Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you need to ring northants bulk and ask for a copy of the judgement and the claimform by email pdf. it is quite usual for them to not have a copy of the claimform. so you need to record the call and ask them to read out the particulars of claim and the address it was sent too.     old wives tales , if you have a debt owing that shows on your credit file or you know exists from say the last 7yrs you should NEVER move without WRITTING to the debt owner with your new address. never run from debt which falls within the above .     all mortgage style SLC loans that were not deferred with erudio following the gov't sale in 2013 and that did not have a court claim raised within 6yrs are SB'd.   drydens simply did this because they wrote to your old address, got no response, and knew they'd get a default roboclaim CCJ where no human checks anything.   shot yourself in the foot.      
    • yep.   if all these are still owned/with the original creditors and you are not paying any powerless DCA's  then little point in any CCA requests at this stage unless any (non OD A/C's) are say pre 2000 opening.   our pro rata letters are the way to go you'll find those in the debt collection section of our library.   get any income payments on going or otherwise moved into a parachute A/c.   it is most probable that whatever you do most A/c's will be defaulted once this is done if not already. bearing in mine your wish to re mortgage or move in a future, it is most probable that the quicker you do default , the earlier a DN will be registered thus the earlier these will not show following their 6th birthday. this might involve you thinking about stopping all payments now ensuring this does happen, then resuming payment under a pro rata scheme self administered , once this happens.   just be aware that no DMP providers will ever question enforceability, should that be relevant.     
    • LL would have Absolutely no chance of getting the smart meter changed back.....
    • slow down ...read what i'm asking , stating and trying to clarify.. it all might seem useless or totally irrelevant but it's important information moving forward with the whole situation and useful in the SPC claim moving forward     there was not 2 loans - the litigated OD is not a loan but it appears from your comment here..     sorry but then you did get scammed on many fronts... they allowed you to settle the loan exploiting your confusion over thinking it was the litigated account. they didn't tell you either and they would also have been aware of your statement filed response form:   The respondent had a junior account with the Bank of Scotland since a young age.  The Bank of Scotland offered the Respondent a loan of around £2500. This Respondent serviced the loan until losing her source of income and ran into some financial difficulty resulting in defaulting in servicing the loan.   they settled for a discounted sum... why? we usually find this is because they hold no enforceable paperwork at all. or was full of charges , charges could have been the discount or it could have been due to 'a business decision' ...   but sure as eggs is eggs there is no way 1st credit would not have raised a court claim for both the OD and the loan unless there was a very good reason. they didn't that smells...badly.   OD 's are notoriously difficult to litigate upon if defended properly...but with a loan in the same claim, with enforceable paperwork, they would have almost been guaranteed to win.   it's also a shame you didn't come where before you did anything but we are where we are.   now the above might seem harsh..even petty but our posts are not only for you and your issue they are also for future readers that find us via search engines or read like threads here alerting debtors to frequent pitfalls and innocent wet myself actions many do that all these dca's will and have exploited time and time again over the last +40yrs .   i'll try and get around to properly redacting all your pdf's tonight and get them back up. but before i finish and get on with the above........the status of the claim as it stands now.   From what i can gather the claim now hinges upon proving her ex at the time settled by a discounted payment to HBOS well before the sale to Intrum and the SPC Claim.   In all honestly and with regard to your comments in your previous posts upon his character, i seriously doubt this ever happened. the disclosures from Intrum contain all the OD statements , should that have happened, it would be detailed in those.   there is little point in the claimant hiding that info as they would be in far more legal trouble should they have doctored them than insuring a mere +£1k claim win. Even 1st credit wouldn't pull such stunts.   Sorry but there is little point in requesting HBOS to attend any future hearing, nor hoping the SAR shows anything different to the statements the claimant has disclosed . That will cost you more money , and more money in terms of the claimant attending another hearing.   there is one exploitation i see. that being the mention of a default notice. the claim states:  The respondent fell into arrears under the Finance Agreement. A Default Notice was Issued by the Original Creditor .   now default notices are not issued for OD A/C's (which ties in to the possible loan confusion and scam settlement i mentioned) . This tallies with a common mistake that many DCA's, including why i keep mentioning 1st credit, which is the previous name for Intrum, made on numerous claims and was one of the reasons for the name change. To Hide that They lost many Statutory Demand and court claims over the non existence of a DN or proof of it's issuance by the OC (a DCA can't issue a DN) .. No copy of a default notice is fatal to to successful  litigation.   even though in this OD case one was not ever needed. (Poor particulars of claim showing copy and paste, and never expecting a claim to be defended but responded to by a wet themselves response , which you did by settling a loan which you believed was the claimed debt when it never was)    other than that you indicate you made an OOC F&F offer in 09-20  have you advanced this option since ?   dx
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Cabot/Nolans SPC Claim - Newday Marbles Card


