Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I cannot see many people agreeing to any virtual webcam review of goods to be controlled.     Many people in debt may not even have the facilities to be able to do this.   And the few that agree may try to have a laugh at the enforcement companies expense.  e.g. this painting is by well known local artist Peter Ist, but he signs his paintings as  P Ist and this other painting is by Brian Roke who signs his paintings as B Roke.     Who would agree to this without understanding the consequences ?      
    • Well poss unenforceable cca both lets see
    • Although I will be submitting another request as DVLA haven't stated when they responded to VCS with the information.  18th was a Friday,  VCS say they posted the letter on Mon 21th.  Seeing how this SAR has taken this long, I doubt the DVLA went all out to clear the request over the weekend, but we'll see.
    • Thanks for the heads up, Peterbard  this will potentially open a big can of worms similar to the assumption all goods seized bailiffs used to try to rely on the comments in the Law Gazetter  are quite revealing, as in thety cosdider the judgment very iffy, the comment about the bailiff asking the debtor to move the webcam so they can get the image of the TV and Playstation illustrating the potential silliness, notwithstanding the way some EA's will rely on that Virtual CGA to allow them to force entry as if they had physically entered premises for a Convential physical compliant entry,  That is a dangerous judgment.
  • 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/MBNA card Debt - Begging letter received om Mortimer Clarke


Recommended Posts

optima don't appear to know theres any previous legal proceedings.?

but they are owned by cabot whom trade under the MFS names too...

 

why did you never defend the CCJ and how long ago was it.

 

this is a restriction K why are you even paying it?

 

what date is the restriction please

have you looked on LR to see exactly what it says?

 

^^^answer the above please

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

The restriction on the documents from the Land Registry reads

 

" 24.1.2011 RESTRICTION: No disposition of the registered estate other than a disposition by the proprietor of any registered charge registered before the entry of this restriction, is to be registered without a certificate signed by the applicant for registration or their conveyancer that written notice of the disposition was given to MBNA XXXXXXXXXX at care of Optima Legal, Arndale House, Charles Street, Bradford BD1 1UN being the person with the benefit of an interim charging order on the beneficial interest of XXXXX (i.e. me) made by the XXXX County Court on 14 January 2011 (Court Reference xxxxx)"

 

I didn't think to challenge it as I was with Payplan at the time and they told me to go to Court.

 

Uncle Bulgaria67 above seems to think that I have no option to pay it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

as I told you earlier

you don't have to pay anything..

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?480656-Restriction-of-sale-from-now-dissolved-company-(Sigma-SPV1)

 

and its been sold on

so cabot can go swivel too!!

 

MBNA took you too court and they got a CCJ

you should have defended the claim

 

as you bent over

they went for a CO on easy prey.

 

if you go read that thread ive linked

all is explained

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

I'm confused??? Unclebulgaria67 said I had no option but to continue the payments so I made the £60 payment they wanted, online. But now you are saying I shouldn't pay? I don't have a CCJ, just a restriction. There is nothing on my credit file about it.

 

It was Optima Legal who took me to Court, not MBNA and Optima Legal are still in existence. If they are true to their word and I have to go back to court, can they place a full charging order against my house, as they have hinted at in their letter? Will I have any defence if I do go to Court?

 

I didn't defend it because I was with Payplan at the time and they told me I had to go to Court as Optima Legal had the right to pursue the debt. Why doesn't anyone check that the "debt" is enforceable and how can I now prove it isn't?

Link to post
Share on other sites

what letter where they hinted at a full charge?

its a restriction k

it doesn't have to be paid

you got had...

 

 

mbna took you to court hence their name on the restriction

optima were simply their rep in court.

 

 

you do have a ccj and it was enforced by the restriction.

the fact it doesn't show is simply because its more than 6 yrs old

 

 

and its now been sold

so where is your money going

ever had a statement?

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

Read it properly..

It says judgement

 

Its a std letter

MBNA already have a judgement

They don't know what they a are talking about

Stop paying

 

Cabot MFS don't hold the restriction MBNA do

 

Being had

That money has gone in their pockets

 

Send MBNA an sar

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

Yes you could send MBNA an SAR.

