Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

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

Cabot and old stayed Court Claim - Old Welcome Secured Loan - want to sell, but charge is still showing


majimix
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 795 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 had already posted the one for my ex back,

 

Back where?

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 OTHER

 

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

  • Replies 203
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

She will most probably get a CCJ then...as it would be seen as good service (last known address)

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 OTHER

 

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

Nothing.......you submit your defence at the appropriate time.

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 OTHER

 

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

have you done CPR and CCA request to the claimant/sols?

 

 

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

CCA request

 

 

send that to cabot with a blank £1 PO

do not sign the letter

 

 

CPR 31:14 from the legal library tab top left

 

 

requesting any documents they mention in their PoC.

 

 

free proof of posting via 1st class from the Po counter will do for each

 

 

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

opps sri

 

 

Mortimer

 

 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Right , they have now both replied.

 

Mortimer Clarke have said " they are taking their clients instructions in relation to the request

and will come back as soon as they can"

 

 

they go on to say ,

" we can confirm our client is willing to agree to the extension of 28 days,for you to file your defence.pursuant to CPR 15.5 (2)

please notify the court in writing of the agreement.

 

Cabots letter came the other day, a day after MOrtimers and says,

" Cabot financial does not have this information on file.

However we have requested the relevant information under section 77 and/or 78

of the consumer credit act 1974 from the original lender.

 

We anticipate that we will be able to provide this information within 40 days.

in the event we are unlikely to obtain this information within those time limits, we will write to you again.

 

They have not sent my £1 postal order back and this is as much as I've received .

 

Any thoughts ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

they are both std replies to both the CPR and CCA request if you read other threads here in the forum you are in.

 

 

whatever you do

 

 

YOU DO NOT MISSING YOUR FILING DATE.

 

 

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

midnight sunday 19th deadline.

 

 

as it stands you have weeks yet

 

 

if they still don't comply

 

 

you file the no paperwork/holding defence widely available on many threads here

 

 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

ok just bringing forward the PoC

 

 

Date of issue - 17th September 2014

 

What is the claim for

1.- an agreement made between welcome finance and the defendant made on or around a date in 2008

WLCF agreed to LOAN the defendant monies under the terms and conditions set out therein,

2.in breach of the agreement the defendant did not pay the instalments as they fell due and

3. the agreement was terminated,

4. the agreement was assigned to the claimant in June 2014.

 

What is the value of the claim - £11'600

 

Is the claim for a current or credit/loan account or mobile phone account ? - welcome secured loan

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007 - after,2008

 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned

and it's the debt purchaser who has issued the claim - the claim has been issued by Cabot financial, not the original

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned - yes

 

Did you receive a default notice from the original creditor - yes

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed " notice of default sums" - yes

 

Why did you cease payments - unemployment

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved - yes

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt managementlink3.gif plan - yes

 

 

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

I see you've been looking around

just find a recent credit card no paperwork/holding defence by andyorch

 

 

number the points in their PoC above

 

 

and adapt the defence to suit YOUR situation

 

 

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

post 17

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?433119-cabot-mortimer-claim-form-Halifax-Aqua-Credit-Card-debt&p=4632220#post4632220

 

 

or any other welcome finance thred in this forum.

 

 

have a go

I've numbered the PoC point.

 

 

reply use the above.

 

 

DO NOT FILE UNTIL IT HAS BEEN CHECKED

 

 

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

1.- an agreement made between welcome finance and the defendant made on or around a date in 2008 WLCF

agreed to LOAN the defendant monies under the terms and conditions set out therein,

 

2.in breach of the agreement the defendant did not pay the instalments as they fell due and the agreement was terminated,

 

3. the agreement was assigned to the claimant in June 2014.

 

The claimant therefore claims £11,600

 

 

DEFENCE:

 

 

I contend the particulars of claim as they are vague and generic in nature.

I accordingly set out my case below and rely on CPR 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

 

1. I have held an account with Welcome Finance however I do not recall the particular account number referred to

and have requested a copy of the alleged agreement pertaining to this claim.

As of this date the claimant has failed to comply with my section 78 request and therefore remains in default of s78.

 

2.

 

 

3. I deny receiving any Notice of Assignment Pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925 and the Claimant is required to prove they are able to bring this claim.

 

 

4. The Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31.14,

therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and

(b) Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

© Show evidence of service of a Default Notice and Notice of Sums in Arrears

(d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

 

5. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed by providing full accounting of the amount they have claimed.

 

 

6. On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due

to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the Act 1974. 17.

 

 

By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

 

Would it look something like this ?

 

 

Thanks for your help by the way !!

 

It didn't look like that when I typed but I can space it out in list form

Link to post
Share on other sites

looks par for the course

 

 

I'd let andyorch check this sometime today before you file.

 

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...