Recommended Posts

the uploads do not contain a NOA from the OC to the DCA Cabot

usual crap determination of the NOA rules from Nolans..... you need to be educating the sheriff upon the correct regulations surrounding the law Of Properties Act,

 

as for the DN, again ,, usual crap from Nolans, under the CCA, a DN must have be produced to litigate regardless to 'only wanting the arrears'...funny that, they've tried that before here and lost!! numerous times i'm sure. and ofcourse they ARE litigating for the full outstanding amount which are not just 'arrears'..

 

nice one Nolan's...

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
  • 3 weeks later...
  • Replies 135
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

its a numbers game  they make (well actually that diff to know as a decree much like a CCJ can sit there for years not bring enforced. sad diff with a decree is its enforceable for 20yrs, bu

not at all none are silly questions, but what I will say is that your excellent self help has far advanced your understanding of things I really wish others would take that rouble as it

You dont repeat your defence Look at what i last posted    you briefly make statements around those points... focusing 1st upon what the sheriff ordered them to disclose and why th

Thanks DX, I've received the Sherrif order which says:

 

"The Sheriff, in Chambers, by way of teleconference call, having heard from parties,

Continues the cause to X November 2020 at 10:00am as Hearing on submissions;

 

Orders written submissions be exchanged between both Parties by no later than X November 2020;

 

thereafter Orders final Written Submissions, and any other documents either Party may rely on, be lodged with the Court no later than close of business on X November 2020;

 

directs that said hearing will proceed by way of telephone conference call; and directs parties to lodge electronically with the sheriff clerk (by e-mail to hamiltoncivil@scotcourts.gov.uk) by no later than 12 noon on X November 2020 a note setting out the name, e-mail address, and telephone number of the person who will conduct the hearing for each party."

 

 

 

I had a look on the Scottish courts website and it states "Where parties agree, a hearing may proceed on written submissions or via telephone or video conferencing."

 

Worried now that I this is something I should have objected to?

Having a look through the other threads I don't see any reference to written submissions in previous cases.

 

Is this playing into Nolans favour?

They get to essentially see my defence and then pick it to pieces and amend theirs to suit them before final submission?

 

Should I be thinking about getting legal advice now as I have no idea how to draft a legal submission?

 

Sorry for the all the questions again and appreciate the help.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

x's aren't helpful. dates please

 

and it work bothways, nolan's are also disclosing to you 1st as well

at present you are in the driving seat.

 

no NOA

No DN.

 

plenty of stuff here on sec 87/88arrears etc etc

you don't need a sols.

 

dates please

 

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

Thanks Dx,

 

- 2 November 2020 - Written submissions be exchanged between both Parties by then.
- 11 November 2020 - Final Written Submissions, and any other documents either Party may rely on, be lodged with the Court.
- 16 November 2020 at 10:00am - Hearing

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I received this in the post today, along with the evidence submission form. I have also checked the online portal for the case and the documents have been submitted there too.

 

It's the deed of assignment. Starting to worry a bit now. What do you think?

 

I have just noticed under the "law" section it mentions the deed is exclusively applicable in English law. This is obbviously going through a Scottish court. Is this worth noting at all?

Cabot deed.pdf

Edited by StandFirm11
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also being doing some reading over the weekend. It appears the law of properties act 1925 does not apply in Scotland (only England and Wales).

