Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Claiming For A Breach Of Contract Where You Are Not A Direct Contracting Partner The contract is private to the contracting parties – “Privity” The general rule is that only the direct parties to a contract are allowed to claim if there is a breach. This is a very old rule and it is called “privity of contract” which means that a contract is private to the contracting partners. “Privity”can cause injustice This has caused some difficulties and even some injustice where a third party expecting to benefit from the contract might be expecting to receive something, if one of the parties to the main contract doesn’t fulfil their side of the bargain, you, the third party beneficiary can’t do anything about it - and the contracting party who did keep their promise is the only person who can sue and maybe they simply don’t want to. This could be even more unjust if you are the third party who funded the entire arrangement between the parcel broker and the delivery agent. The parcel was lost. Both the parcel broker and the delivery agent are not out of pocket – only you are out of pocket– but under the “Privity of Contract” rule you are not allowed to make a claim against the delivery company which lost or damaged your parcel. The Law Commission Report on Privity Of Contract And Third Party Rights In 1996 there was a report from the Law commission which recommended that in some circumstances third parties should be able to sue under contract even though they were part of the contract. In particular, the Law commission highlighted this injustice:   [The Person Who Has Suffered the Loss Cannot Sue, While the Person Who Has Suffered No Loss Can Sue]: In a standard situation, the third-party [privity] rule produces the perverse, and unjust, result that the person who has suffered the loss … cannot sue, while the person who has suffered no loss can sue.   As a result, Parliament passed a law called the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 This gives a third party in some circumstances the right to sue for a breach of contract even though they were not a direct contracting party. As a third party, are replacing one of the main parties When the third party uses this third party right, then they have to sue as if they were one of the direct parties to the contract and this means that they are bound by the same terms and conditions of that contract. This means that if it was a consumer contract then they can sue as the consumer with consumer rights. If it was a commercial contract, for instance between a broker and a delivery company, then you have to rely on your commercial rights. Most parcel delivery brokers are in the UK so you can sue the broker directly and this is always the best thing to do. However, there are one or two which are not in the UK. They are outside the jurisdiction of the UK courts and so if you arrange your parcel delivery through a one of those brokers and if your parcel is lost or damaged and if they refuse to reimburse you, suing the broker can be a difficult business and probably impossible. The only thing you can do is to sue the delivery company which lost the parcel but as you didn’t contract directly with them, you will have to rely on your “third party rights”. What the delivery company will say If the delivery company tries to defend the claim, they will probably say that although they did lose the parcel, you don’t have a right to sue them. They will say that you must sue the parcel broker because you made your contract directly with them – but of course we know that that is impossible because your parcel broker isn’t in the UK. You will have to state in your claim form and also explain to the judge that you are entitled under the 1999 Act because it was clear to the broker and to the delivery company that the delivery contract was made specifically for your benefit as the sender of the parcel and also for the benefit of the addressee – who is also a third party – and that it was even you who paid for the delivery anyway. What rights will you use? In a contract where you organised with Packlink, for example, to send a parcel using Evri, Packlink are based in Spain, you would have to sue Evri using the same commercial rights as enjoyed by Packlink. So in a commercial contract instead of relying on the Consumer Rights Act 2015, you would rely on the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 which also requires that a company selling a service must exercise reasonable care and skill and if they don’t then they are in breach. Also, in a commercial contract you would rely on the unfair terms provisions in the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and which includes as an unfair term any attempt to restrict or limit liability without any good reason. If you are using your third party rights to sue on a consumer contract then you would be able to rely on the Consumer Rights Act 2015. Making a small claim as a third party is pretty straightforward The the process for bring a small claim as an entitled third-party is the same as any other small claim and pretty straightforward. The arguments are slightly different – but that’s all             Some examples of people who might be excluded by the “Privity” rule but are saved by their third party rights ·        Your friend takes you on holiday. They organise it and pay for it. Your friend’s holiday is great but your room is damp and rat infested. Your friend doesn’t want to claim against the holiday company. You took time off work for this holiday which you won’t get back but you didn’t have a contract with the holiday company.             You would sue the holiday company as third party consumer and rely on your consumer rights.   ·       Your friend uses a parcel broker based abroad to send you a mobile phone with £500. And the parcel arrives, it contains shoes. Your friend has moved to Australia permanently.           You don’t have a contract with the parcel broker so you would sue them as a third party to a consumer contract and                 rely on your consumer rights   ·        You get taken out for an expensive meal. Your host the table and pays for the meal but you get food poisoning. Your host had a great time and hasn’t actually lost anything.              They have no loss to claim but you don’t have a contract with the restaurant.You would sue as a third party to a                         consumer contract and rely on your consumer rights.   ·        You sell a mobile telephone on eBay and send it to your purchaser using an overseas parcel broker to organise the delivery through a UK delivery company. When the parcel arrives the purchaser finds that it contains some books.                 You sue the parcel delivery company as a third party to a commercial contract and rely on your commercial rights  
    • new subheading under paragraph 25 – The defendant is fully aware of third party beneficiaries new paragraph 26 Any denial by the defendant that they are unaware of the existence of third party beneficiaries to their contract with Packlink would be quite untrue. The defendant routinely sends out notifications to parcel recipients informing them the parcel which they are carrying on behalf of the broker is about to be delivered. Please find examples at – bundle X X X, X X X 26. 1) In the absence of any explanation the defendant’s denial should be disregarded.  but in any event,   If you have a look at the pinned thread at the top of this sub- forum relating to third-party rights, you will find several examples of notifications which have been sent by EVRi to the recipients of parcels warning them that their parcel which is being carried on behalf of QVC, Packlink – et cetera is due to be delivered. I suggest that you use a couple of these as examples of how EVRi is completely aware that there are third-party beneficiaries involved. If EVRi tried to say – "yes, we knew that there was a recipient that we had no idea that there was a sender…" Well, could they really be that stupid? I suggest you incorporate that, make the tweaks which have been suggested by @jk2054 and that's it. That would probably be the final version. You've worked hard on it – but hopefully the constant repetition will mean that you are absolutely fluent if it actually goes to court. EVRi are watching this of course and I don't really expect they are looking forward to having a judgement on this against them so I can imagine that they might reach out to you before the trial and make an offer. Have you paid the hearing fee yet? I don't think you have. I can imagine that they are waiting to see if you pay the hearing fee so they know that you are serious. Of course is not guaranteed but I would expect that they will try to prevent this going to trial. You should hold out for every penny. And if they want to make an offer to you under conditions of confidentiality then you should refuse. Confidentiality is not part of the claim. That something extra. If they try to impose a condition of confidentiality then you should tell them that this would cost them extra. I would say thousand pounds is probably cheap for the trouble that a judgement against them will cause them. Keep us updated of any approaches by EVRi – either on the forum – or by email if you prefer to admin email address. Let's see your final version
    • Hello I’m also going through the same at the moment for £300. Icon went quiet for a month or so but just received another text this morning to say “Notice of likely CCJ/Enforcement due to non-payment”. I’m still ignoring as per all of the threads on this but every time I get a text I still like to have a read up just to check advice hasn’t changed so good to read this thread! Thanks
    • They have now closed the account.
  • 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

