Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • your welcome.   when you send your email make sure that you include a method of payment.   alternatively drop a paper copy of the application (along wiht a copy for service on parties) to the court with a payment.   not deemed as served without being paid.
    • Morning,  I've put together my defence and would appreciate any advice.  Much thanks!  1. The claim is for the sum of £6000 due to the defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a Lloyds Banking Group PLC account with an account reference of (account no. 16 digits long). 2.  The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the consumer act 1974 which has not been complied with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on (date) November 2016 notice of which has been given to the defendant 4. The claim includes statutory interest under s.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum for the date pf assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £0.00. 5. The Claimant claims the sum of £6000. 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. 1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings with Halifax part of the Lloyds Group of Companies but do not recognise the specific account number referred to by Claimant. 2. Paragraph 2 is noted. I do not recall receipt of a Default Notice by the original creditor which the Claimant refers to within its Particulars of Claim. CCA & CPR 31.14 requests were sent to Claimant dated 11 May 2024. Response dated 24 May 2024 details that ‘they are unable to obtain a copy of Default Notice’. 3. Paragraph 3 is noted. Although I had not recalled a copy of the Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) I requested a further copy from the claimant which has since been provided in response dated 24 May 2024. 4. Paragraph 4 is noted. It is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement. (b) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice Pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. (c) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. 5. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 6. 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.
    • Thanks for updating Cheeky. I'm sure it'll help others to see that no action is ongoing.
    • yes sorry my reference to closing this one because something tells me the OP is likely to start his new claim on this thread if it was left open that was all.   jk
  • 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

Cabot /Mortimer Claimform - Newday Fluid Card - stayed - Now N244 - Summary Judgement ***Claim Discontinued***


albouk
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 246 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

This debt was originally for a Newday Fluid credit card which has since been sold to Cabot Financial and is now being pursued by Mortimer Clarke.

 

When Mortimer Clarke began to chase the debt I asked for the credit agreement, default notice and deed of assignment, this was not produced at the time of asking, they claim it was sent out in their witness statement!

 

They sent out a LBA 6 months later on the 25th March 2021 which we did ignore because of the lack of evidence, on the 28th March 2021 they issued a claim.

 

I did defend the claim stating they had not shown the debt existed as they failed to provide the credit agreement, default notice and deed of assignment. The case was left stayed until late February 2023 and now they are applying for Summary Judgement.

 

2 other things to note,

in their witness statement they state they sent out the documents asked for in the defence on the 18th of February 2022,

upon checking the document in the witness statement it was sent to an email address belonging to my partner which is a surprise since all previous contact was via post and he does not remember getting it.

 

They did send a warning about applying for summary judgement back in September 2022 but again we ignored this because we didn’t have the documents.

The first time we have seen the requested documents is upon receiving the bundle from the court last week.

 

The hearing is on the 28th March 2023.

 

This and all other debts defaulted back in summer 2019 ideally, I do not want a CCJ.

The only anomaly I can see to argue my case is that we never did receive a default notice at the time even though one has been included as evidence.

 

I have on a “without prejudice save as to costs” basis attempted to come to an arrangement with them.

I offered £500 as a full and final settlement or £100 per month for the full debt.

This was rejected as they have been advised to pursue for Summary Judgement even though in their witness statement, they would be happy to accept monthly payments if I lose.

 

They then sent an email stating they would ask the court for costs totalling around £750.

 

Any help would be appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Cabot /Mortimer Claimform - Fliud Card - stayed - Now N244 - Summary Judgement
  • dx100uk changed the title to Cabot /Mortimer Claimform - MBNA Fluid Card - stayed - Now N244 - Summary Judgement

have you actually received the N244 etc in the Post.

 

they should not be served via email!!

 

you need to cut that off now

send one email to their sols, stating email is NOT to be use dfor anything regarding our mutual court claim.

 

you state you did received exhibits in their WS.

 

can you scan up the N244 ( if you have had a PAPERCOPY (not via email)

 

and also their FULL WS inc Exhibits

 

read our upload guide CAREFULLY

one mass PDF only please!

 

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

does that ip address trace to near you for the time of take out?