 

"In Scotland an assignation need not be in writing, and intimation is all that is needed to give the assignee a right effective against all parties. Apart from the terminology, the principal differences in England are as follows. Under the Law of Property Act 1925 the assignment must be in writing, the entire benefit must be assigned, and notice must be given to the other contracting party. If any of these elements are missing there may still be an equitable assignment – under which an assignee would typically need to join the assignor as a party to any action under the contract."

 

So I think the NOA defence is not going to hold up, as Nolans are probably right in what they are saying that their letter (intimation) is sufficient.

 

So my sole defence is going to be lack of default notice under section 87/88.

 

Any advice at this stage? I assume costs are still capped at £150 if lose?

Link to post
Share on other sites

:nono:

stop doing nolans job for them...

there are numerous threads here in the same forum yours is in

 

 

no DN info to follow

 

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

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

Thanks DX, I've read these a few times over. I'm feel like I'm pretty confident on the subject.

 

Do you think I should play dumb and quote the law of property act etc anyway?

 

The only thing I'm not sure about is the process now, I'm obviously very inexperienced in this and I'm not 100% sure what the sherrifs order is asking of me (post #53). Or maybe I don't need to do anything at all because I'm not submitting any documents as evidence?

 

The order is post #53 and I'm not sure what they mean by written submissions? is there a form or correct format/process for doing this?

 

Again, appreciate the help DX and sorry for all the Qs.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

go back and read what andyorch said in my above links about a DEED of assignment NOT being a Notice Of Assignment.

its a general document for a portfolio of MANY debts they bought on a spreadsheet, NOT specifically relating to YOUR Agreement.

but your was like all others, a single line in a spreadsheet. 

 

the sheriff has specifically asked for the NOA and the Default Notice ...neither of which the fleecers have provided, merly a load of ole twaddle like trump does to divert attention away from those NOT being provided.

 

forget the stuff about LOP 1925 etc that a NOE is NOT applicable in scotland , the sheriff has asked for it..end of!!

 

bedtime reading

particularly regarding default notice sec 87

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?484300-Cabot-nolans-SPC-Claim-Old-Next-CAT-Debt(2-Viewing)-nbsp&p=5119630#post5119630

 

read from about post 70.

 

as for the written submission.

i'll find an example later.

 

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

So tomorrow is the deadline for this part of the order - "Orders written submissions be exchanged between both Parties"


I haven't been able to  find any examples of a written submission and how/what format it has to be in.

Do you think this can this just be sent as a word doc in a letter format?

 

Just a rough example here (mostly taken from original defence response)...

 

The Claimant is a well known Debt Buyer or Debt Collection Agency that purchases large debt portfolio 'En-Masse' for a discounted Pence to Pound reduced value.

 

These debt portfolios, be them direct from the Original Creditors or exchanged under sales between like Debt Buying Organisations, were placed for sale because the Original Creditor neither wished to litigate against their customer themselves due to bad publicity or are typically related to issues of enforceability under the Consumer Credit Act.

 

The claimant has failed to show their legal right to enforce this debt.

 

To date, I have yet to the receive a copy of the original Notice of assignment and original default notice issued by the original creditor.

 

The Default notice is a requirement under section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act (1974):

 

Need for default notice.

(1)Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a “default notice ”) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,—

(a)to terminate the agreement, or

(b)to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

(c)to recover possession of any goods or land, or

(d)to treat any right conferred on the debtor or hirer by the agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

(e)to enforce any security.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You dont repeat your defence

Look at what i last posted 

 

you briefly make statements around those points...

focusing 1st upon what the sheriff ordered them to disclose and why they have failed each of his hurdles

and why each is important to their claim

 

Dx

  • 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

Thanks DX, I'm just struggling a bit as I can't find any examples of written submission.


The thread you linked regarding the default notice, I've read a few times but they ended up appointing a solicitor when it got to the submissions stage so we didn't really get to see any examples.


What about something along the lines of (any edits would be massively appreciated!!)


"The claimant has failed to show their legal right to enforce this debt.


To date, I have yet to receive a copy of the original Notice of assignment from the original creditor notifying of me of their intention to legally assign the debt. This was requested on the 1st order and the claimant has failed to comply with this order.

 

I wish to challenge the that the debt was assigned absolutely as the original creditor did not provide me with a notice of assignment as required by the Law of Property act 1925 section 136.

