LC Asset/Link/Kearns Claim Form #1 - Halifax CC

[dx100uk]

what date was the DN sent on the letter please

 

[Badtimes123]

Yeh you're right, sorry I thought it might identify the case to the claimant. I see how that actually wouldn't matter...

I saved copies of scans without redactions, those are available if needed

8th December 2021

[dx100uk]

oh yea top of previous page...

what date is the tick page 11.

 

[Badtimes123]

Sorry my redactions made it harder dx.

Tick dates are 11/12/2014

[Badtimes123]

My expectation was their WS would include the best paperwork, like at least true copies of originals, but these just look wrong somehow, perhaps the font and size of font...

Not sending me the DN in CCA request but producing it for evidence I would argue could be a tactic used by them...

- Page 11 with ticks - there is no reference to IP addresses

- Home addresses are correct for dates in documents

 

Just looking up example Defendant WS's while awaiting your thoughts on this

Edited April 30 by Badtimes123
home address comment

[dx100uk]

Same date as poc then

i dont like the agreement either, it just smells to me, but i can't find a like one of that era to compare against.

this is only 10yrs old, so weight that up, i'd say enforceable & most are from the ear as a whole here.

it cant be a recon as they must state so, and it wouldn't/doesn't need to have a tickbox+typed name to be so either.

>80% loss if you go fwd, unless you can pay the CCJ within 30 days of judgement in FULL, might be time to consider a tomlin/consent, as much as i hate link, if you don't want to gamble on a very small chance of a win or can't pay within 30 days if you lose.

what date is the hearing?

dx

 

 

[Badtimes123]

Thanks dx, with link having multiple accounts for me, I didn’t want to be a pushover in the first one ideally..

hearing is 3rd June, WS’s to be exchanged by 6th may 

I'm not sure on the best option here, I'm happy to go with Tomlin, however I can afford to pay this one in full if needed and wonder whether I should be trying to get a reduced amount, perhaps in the court hallway before going in? that would require submitting a WS of some sort.

What I 'like' (strong word) about TO in this instance, is that it allows me to keep my savings to hand for further accounts needing attention in the near future and I would hope gives me some control over the pcm amount..

I've read a number of TO threads now (fell to sleep at the keyboard last night ) but have a few questions please:

- Do I specify the payment arrangement in a TO or the claimant? I'm thinking 20% lump upfront plus 96 months of circa 60 squid.

- Who decides repayment amounts if CCJ is granted? if the judge, then do I submit I&E at any point?

Given the amount of total debt across all my claims, I need to ensure anything I commit to is future proofed. I wouldn't want all my disposable income sent to this one debt, only to have another one in a month or two.

[AndyOrch]

12 minutes ago, Badtimes123 said:

I've read a number of TO threads now (fell to sleep at the keyboard last night ) but have a few questions please:

- Do I specify the payment arrangement in a TO or the claimant? I'm thinking 20% lump upfront plus 96 months of circa 60 squid.

You can make an offer but the claimant has final say but must be affordable

- Who decides repayment amounts if CCJ is granted? if the judge, then do I submit I&E at any point?

The claimant on a default judgment on a hearing judgment the judge and no you do not submit an I&E

Andy

[Badtimes123]

Thanks Andy,

Did I understand correctly, in another thread you suggested a phonecall to discuss TO with claimants solicitor? just want to ensure whatever I do doesn't acknowledge the debt

Edited May 1 by Badtimes123

[AndyOrch]

Yes its usually the best form of approach re Tomlin Orders catch them off guard and dont let them consider or prepare from a script.

[Badtimes123]

Righto.

I will contact them, do I ask for the named solicitor?

What do you think of stating:

As a means to avoid further litigation, I would like to make the following offer of settlement:

A Tomlin Order for £6500 (which is the amount they randomly mentioned at the start of mediation). Lump sum of £1500 and 96 months of £52ish

In the meantime, should I submit a WS for this claim given the looming deadline?

 

[AndyOrch]

Yes the sol or whoever is dealing with claim number xxxxxxx and yes you must proceed with the directions they may not entertain a Tomlin.

 

 

.

[Badtimes123]

Working on WS, get that in the post then contact sols is the plan.

The sol has misgendered me in their WS

[Badtimes123]

I've given it a try, I expect alot of work required so will give my eyes and brain a rest as I'm getting word blind.. and I'll come back later following your initial bashings

Thanks

IN THE ******** County Court
Claim No. [***]
BETWEEN:
LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L
CLAIMANT
AND
[***]
DEFENDANT
************
_________________________ ________
WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***]
_________________________ ________
I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

 

I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.

 

1. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. 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.

2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant.

3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies.

4. The Claimant claims a Notice of Assignment was served on the 22/02/2022. This is denied.

5. The Claimant claims a Default Notice was served on the defendant. This is denied.

6. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement.

7. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession.

8. Point 3 is noted and denied. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***].
The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925.

9. Point 5 is noted and disputed.

10. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***
The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925.

11. Point 11 is noted and disputed. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies.

12. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** (dates are wrong)

13. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations.

14. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022.

Conclusion
15. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt.

16. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt

17. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter into settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter into such negotiations with the Claimant.

On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.

Statement of Truth
I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true.
Signed: _________________________ _______
Dated: _____________________

[Badtimes123]

I’ll give it another run over tonight.

As I’ll be trying for a TO this just needs to be basic, I’d like to raise concerns with the agreement and the fact it doesn’t look right, or smell right as dx says also, they are claiming I was served with notices - shouldn’t they have to prove this? A photocopy of a letter doesn’t confirm delivery or receipt of said letter.

not sure really how best to structure it but I’ll keep trying and any pointers in the meantime would be appreciated 

[AndyOrch]

Point 4 and 10 duplicate

Point 5 and 8 duplicate 

Try to keep to one para with regards the agreement...various paras duplicating the same.

Statement of truth is out of date refer to the claimants statement

 

 

[Badtimes123]

Appreciate input Andy, updated:

IN THE ******** County Court
Claim No. [***]
BETWEEN:
LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L
CLAIMANT
AND
[***]
DEFENDANT
************
_________________________ ________
WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***]
_________________________ ________
I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

 

 

I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.

 

1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment.

As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. 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.

2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant.

3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies.

The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement.

4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***].
The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925.

5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925.

6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3.

7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits ***

8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations.

9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 21/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession.

Conclusion
10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt.

11. The Claimant has been unjustly enriched at the expense of the Defendant by purchasing bulk debt at a greatly reduced cost and subrogating for the original creditor in trying to recuperate the full amount of the original debt

12. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant.

On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.
 

Statement of Truth
I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth.
Signed: _________________________ _______
Dated: _____________________

 

 

 

.

[AndyOrch]

 

5 hours ago, Badtimes123 said:

2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. The Defendant has not entered any contract with the Claimant.

 

(3) As at xx/02/2022 the Defendant owed Bank of Scotland plc the sum of 8,xxx.xx.

By an agreement in writing the benefit of the debt has been legally assigned to C effective xx/02/2022 and made regular upon C serving a Notice of Assignment upon D shortly thereafter.

11 duplicates your 1 you have already stated the process of assignment.

 

 

.

[Badtimes123]

Having another go now.

Here is my thoughts on approach with the defence while I edit the WS.

Focused around proof of service of CCA required paperwork, referring to s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925, and this section (my highlights)

"Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-house, and if that letter is not returned through the post-office undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered."

Having a photocopied letter only in exhibits is not proof it was serviced. Strict proof? Proof of postage/receipt?

Or, am I missing the point with the above please?

And somehow arguing the agreement looks smelly.. like I could have typed it up myself. - not sure how this can be argued correctly, but it's just a piece of paper with my name on it, I think having a judge decide is a perfectly reasonable thing for a person to do if they don't think it's right.

As it's my first court case and potentially many to come, I'm keen to experience it (or one of the first ones), I can afford to argue this one in court. I will also benefit from seeing this through for future decisions I will have to make.. rock and hard place

With all of that said, and taking dx's advice, I'll TO if attractive and maybe do court on future ones that have a greater chance at success.

[AndyOrch]

Not much mileage in challenging assignment Notices..judges are not concerned.

[Badtimes123]

Including Default Notice Andy?

Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS.

They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months.

IN THE ******** County Court
Claim No. [***]
BETWEEN:
LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L
CLAIMANT
AND
[***]
DEFENDANT
************
_________________________ ________
WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***]
_________________________ ________
I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim.

1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. 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.

2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers.

3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies.

The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement.

4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***].
The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925.

5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925.

6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3.

7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits ***

8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations.

9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession.

Conclusion
10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt.

11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant.

On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.
 

Statement of Truth
I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth.
Signed: _________________________ _______
Dated: _____________________

[AndyOrch]

16 minutes ago, Badtimes123 said:

Including Default Notice Andy?

Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.

 

 

.

 

 

[Badtimes123]

I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory.

Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance

[AndyOrch]

Your point 4 deals with that and puts them to strict proof .....but realistically they are not in a position to state that within their particulars they were not the creditor at the time of default but naturally assume the OC would have...so always worth challenging and if you get a DJ who knows his onions on the day may ask for further evidence from the OC internal accounts system. 

[Badtimes123]

Thanks for input everyone, hoping to bring this to a resolution very soon, so I'll update thread when that happens, beit court or TO.

Printing the WS this afternoon, I'll hand deliver to Court and send to other party by post