Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • hey your doing fine, stop sweating, it's really no big deal, you need to understand you are what is classed as 'a litigant in person' - meaning joe public against what can be seen as a somewhat daunting judicial system, that is too your advantage.   IMHO thats just a reprint of your defence, it might be better to structure around something like this, whos basis is around the WS in the thread i pointed too.         WITNESS STATEMENT OF DEFENDANT XXXXXXXXXXXX CLAIM NO. XXXXXXXX                                                                                                                                   Defendant: XXXXXXX                                                                                                                               Date XX/XXX2019 IN THE COUNTY COURT AT                                                                               CLAIM NO:XXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX     BETWEEN     XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX      CLAIMANT     AND XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX     DEFENDANT    1. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed ...10p to 15p in the £1 and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. Idem Capital securities issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt to maximise profit.    2. 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.   I accept I have in the past had financial dealings with {insert original creditor name]. That being a Loan Agreement . I do not recall the precise details of the agreement but do recall it was on or about the year xxxx.   After seeking advice this led me to check all paperwork I held with creditors, from this I could not find any Credit Agreement relating to the account the claimant is referring to.   I have therefore sought clarification and requested copies of the agreements from the claimant by way of a section 77 request    exhibits   (DOC 1) A CPR 31.14 request pursuant to sec 61 B of the CCA1974 was sent xx/xx/xxxx via Royal Mail signed for and shows as received xx/xx/xxxx. Request for the following :   1.a copy of the default notice served under section 87 of the consumer credit act 3. Notice of assignment 4. A statement of account   (DOC 1A) To date NO default notice been produced.    (DOC 2) A Section 77 request was sent on xx/xx/xxxx via royal mail signed for and shows as received xx/xx/xxx. The claimant to date has failed to comply to my Section 77 request.   the defendant has failed to produce a copy of the Default notice issued by the original creditor,  as far as I can recall any breach with the original creditor would have been on or around xxxx.   The claimant as an assignee would not be able to legally issue a Default Notice as the debt would have already been terminated before assignment.   (DOC 3) I sort clarity of any Default Notice by the way of a CPR 31.14 request, sent via Royal mail signed for on xx/xx/xxxx and shows as received signed for xx/xx/xxxx   The claimant has still yet to comply to my CPR 31.14 request with regard to clarity of any valid default notice issued, as yet I have never received an original or seen a copy of a valid default notice from the defendant.   Conclusion   I contest that the documents I have received do not meet the requirements and prescribed terms of a legal binding credit agreement, and that the claimant has acknowledged that they are unable to produce an agreement and are unable to enforce litigation action.     I also state NO VALID Default has been produced from the claimant.   I believe that the that the facts stated in the witness state are true   ..................   have you received the claimants witness statement yet...   the above is just musings...    
    • Hi I know you are a busy site but I have posted the last few very important messages as I will be in court in the next few weeks   as you can see time is of essence and I have had few cryptic replies of look for your self messages which I have tried to work out about new guidance on statement of truths but this is not something that I am familiar with   yes I understand this site is not here to spoon feed everyone but sometimes it feels like a cap in hand approach. I have not had any feedback as to whether my statement is going to stand or if it will be thrown away by the judge?   I wish I had the knowledge of all you guys that assist everyone in their time of need who ask for the guidance that is readily available here but unfortunately it’s not the case sorry.   If anyone could advise on my post it will be very much appreciated.   Thanks G
    • I will need to find the original two letters. It wasn’t that long ago so they can’t have gone far 🙄   but nobody remembers this pcn which makes me wonder about the date. I will check. 
    • Electricians generally do a good job and we all need them from time to time.  However, none of us would employ an electrician to change a light bulb, we'd do it ourselves.   The small claims courts is designed to be informal and to discourage the use of solicitors.   What we can't understand is why you are paying a solicitor huge sums to do things you could easily do yourself.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Summons issued against Parrcel2Go


Its WAR
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 95 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

its war

 

hit quote on this post and try typing

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 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

looks like i've sorted it now.

 

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

Thx DX.

 

Hi MattyPrice. I made a mistake stating it was Royal Mail 48, it was in fact ParcelForce 48.

 

The thing is the product I chose was described as Parcelforce 48 (that is why I clicked on it, because I wanted that service rather than any of the alternatives on offer).

 

What P2G supplied was not actually that product but a cheaper version of it which excluded the £100 compensation which the product called Parcelforce 48 always comes with.

 

contend it should not have been described as ParcelForce 48 but called by another name distinguishing the two different  products.

 

But also I argue Contra proferentem, also known as "interpretation against the draftsman", which is a doctrine of contractual interpretation providing that, where a promise, agreement or term is ambiguous, the preferred meaning should be the one that works against the interests of the party who provided the wording.

 

Nowhere in P2G order process does it describe the differences between what I ordered and what I got. They did try to sell me additional insurance which is ambiguous as I chose not to buy extra insurance as I expected the product to already have it.

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

stick this working thread now

all the info is here from day one.

the other to save confusion i will hide.

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 made a mistake . I was trying to decide how to deal with being away and missing the hearing that I forgot to send the £25 hearing fee and two days later the claim was struck out. (It turns out I couldn't have traveled anyway due to Covid restrictions). I have now advised the defendants that I will be issuing a new claim in 14 days and they might decide to take the chance to settle.

Its WAR

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...