Friends LC Asset/Link Claimform - 2019 Barclaycard debt


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 388 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

Good afternoon all

 

After my successful dealings with Barclaycard thanks to you all I am now helping a friend of mine to hopefully do the same.  Single mum with no computer etc so sorting all the paperwork and explaining as we go along. 

 

Old Barclaycard debt apparently sold to Avarto then Moorcroft - no letters of assignment but both blood suckers chased the debt claiming they owned it. 

 

Dec 21 received a letter of assignment from Barclaycard stating sold to LC Assets - No letters from LC

 

May 22 received a letter of assignment from LC Assets stating sold to Link - No further letters

 

Sept 22 received Court papers from NCC with the claimant being LC Assets 

 

Now she has only ever had a notice of default from Barclaycard with nothing other than stated from the others.  I have created a MCOL account with her and notified that we intend to defend all of the claim. 

 

Now just about to send off a CCA request to LC Asset ( Does it matter the address on the claim form is in Luxembourg? ) 

 

Now was going to send a CPR31  off to Kearns Solicitors but noticed my debt was under 10k but hers is as follows:-

Amount claimed - £9500

Court fees - £455

Legal costs - £100

 

Therefore the total amount is over the 10k mark for the small claims track, therefore what form should i send to the solicitors?  

 

Thank you in advance for any help you provide

 

Ok sorry guys I have found the original form in the Library, so i just delete this section then? 

 

 

Although your claim is for a sum which is not more than £10,000.00 and will in all likelihood be allocated to the small claims track for determination upon my delivering a defence, at this moment in time I have not delivered my defence and the case has not been allocated to a track.