 

I presume you got a CCJ because you did not defend and then you did not pay. MBNA obtained an interim charging order and this is when you started paying £20 a month via Payplan. Is this correct ?

 

Here is a link from National Debtline about charging orders.

 

https://www.nationaldebtline.org/EW/factsheets/Pages/countycourtchargingorders/chargingorderadvice.aspx?gclid=CLCz0IX98tYCFYq97QodnsoHfg

 

Yes you could stop paying Optima, unless you receive proof they have legal right to receive payment on behalf of the debt owner. It is your choice whether you can or want to pay £20 a month or take the risk that the debt owner might apply to convert the interim charging order to a final charging order. You could write to Optima asking them to provide documentation to confirm that they have legal right to receive payments on behalf of the debt owner/claimant holding Judgement. E.g copies of court judgement, notice of assignment. Say that you have paid the £60, but would need documentation to consider making any further payment.

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

the restriction is not in optima's clients name

cant demand anything

stop paying.....

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

Yes i see that from the attachment. You would think the new debt owner would apply to register the CCJ and charging order in their name. If they don't then trying to obtain payment by application to the court will be difficult.

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 years later...

Can anyone help? 

 

I've just got a letter from Mortimer Clarke, chasing a debt originally payable to MBNA in 2003. 

I asked for a copy of the credit agreement and told them not to write to me again until they have it. 

 

MBNA originally said they didn't have a copy. 

Solicitors for MBNA said when I defaulted that they couldn't locate a copy of the original credit agreement which I signed. 

 

The copy which Mortimer Clarke has sent me is just a signature page, which shows my name and address, account number, the amount of the debt (which they say is £11,313.14), my signature and hand written date.  The copy "agreement" is only just legible.  They have also sent me an income and expenditure sheet.  I'm 71 and retired.

 

Given that the agreement is dated 2003, I defaulted in 2008 and it's now almost 2021, is this not statue barred? 

I have been making regular monthly payments of £20 since I went to court in 2010 but cancelled it recently when I heard that my debt had been transferred to Mortimer Clarke. 

I don't know how I can repay this debt and I'm sick with worry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have been making regular payments from 2010 until recently then the debt cannot be statue barred.

 

You said you defaulted on the debt in 2008, in what way did you default?

 

What debt were the payments from 2010 to 'recently' for?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I defaulted because I couldn't pay. 

The original debt was for an MBNA credit card. 

 

I had to go to Court a few years ago and Optima Legal said I had to pay £20 a month. 

Then the debt was changed to Mortimer Clarke recently

I stopped paying the £20 a month to Optima.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By went to court do you mean they issued a court claim and got a CCJ against you ?    That was 2010 ?  

 

Quote

 I had to go to Court a few years ago and Optima Legal said I had to pay £20 a month. 

 

Is this a second court appearance (2018 ) ????

 

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 OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • dx100uk changed the title to cabot/MBNA card Debt - Begging letter received om Mortimer Clarke

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

threads merged.

its a restriction k so nothing they can really do.

 

its a begging letter wanting you to pay for their staffs new years party drinks bill.

 

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

should I start to pay MBNA £20 a month? 

What will happen if I don't? 

 

I understood that if the original credit agreement was produced and signed by me, that I had to pay? 

 

Sorry to sound so vague - I should be used to all this by now.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

you should you've been here long enough...

 

them having or not, enforceable paperwork is pretty much immaterial - the old CCJ will trump that. 

 

as for paying anyone, they've done nowt in 2yrs and i can't see them being able to do anything now.

for point of ref..scan up the Mortimer letter to PDF please

read upload carefully..

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...

MBNA years ago attained CCJ then latterly a CO which is infact a restriction k

therdebt along with the CCJ/CO was latterly sold to cabot

nothing mortimer can really do.

 

its a begging letter wanting you to donate to their staffs outstanding new years party drinks bill.

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

correct ignore.

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...