 

I have also yet to receive a copy of the default notice from the original creditor. This was requested in my initial submitted defence. I have raised this point at both case management discussions. The claimants response is that this document is "not necessarry".

 

A Default Notice must be served before any creditor/owner can enforce the agreement. The claimant must prove and evidence that a default notice was issued.

 

The Default notice is a requirement under section 87/88 of the Consumer Credit Act (1974):

Need for default notice.

(1)Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a “default notice ”) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,—

(a)to terminate the agreement, or

(b)to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

(c)to recover possession of any goods or land, or

(d)to treat any right conferred on the debtor or hirer by the agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

(e)to enforce any security."

Edited by StandFirm11
Link to post
Share on other sites

refer to the sheriff wanting them and the Claimant has failed.

not that YOU want them.

 

then backup the importance of each these to debt enforcement in a short sentence of two.

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

This might be the problem, after reviewing everything.

 

The sheriff did order the NOA to be provided but did not order the DN to be provided.

 

I brought this up on the 2nd case management discussion quite forcefully and explained the importance of the default notice and why it should be provided. The sherrif asked Nolans why this has not been provided. That is when Nolans replied it's not necessarry and hasn't been asked for.

 

The sherrif then quickly concluded that this would go to hearing. So there is no written order requesting the DN and I worry that Nolans will rely on that. Unless the case management discussions are transcripted and available to the sherriff to consider during the hearing?

Link to post
Share on other sites

the sheriff asked for the DN regardless of by what method, 

stop doing nolans job for them!

 

 

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

Thanks DX, I'm sorry about the frequent posting. I do really appreciate all of your help.

 

I've made a few revisions to the wording. Is this better wording? Should I just delete the copy and paste of section 87 at the bottom?

 

"The claimant has failed to prove their legal right to enforce this debt.


The Sherrif ordered the claimant to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment. The claimant has failed to provide the original Notice of Assignment from the original creditor notifying their intention to legally assign the debt. This was requested by the Sherrif on the first order and the claimant has failed to comply with this order.

 

Notice of Assignment is required, by the Law of Property act 1925 section 136, for legal assignation to take place.

 

The claimant has also failed to provide a copy of the Default Notice served by the original creditor. This point was raised at both case management discussions. When the Sherrif asked the claimant about their failure to provide this, the claimants response was that this document is "not necessary".

 

The default notice is an important document and is a requirement under section 87/88 of the Consumer Credit Act (1974). The Default Notice must be served, by the original creditor, before any creditor/owner can legally enforce the agreement through court. The claimant must prove and evidence that a default notice was issued by the original creditor. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of this.

 

The Default notice is a requirement under section 87/88 of the Consumer Credit Act (1974):

Need for default notice.

(1)Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a “default notice ”) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,—

(a)to terminate the agreement, or

(b)to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

(c)to recover possession of any goods or land, or

(d)to treat any right conferred on the debtor or hirer by the agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

(e)to enforce any security."

Link to post
Share on other sites

The deadline for submission is today, just preparing it now.

 

- 2 November 2020 - Written submissions be exchanged between both Parties by then.
- 11 November 2020 - Final Written Submissions, and any other documents either Party may rely on, be lodged with the Court.

 

I haven't received anything from Nolans and won't today, should I just send what I posted above and then phone the court tomorrow and say Nolans haven't complied?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll pop back later 

pers i'd hold till you get theirs as you are supposed to both exchange with each other?

don't blink 1st!!

 

they will be in far greater trouble than you as they are supposed to be wonderful solicitors...NOT!!

 

as i said before NOLANS WILL pull every stunt in the book so be warned.

 

  • 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

Thanks DX, I'm more than happy to hold off if you think that would be ok?

 

Yes, this part of the order is an exchange between both parties by 02/11

Final written submissions to be lodged with the court by 11/11.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll run over what you have to date later.

sorry i forgot you sort of but no panic

 

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

Uploading docs just now DX, would really appreciate your help with this. The docs were uploaded to the online portal and not sent to me directly.

 

It also appears Nolans might be reading this thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as they do

sadly they don't like DX.:pound:..

 

they think you'll run away cause they can see things.

 

 

 

 

 

 

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...