 

you said this was orginally an mbna card but the fleecers claim it was a newday fluid card taken out through a third party provider/broker at 11pm at night? M1 Money is it? do you remember doing this?

 

 

 

 

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 not sure who has added the MBNA to the text or title of this post, it wasn’t me. The card was a Newday Fluid.

 

The IP address is ours I investigated that. I don’t remember taking out the card at all!

 

After looking at the bundle of evidence they have submitted I can see 2 points to go back at them with which may be enough to stop the summary judgement.

 

1. I don’t recall receiving a default notice, as this is a purchased debt they are relying on information from Newday. They have provided a default notice but have failed to show proof of service.

 

2. In the credit agreement page 21 onto 22 of the exhibits “how can the agreement be ended”  it states they can cancel the agreement giving 2 months’ notice and then goes on to say in the same headed section about repeated missed payments etc. At the bottom it states “we will give you advance notice and the chance to fix the breach before taking these steps”. As a default notice is a termination of the agreement could I argue even if the default notice was served they didn’t give me 2 months as in the agreement. I know in other credit agreements I have they clearly differentiate between normal termination and default termination.

 

What are your thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Cabot /Mortimer Claimform - Newday Fluid Card - stayed - Now N244 - Summary Judgement

sorry about mbna sorted now.

 

weighing everything up

 

they appear to hold all the cards they need too?

 

 

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

neither are valid.

 

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

What about notice of sums in arrears. I’ve never had any notices after the debt was assigned. CCA 1974 s86(d) states the agreement is unenforceable during a period of non compliance. Notices should be provided at least every six months. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

well they are in the upload, several of them.

and even if they dont send them, it doesn't make the agreement voided, simply that they cant charge interest for that period.

 

dont get confused with no DN, that they have too and it looks compliant as well.

 

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

nope makes no real odds 

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

Hi @albouk, I wanted to let you know that your full name appears several times within your upload in post number 3.  It is on pages 70, 83, 88, 97, 111 and 127.

 

Thanks for sharing your experience to date, I too am at the N244 stage following the lifting of a stay and my case is progressing.  It is really helpful to be able to see how they have constructed their WS and exhibits and being able to understand what compliant and non-compliant documents may look like.

 

I hope you are able to resolve this in a way that is manageable for you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kjw327 said:

Hi @albouk, I wanted to let you know that your full name appears several times within your upload in post number 3.  It is on pages 70, 83, 88, 97, 111 and 127.

upload a new file and i'll swap

 

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

3 hours ago, albouk said:

Do you have your own post up with your claim? Im fighting this one on a couple of technical defences.

 

kjw327's Content (consumeractiongroup.co.uk)

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

After reviewing my witness statement Mortimer Clarke have stated their client is willing to accept a settlement of £600 which was my last offer to them! Thats because they have absolutely no chance in winning their case. I have told them to proceed to Tuesday’s hearing, where they will either have their claim dismissed or have it sent to trial and have to pay my costs and their own expenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be able to share that dependant on the outcome of Tuesdays hearing or if they walk away from the case before then. I don’t want to jeopardise anything just yet.

 

After reviewing the letter again, it stated let us know if you don’t want to settle for £600 so we can take further instructions from our client. So, I called to give them every opportunity to walk away from the case before Tuesday’s hearing. Let’s see what happens between now and then. I will update this post as soon as I have anything more to share.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, albouk said:

I will be able to share that dependant on the outcome of Tuesdays hearing or if they walk away from the case before then. I don’t want to jeopardise anything just yet.

 

 

thats not fair on CAG members , their threads you've read nor CAG as a whole

the forum has helped you 

its not for being selfish

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

Maybe but I won’t upload until the case is resolved either way. The other day you told me I had no defence. This statement was also compiled from research I’ve done outside of this forum. If you feel I’m being unreasonable or its against your rules, then I’m happy to remove my account.

Link to post
Share on other sites

same outcome, you've abused people goodwill. we dont remove accounts no.

 

no one has said you have no defence, you already filed that long ago, 

if you mean the ideas to put in your WS, which you were popping up, you got honest answers.

 

didn't mean you couldn't put it up and ask for help on it.

thats probably what others were waiting for....

 

never mind 

moving on.

 

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...