Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank you both. My defence was as vague as their Claim. 1. I am the defendant in this claim and litigant in person. All allegations made by the claimant are denied. 2. The defendant does not recognise the alleged agreement xxxxxxxxxxx as mentioned in the particulars of claim therefore it is denied that any such agreement exists. 3. The defendant has requested copies of the alleged agreement under Data Subject Access Request, Consumer Credit act 1974 s.77/8 and Civil Procedure Rules 31.4 but to date the claimant has failed to provide a copy of this document. 4.The defendant has also requested copies of the default and termination notice for the alleged account xxxxxxxxx as required to legally enforce the alleged debt, but again the claimant has failed to provide either. 5. In addition the defendant has requested copies of statements for the alleged account xxxxxxx showing the amount of monies allegedly owed to the claimant. To Date these have not been provided. 6. The defendants view is that this claim is vexatious and an abuse of process as the claimant has failed to provide any documentation to support their claim and respectfully requests that the said claim be struck out.   As an aside, I noticed that the 'statement' they did provide had a different figure on it to what they are claiming, so I will hopefully be able to flesh out quite a bit in my skeleton argument.   Spam 
    • 80% refund sounds like a very good deal* as they are entitled by law to deduct an amount from the refund to reflect the use you have had of the item over the 12 months it has been working.   So you could argue that a deduction of 20% for one year indicates that they expect it to last for at least five years, and probably longer.     * Think about it this way - would you pay 80% of the value of a brand new iPad to buy a second-hand one that somebody else has been using for over a year, or would you expect to get it cheaper than that?
    • Hi WoodDD.. Neither Case was cited in the VSC WS... however, MR D form VCS threw in VCS v Ward & Idle for the Judge to consider during the hearing. The Judge did not have time to review this. I believe he may have had a quick scan but decided it wasn't relevant at the time.. By not relevant, he didn't elaborate if it was not admissible or anything else..   Hope this helps..   Regards Tom     
    • Can I  ask what you mean by "... they recommended a firm... "?   I ask because I'm a bit surprised that Social Services are even allowed to do that.  (I may be mistaken and that this is common practice, but it seems a bit odd to me).   If they did do so and the work has turned out to be sub-standard and unsatisfactory, I would have no hesitation in making a formal complaint to the council and also to my (or your friend's) local councillor(s).  You acted on the council's recommendation and you should have a reasonable expectation that the firm recommended should be reliable and professional.  I would also insist that trading standards be asked to investigate this firm.  (Where I live our local county council trading standards department runs an approved trader database).   A complaint to the council might not directly assist you but it might help to prevent others being taken in by this firm.
    • Hello Susan, welcome to CAG.   Hopefully Paul Walton will see this message and reply to you, but it would also be a good idea to start a new thread of your own so we can advise on anything else connected with your refund.   Best, HB
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • 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
      • 33 replies

CLI Chasing Jamaica National Small Business Loan debt


Recommended Posts

in one way it's a very bad thing and has been seriously compounded by wherever you seem to have been getting advice from since you came to the UK. this is backed up by the some of you comment here like i don't want them finding me, i don't want to give any real details.

 

the owner of a debt could quite legally pick any of your old address and quite legally file a court claim.

that's called  a backdoor CCJ and you'll know nothing about until High Court Bailiffs arrive at your door.

whatever a debt type, you should never be running and hiding in this predominantly computer age where information is so readily and easily available both ways.

 

the good thing is you can cut everyone's legs off and prevent the above, but you must ACT, not take 6 weeks to convince yourself sticking your head back in the sand is the best way, as it's worked till now and everything you've read till you came here supports your theory.

sadly there are 100's of backdoor CCJ threads here that prove otherwise.

 

so let's resit and go all the way back to the 1st 7days when you came here and the advice given.

send the debt owner an adapted version of our SB letter, let them work it out .

cant harm you, but legally gives then your correct address.

it's for the owner in court to prove a debt is NOT sb'd, not for you to prove it IS.

i bet that will be the last time you ever hear anything bar willy waving from CLI 

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
  • Replies 89
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Thing is,

the debt owner does have my current address in the UK as I gave them this in 2013 by telephone when I called them just after I moved house for threatening to publish my personal details in a local news paper and the internet.

They went ahead and did so anyway.

 

It would be light work to find these personal details on the internet if you know what to look for.

Apparently the contract that I signed at the time permitted them to do so.

 

I suspected that my rights (GDPR) were infringed upon by this act, but was not sure one way or another, so I never pressed it and let it alone out of fear.

 

Since this event, for the whole of 2014 I was receiving statements regarding the debt from the original owner consistently, but at that time, I assumed it was statute barred then since I had not paid for over 6 years and never responded.

 

Sometime during this period (my best guess is around 2014), while I was still receiving statements at my current address I called over the phone to let them know that I believed the debt to be SB'ed.

 

They claimed that it was not since I had

1) made a payment in 2013, and

2) they have an email from me with my name printed, admitting that I owned the debt and will arrange to pay them. They then confirmed my current address again.

Both these things they claimed would have reset the SB window.

 

At this time, I checked my old statements and as they claimed, there indeed was an anomalous  payment made to the account at this time.

 

I am absolutely certain that this payment could not have been by me as I was in the UK at the time of the payment and never left since I arrived, never authorized anyone to make payment,  nor wired them any payment towards the debt. 

 

As for the email, I did not at the time ask for proof of this, but am very sure that it could not have been mailed by me (It is this email that I am also worried about).

 

I have no way to prove it is not mine however.

Regardless, since this telephone conversation, their communication ended for a while.

 

That was, until CLI started contacting me. Bringing us to today.

 

My point is,

the original owner does indeed have my correct address as they have been using it for a while now to send me statements.

 

Never any threat of imminent court action, just statements. That is, until CLI.

Link to post
Share on other sites

now you tell us....

 

i wish you wouldn't keep playing teeth pulling with us.

 

ignore until/unless you get a letter of claim 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

No ...only the issuance of an actual court claim stops the limitations clock.

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

Afraid not...next you will be asking how can we make it snow on Christmas Day :wink:

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

So are you saying I can get a court claim at any time from now, and there is nothing I can do about it?

There are no other intermediate steps CLI or the owner needs to do where I can push the time to action beyond 3-4 month threshold by slowing down or thwarting their response time?

 

All this considering that it is an international debt.

Don't these things take some time to process? :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

Possible...but if they have not issued a PAP pack before...they are going to be in trouble proceeding with the claim.....so we are back to start of this full circle...until you receive a PAP ...have a great Christmas and relax.

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

Please try....debt is one of the last things to ever worry about.....particularly at the moment with whats happening around us under the current climate.

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 hour ago, syphont said:

Is there any strategy I can use to achieve this goal?

 

you are already doing it and have been all along...ignore everything...

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

One quick question:

 

Which is the better option in response to this threat:

 

"Our client has now instructed us to proceed through the Courts to collect the above debt. Unless payment is received within 7 days, we will initiate the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claim which applies to this matter. Hopefully  you will seize the opportunity to settle this matte ramicably to prevent the issuing of a Claim in the County Court and the additional Court fees and Legal costs that this would generate"

 

 

1) call them and ask for NOA and DOA and tell them it is SB'ed

2) write them and ask for NOA and DOA and tell them it is SB'ed

3) wait until I get the PAPLOC claims form and then do step 2.

 

It would also be helpful if you explained why the choice you said is the best one., as I try to wrap my head around all this.

 

Thanks.

 

Edited by syphont
Link to post
Share on other sites

You await the fictional letter of claim.

 

theyve said this so many times already

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...