PRA Letter of Claim - now Fast Track claimform - 2000 barclaycard debt - now n244

[dx100uk]

the cca is NOT from 2000,  T&C's are (says 00/03 at their bottom.}

there are no dates anywhere on the cca return, but i know thats about 2007/8 one from bc. but no sight of a recon for the original date.

when terminated?

what was?

dx

[RobinB4nk]

well yes i agree dx, i just look at it perplex. why can i not decipher what they've sent!

i think i just need to go through this with you if i can.

1) 1st page is supposedly a cover letter from BC in response to a request for terms - not a CCA request

2) 2nd page has an address at takeout blanked out plus a box with some rubbish about cancelling

3) 3rd/4th page terms from takeout and cancellation box

4) 5th-19th page an undated copy cca with my current address insert at the top.

Is this what im seeing?

it looks to me that pages 1-4 are supposed to be the recon cca from takeout.

 and pages 5-19 is a recon cca with the latest varied terms. 

[dx100uk]

1st 4 pages correctly relate to the time of takeout for 2000.

page 1 being the cancellation box page with a sticker of the correct name/address for the time of the application for the card. the other 20-32 pages of a cca return for that period are missing totally, as well as no separate T&C's for that time with name/address for the date of takeout.

from page 5 onwards is a totally undated nor signed copy of what a complete CCA for an agreement from 2006/7/8 looks like.

psst and it's a big PSSSTTT..

 

go read a good few hoist barclaycard claimform threads here.

(use our enhanced google searchbox not the top red banner search)

you'll soon see 100's of examples in uploaded pdf's/claimant ws's of the above and also WHAT a cca return for 2000 SHOULD contain.

what you wont ever find is a SIGNED BC CCA return. they dont exist, baclaycard never kept them/held them and if they do they never send them out to debt buyers they sold debts onto.

it will also teach you about section 127 61 etc etc that @Andyorch related too.

easy win here. 

just get your head around things and your brain in the right gear, you are almost there,

the claimant is only pushing this BECAUSE they see a very large debt their speculative claim might earn lots of money on . if it were a mere few £100's they would have disc'd months ago.

this case is a mirror of the 100's of the old hoist claims, which is why they lost soo many, lost loads of money in court fees and ultimately gave up on the bought up barclaycard portfolio they spent £1m's buying.

rumour has it it's why their whole name/portfolio was old to lowells of recent, their poor debt buying they broke up the hoist group. 

 

dx

 

[RobinB4nk]

hi dx,

ive tried searching for hoist barclaycard witness statement in both legal successes and legal and I'm just not finding any 2000 takeouts, what am i doing wrong?

actually you're right dx in your post 123.

the document has been editied by pra. the 3rd and 4th pages have been added by them.  i dont believe they came from barclaycard.

at the base of all the other pages it says 'restricted - internal'.

those two pages just dont fit with the rest of the document. the orientation, the print quality. just doesn't look right.

i think thats why its so confusing.

its like a cca and its terms from 2000 injected into the cca and terms from another period.

[dx100uk]

i didnt say search directly for a WS.

i said 'Hoist Barclaycard claimform'

Programmable Search Engine

CSE.GOOGLE.COM

click the above ive done it for you.

i didnt either say that parts of the CCA were faked by PRA.

read my previous explanations CAREFULLY.

 

[RobinB4nk]

thanks dx,

not sure what you mean faked.

it would seem, as you said in #123, that the cca from 2000 was added by pra into the barclaycard document before it was sent to me.

when i read your posts, you seem to be connecting the two sent cca's together as one document.

you talk about the terms from 2000, but the cca from 2007.

Is this the angle you would go in on, sort of pleading innocent that you just assumed, because of the way they are presented with no explanation, that you assumed them to be one of the same?

[dx100uk]

11 hours ago, dx100uk said:

the docs in the PDF around post 18 .....

the T&C's are from the correct time of take out (state in footer T&C 03/00) but do not appear to have his correct address on them so could be a copy from their filing cabinet and NOT from BC as a result of PRA requesting them from barclaycard. so do not count.

the std int rate on them is 15.75%.

the std int rate on the supposed copy of his agreement is 19.4%

they dont match so .....

it is also worth to note the agreement default sum fee is £12

a fixed recommend max default fee of £12 did not come in until after 2006 when the FCA ruled on bank/credit charges fees , for a 2000 BC card the charges were £25 late/overlimit.

so the agreement is post 2006 NOT a reconstructed copy of the one he signed in 2000.

i would specifically question PRA WHAT is the date of the agreement they sent.

im not going to keep repeating myself.

 

[RobinB4nk]

sry dx, im just struggling to understand.

its clear to me that they are relying on pgs 3 and 4 as been the cca for the period. its headed 'credit agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974' it then states 'this is a copy of your credit agreement for you to keep'.

 

[dx100uk]

 pages 3+4 are not anything to do with the original from 2000, the one you actually signed  and that only has one page showing

 

pages 3+4 are a copy of an agreement from about 2007/8 with your name inserted in it. garbage toward enforceability

go read andyorch's recent posts very carefully.

 

[RobinB4nk]

Right! Thank you dx.

I know it can be frustrating for you, but to me its like looking at one of those 3d pictures, you know the ones where you stare at it and its just nothing, then bang its there.

Well today i saw the picture and i know exactly whats happened here, and i completely get it.

that pos booklet they sent was the terms that came with the card, what was signed, if anything was an application form and not an agreement.

Therefore the prescribed terms where missing and because its pre 2007 the agreement is irredeemably unenforceable.   Sooooo obvious now! Sry for being thick.

roll on friday!

[dx100uk]

and?