 

In consequence the provisions of CPR 27(2) are of no effect and you should not seek to avoid compliance with your CPR 31 duties by claiming otherwise]#

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Friends LC Asset/Link Claimform - old Barclaycard debt

please complete this

 

 we will advise you properly upon what to send to whom.

 

dx

 

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

Which Court have you received the claim from ? MCOL Northampton N1

 

Name of the Claimant ? LC ASSET 2 S.A.R.L 

 

Date of issue – 25 Aug 2022

 

1.The Claimant C claims the whole of the outstanding balance due and payable under an agreement referenced (16 digit code)  and opened effective from 07-03-2019. The agreement is regulated by the CCA 1974 

CCA was signed by the defendant D and from which credit was extended to D. 

 

2.D failed to comply with a default notice served pursuant to s87 (1) CCA and by 30-01-2020 a default was recorded.

 

3.As at 29-11-2021 the defendant owed Barclaycard plc the sum of 9050.00. By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective 29-11-21 and made regular upon C serving a notice of assignment upon D shortly thereafter. 

 

And C claims 1

, 9050.00   

2, Interest pursuant to section 69 County Court Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from 29-11-21 to 25-08-2022 of 470.00  And thereafter at a daily rate of 1.91 to date of judgement or sooner payment. Date 25-08-2022

 

 

What is the total value of the claim? 10,055
 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No
 

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No
 

Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A

Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card
 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After
 

Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? No
 

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Will find out & edit
 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Debt purchaser
 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Sort of - see first post
 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes
 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? No
 

Why did you cease payments? Could not afford them
 

What was the date of your last payment? Never made a payment
 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No
 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No - buried head in the sand

 

 

This might be easier 

 

 

 

N1 form (1).pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.
[if mcol is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time]
.
 register as an individual on the Gov't Gateway Site
Go to HMRC's login page.
Click the GREEN sign in button.
Click “Create sign in details”
Enter your email address where asked.
You will now be emailed a confirmation code. ...
You will now be issued with a User ID for your government gateway account.
 note down your details inc the long gateway number given, you might need it later.
 then log in to the MCOL Website
.
 select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.
.
 then using the details required from the claimform
.
 defend all
 leave jurisdiction unticked
 you DO NOT file a defence at this time
[BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ]
click thru to the end
confirm and exit MCOL.
..
get a CCA Request running to the claimant

.

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/

..

Leave the £1 PO unsigned and uncrossed

.

get a CPR  31:14  request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant]
...
.[use our other CPR letter if the claim is for an OD or Telecom Debt]
.

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/

.

on BOTH type your name ONLY
Do Not sign anything
.do not ever use or give an email
.
you DO NOT await the return of ANY paperwork 
you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count]

..............


 

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

you DO NOT await the return of ANY paperwork 
you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count]

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...

need to file the defence before the 27th September 

 

I have written out a rough draft for advice and polishing 

 

 

Defence 

 

  1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 

 

 2. It is noted insofar as I have in the past held a contractual relationship with Barclaycard. I do not recall the precise details or aware of any outstanding balance. I therefore have sought clarification from the claimant by way of a CPR 31.14. Unfortunately the claimant has failed to comply with my request. 

 

 3. It is noted that the debt was legally assigned by LC ASSET (Ex Barclaycard) to the claimant and notice has been served.  The Letter of Assignment was received on the 21st December 2021, then another letter of assignment from LC ASSET to LINK financial was received on 22nd May 2022 but since that date have not received anything requesting or related to the alleged debt until the Letter of Claim dated 25th August 2022

 

 4. It is noted the claimant states that the defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement. The claimant has failed to comply to my section 78 request and thus remains in default of said request and therefore unable to enforce any alleged agreement? 

 

 5. It is noted the claimant states a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to S.87 (1) CCA. I have never received any Default Notice relating to the alleged claim therefore it is denied.

 

 6. On the 06th September 2022 I made a legal request by way of a section 78 request to the Claimant. The Claimant has failed to comply with my request and is therefore in default and unable to enforce or request any relief until such time they comply. 

 

  Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: 

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

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

(c) Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice Pursuant of sec 87(1) of the CCA1974. 

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

 

 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed and evidence any breach and notice of breach by way of a default notice or notice of sums in arrears 

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would drop 3 totally, if you've got both NOA, then there is no need to mention such 

 

Re the CPR did this not goto Kearns?

