I have had a response from the officer stating the end result of this collision was damage only and therefore no collision report was completed.

 

Therefore we do not have a report to supply."

 

 

Defence.pdf

Edited by The Phantom
Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing from the police that basically they're saying that because it was a collision, it was not necessary to have a collision report. I'm sure there's some logic there – I've just got to read around and find it.

 

In terms of the defence, it's quite clear.  They are admitting negligence – and that's the most important thing – but at the same time they're not admitting that any front end damage to your vehicle was caused by the defendant. They're leaving it open that may be you drove into the guy in front first and then she ran into the back of you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we touched on this right at the beginning, where we didn't distinguish between the damages to front and rear on purpose and just kept it at "damage" for that reason.

 

The shunt in the back would have been enough to write the car off anyway. The damage report stated that the rear impact was moderate to severe and the damage to the back reflects that.

 

As I don't have the address for the lady that was in front of me (just her name and car registration) I asked the police collision unit to provide that to me for legal purpose as I may need to contact her to be a witness.

The collisions unit just sent me a form back and said I will have to pay a fee for that !

I pointed out I should have been given full details at the time and surely there can't be a charge for that now.

 

I also asked them for the details of the police officer who secured the scene of the accident and who was behind the car that  hit me.

 

They say they don't know who that was, as there is no collision report and the log doesn't make it clear who exactly that officer was !!  It's unbelievable really, considering the road was closed for a while with ambulances , highway maintenance etc and there were six or seven vehicles involved and there is no collision report. Just a log which doesn't even make it clear which officer was at the scene first.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...