Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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. 
    • 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
    • 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.     .    
    • 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: _____________________
    • AMEX and TSB the 2 Creditors who you need to worry about the least, ever!  Just stop paying them and forget about it, ignore all their threat o gram letters.  Only if, and with these 2 it's a massive if, you end up with a claim form you need to respond, and there will be plenty of help here.
  • 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

Court hierarchy


Russe11
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1886 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I don't know what you mean by saying that you want to get it at "a worthwhile level"

 

You have to go to the County Court.

 

You could go to the High Court but it is very expensive, more difficult in terms of procedure and if you lose you will suffer a serious costs penalty.

 

You go to the County Court, claim for less than £5000 and there is almost no risk of having to pay costs even if you lose - as long as the judge doesn't think that your claim is so ridiculous that it is abusive of the process or deliberately wasteful of the courts and the defendants time.

 

I am going to suggest very strongly that you read up a little on what you are proposing to do.

Google "Small Claims County Court UK" and see what what comes up.

Although it is quite easy, you do need to have some of the basics under your belt so that you don't make a fool of yourself.

Don't forget that the Bank's reacton to you will depend a great deal on whether they think yo know what you are doing.

 

This forum can help you to a certan extent but you must go and help yourself as well. This is a support forum - not a "Do-it-for-you" forum.

I hope that yo don't think that this is too harsh.

Remember that if the bank decides to go into court with you, then you will be on your own.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was more to a point of interest as well as the fundementals.

 

I have built up a reasonable understanding of the system.

 

The banks choices are to defend or not, but also I belive they are entitled to launch a counter claim if they so wish. Can the bank only do this at County Court level, or are they able to do more ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can launch a counter claim. If they launched it for a very large amount of money then the case could be transferred to the High Court.

I doubt whether you are involved with that kind of sum. - at least four x zeros - several times.

 

If the bank made a counterclaim then this would be very exciting because they would be indicating that they are going to go to court and submit to jusidical scrutiny of their penalty charge system.

They wouldn't be able to go to court merely on the question of the counterclaim and not have the principle issues which you have raised dealt with as well.

 

It is nearly inconceivable that the bank would want to go this way and if they did it would to my mind mean that they had been poorly advised by someone who did not appreciate what was at stake or else they were suprmemely confident that they could win the penalty charge issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, they need to be lured in......lol (not suggesting anyone trys anything by not following the correct procedure - just a joke)

 

My bankmanger obv does not have a head for figures, I quote from my meeting...

 

"£1163 that is a lot of money, and interest !" ...."This is a considerable sum you are asking for" he remarked as reading my letter in front of me.

 

in my head "for a bank that is heading for nearly 10 billion year profits"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Done! 8)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I am considering a claim against Lloyds TSB for approx £3000 in unpaid excess fees etc. If, after submitting the letter, the bank doesn't cough up and I start the claim through the county court small claims track, they defend, I understand it is the Judge who would decide if it needs to be heard in the small claims or higher court. If he decides a higher court and the bank wins, I would be liable for costs.

 

If, assuming it got this far, the judge descides it should be heard in a higher court, could I drop the case then? - I am a little scared about the potential damaging effect of paying their costs - just trying to protect myself!

 

Can anyone confirm my understanding of the situation. I know this is highly unlikely but I want to cover every angle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am considering a claim against Lloyds TSB for approx £3000 in unpaid excess fees etc. If, after submitting the letter, the bank doesn't cough up and I start the claim through the county court small claims track, they defend, I understand it is the Judge who would decide if it needs to be heard in the small claims or higher court. If he decides a higher court and the bank wins, I would be liable for costs.

 

If, assuming it got this far, the judge descides it should be heard in a higher court, could I drop the case then? - I am a little scared about the potential damaging effect of paying their costs - just trying to protect myself!

 

Can anyone confirm my understanding of the situation. I know this is highly unlikely but I want to cover every angle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your claim is for less than £5000 then unless it is especially complex with a lot of witnesses etc then it will be allocated to the Small Claim Track. No costs unless you conduct your litigation very irresponsibly.

If it is £5000 - £10000 or compaex it goes to the Fast track. Limited costs.

 

After that Multi-track - full costs

Get yourself a bood on small calims in the County court. Visist your court for a booklet and go to a decent bookshop.

Don't get anything more than 150 pages - max

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your claim is for less than £5000 then unless it is especially complex with a lot of witnesses etc then it will be allocated to the Small Claim Track. No costs unless you conduct your litigation very irresponsibly.

If it is £5000 - £10000 or compaex it goes to the Fast track. Limited costs.

 

After that Multi-track - full costs

Get yourself a bood on small calims in the County court. Visist your court for a booklet and go to a decent bookshop.

Don't get anything more than 150 pages - max

Link to post
Share on other sites

True

Link to post
Share on other sites

True

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 13 years later...

This topic was closed on 03/05/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support their.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1886 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...