 

[RobinB4nk]

well friday came, i travelled over an hour to get to my brothers, then down to the local court. they had doubled booked the judge and there was no one to hear the case!

it was just unbelievable. on arrival the other sides solicitor said hed only just seen the defence and ws 24hrs ago and didnt understand what we were saying and wanted to chat about some perhaps common ground? we declined.

we then went in to see the judge who explained what had happened and they would try to get someone else to hear the case, the judge tried to encourage us to talk to the other side. the judge asked the claimants sols how long it would take, which bugged me, he said oh 1 1/2 hrs should be enough, acting all confidently.

we then waited for another judge to become available which just didnt happen. waste of 4hrs of our lives. the case has been relisted for January. it was just unreal, their solicitor was like, 'oh no worries judge,' typical butt kissing. then, when asked again by the court manager how long it would take to hear the case, he changed his 1 1/2 hrs to 3/4hrs.

It seems to me when talking to the court manager, they knew the judge was double booked, but hoped we would enter an agreement without needing a hearing. thing was a complete joke.

 

[RobinB4nk]

well guys, not good. We lost, badly.

Everything we argued was dismissed and we were white washed. the agreement was dismissed very quicky, she accepted it was the agreement and she was satisfied it was legible. She was satisfied the default was correct and she pretty well ignored anything from the FOS.

We were completely shell shocked and its complete injustice. so the original claim was 16kish, then with the FOS refund it took it to 11k, then they added about 3k costs, so were back up to 14k.

so obviously my brother has nothing and cant afford that, he rents and has an old car. So would like your thoughts on his next move. He has family and doesn't want bailiffs visiting, We know they can do squat and if he was on his own he'd tell them to do one.

So would like your advice, as we see it he has 3 options:

1) He could try to prevent the registering of the judgment by doing a monthly payment directly with PRA?

2) fill in court form for reduced payments but this will lead to judgment been registered?

3) enter a DRO and have done with it for once and for all together with everything else?

whats your thoughts please?

Edited January 31 by RobinB4nk

[AndyOrch]

Oh dear  one of them judges...

39 minutes ago, RobinB4nk said:

1) He could try to prevent the registering of the judgment by doing a monthly payment directly with PRA? Not possible

2) fill in court form for reduced payments but this will lead to judgment been registered? N245 (best option)

3) enter a DRO and have done with it for once and for all together with everything else? Possibly

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/347309-legal-n245-application-for-suspensionvary-an-order-correct-as-at-oct-2019/#comment-4179767

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/351647-debt-relief-orders-dros-a-brief-guide-accurate-september-2015/#comment-5089745

Andy

[RobinB4nk]

thanks Andy, it does seem you really advocate n245, can you just elaborate why? once the court has agreed the amount can PRA ever apply to have it varied again? does it really mean he has to pay these people 14k? is there ever an end other than years of paying?

you say its not possible to stop the judgment being registered, however, its my understanding only default judgments are immediately registered, defended judgments are only registered once enforced? this is what both the court and the registry of judgments told me?

[AndyOrch]

15 minutes ago, RobinB4nk said:

thanks Andy, it does seem you really advocate n245, can you just elaborate why? once the court has agreed the amount can PRA ever apply to have it varied again?  Yes at a cost of an application very rare but he remains in control ,does it really mean he has to pay these people 14k? Yes but at an affordable amount is there ever an end other than years of paying? DRO?

you say its not possible to stop the judgment being registered, however, its my understanding only default judgments are immediately registered, defended judgments are only registered once enforced? this is what both the court and the registry of judgments told me?

Incorrect, all judgments are registered after the permitted time to pay has elapsed (28 days)

Andy

 

.

[AndyOrch]

Also the n245 protects against execution of the judgment providing the payment plan is maintained.

[RobinB4nk]

ok thx andy, also what figures do the courts accept on these with a 14k debt? can the courts reject an offer of say £10 as been unreasonable for the claimant? what happens then?

[AndyOrch]

Its dependant on how you complete the attached N245 I&E and what is left which is affordable and what you propose. Always make it affordable but you must complete it honestly and try to make it future proof over a long term payment plan IE rent increases etc etc.

The courts and claimant can reject your offer if the I&E does not reflect the same affordable proposal so its about getting it right and looking fair.

[RobinB4nk]

OK, so if its genuinely what you can afford, the court will not reject it? even if it would take 100yrs to repay?

[AndyOrch]

You cant get blood out of a stone....the key word is realistic.

[dx100uk]

ruddy judge lottery here.

stick the n245 in for say £10pcm, then that will nail PRA in their box, they can never force him to increase it either.

[AndyOrch]

Follow the advice I have already given....they can increase it by way of a redetermination application

[shakeyshark]

Hey Robin,

 

Sorry to hear about how it went at court. 

Do you have any updates to the story?

I'm going through a similar situation myself and don't know whether to just set up a payment plan of say £10 a month for eternity or gamble at court.

 

Many thanks

[RobinB4nk]

Hi shakeyshark,

I've had a skim read through your post and obviously your circumstances are very different to my brothers.

As for an update, we've setup a payment plan at £10/mth to hold things. Along side that we sent a formal complaint to PRA group about their conduct in the matter, particularly regarding why they never eluded to the FOS investigation and why they failed to provide an accurate breakdown of how the figures were calculated. I still believe they are in breach of FCA rules regardless of the court outcome.

They have subsequently written back saying the account is on hold whilst they investigate things which could take up to eight weeks. So we'll see what they say and whether we need to refer the matter to the FOS.

We felt confident to go to court because of the FOS investigation and their findings, I would not have been confident arguing the toss on agreements. I think you have to be careful on a fast track claim due to the costs and if we could re run it with hindsight probably should have negotiated a deal then entered a Tomlin.