 

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

Thank you, 

 

no3, is it not woth keeping it in as she recieved a notice of transfer from LC Asset to LINK financial but the N1 is from LC asset? 

 

Yes the CPR did go off to Kearns, should i replace claimant with Kearns solicitors? 

 

 

Edited by spergen
Link to post
Share on other sites

claimants solicitors.

 

as for link/ asset  they are all part of the Link group ...immaterial really.

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

Defence 

 

  1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 

 

 2. It is noted insofar as I have in the past held a contractual relationship with Barclaycard. I do not recall the precise details or aware of any outstanding balance. I therefore have sought clarification from the claimant’s solicitors by way of a CPR 31.14. Unfortunately the claimant’s solicitor has failed to comply with my request. 

 

  3. It is noted the claimant states that the defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement. The claimant has failed to comply to my section 78 request and thus remains in default of said request and therefore unable to enforce any alleged agreement? 

 

 4. It is noted the claimant states a default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to S.87 (1) CCA. I have never received any Default Notice relating to the alleged claim therefore it is denied.

 

 5. On the 06th September 2022 I made a legal request by way of a section 78 request to the Claimant. The Claimant has failed to comply with my request and is therefore in default and unable to enforce or request any relief until such time they comply. 

 

  Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: 

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

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

(c) Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice Pursuant of sec 87(1) of the CCA1974. 

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

 

 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed and evidence any breach and notice of breach by way of a default notice or notice of sums in arrears 

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No

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

Did you get a letter of claim and ignore it?

 

 

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 rush, courts are now closed till Monday AM 

 

You need to add the sentence about not receiving a letter of claim.

 

Dx

 

change the relevant details in this defence (dates time figures only)

 

1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

2. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a Letter of Claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.

3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had in the past a contractual relationship with Barclaycard. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars . I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant who has not complied with my requests for further information.

 

4. Paragraph 2 is noted. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by Barclays Bank and received by the Defendant.

 

5. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or Barclays Bank.


6. On the 05/10/2021 I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and CCA1974 Section 78 request. The claimant as yet to respond to this request. Kearns as yet to respond in relation to the CPR 31.14 request. To date, 21/10/2021, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request.


7. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:


(a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and

(b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974

(c) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

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

 

8. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

9. On the alternative, as 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 consumer credit Act 1974.

 

10. 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.

 

 

.................................

 

needs filing by 4pm monday (day 33)

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 month later...

Update

 

Went to go see my friend tonight, she received a letter from the courts stating they had sent her defence to the Clamant and the claimants solicitor giving them 28days to provide us with the information required and to further inform the court if they wished to proceed. 

 

This letter was dated the 26th of September, checked MCOL and nothing showing and nothing in the post to date. 

 

Should I get her to phone the court for an update or ask for a letter confirming the situation seeing as its in limbo at the moment? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no read the court letter completely.

 

after 28 days + 5 days for service, the claim becomes automatically stayed if the claimant does not move it fwd to the next stage.

 

FYI: if that happens ,  it would cost them £275 to unstay it.

 

what is the next stage ...you should be reading up. direction questionnaire n180

 

keep an eye on the mcol status to see if DQ N180 being sent from the court gets logged, if not by about 6 weeks, she is home free to all intent.

 

dx

  • Like 1

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 months later...

So a quick update 

 

My friend called me in quite a panic the other day, Link Financial sent her a letter stating they had recieved the documents relating to the S77/88 request from the original creditor and that the account is now enforceable!  

 

Went over for a cuppa and to look thorough the paperwork as it was quite vast, upon reading though it turns out they had simply gone to the barcleycard website and printed off the sandard terms and conditions.  The fools had left HTML link at the bottom of the page, how stupid do they think we are? 

 

So thats it in a nutshell for the moment.  I hope this helps anyone in a similar situation? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

yep fake stuff with no signature  or tick box date printed name etc etc#typical link

 

i will guess the last update on mcol is defence filed date xxxxx?

no mention of dq n180's being sent out to either party.?

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 months later...

claim is stayed.

it will now cost them +£275 to lift the stay via an N244 which the court will advise of

just DO NOT MOVE without informing the court.

go forget and enjoy life

std practice for link to send BS.

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Friends LC Asset/Link Claimform - 2019 Barclaycard debt
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...