Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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. 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. 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: _____________________
    • Morning,  I am hoping someone can help, I am posting on behalf of my friend so I will try and provide as much info as possible.  Due health reasons, she is currently not working and unable to pay her contractual car finance payments. She emailed 247 Money and asked for a 3 month payment holiday, they refused this straight away with no reasons as to why. They have told her that instead she can make a payment of £200. She is currently getting £400+ a month ssp so this is not acceptable. She went back to them and explained she cannot make this payment and they have not offered an alternative plan. Its £200 or she falls into default.  She is now panicking as she does not want her car to be taken away. What options does she have?  Thank you, 
    • Read these 6 things you can do to be empathetic to other people’s views and perspectives.View the full article
    • Peter Levy says he received a call from someone pretending to be from his bank in February.View the full article
    • Peter Levy says he received a call from someone pretending to be from his bank in February.View the full article
  • 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

passivenomore v lloyds tsb


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6100 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

Right, here we go!

 

A little background info... I have been researching via moneysavingexpert and after weeks... nay months, have taken positive action. Being self employed, I have access to all my relevant bank statements, so set about recording all charges. Using MSE's interest calculator and 1st letter template, I have already sent this correspondance off.

 

After receiving the "on your bike" letter, I went back to MSE to make my next step. It was here that I came across references to CAG and came here!! Having read various threads, it seems I've made an error in including the interest in stage 1. :mad:

 

Also, as I didn't need to contact the bank for a list of charges, I haven't asked them to disclose whether they have entered any defaults on said account.

 

The first point, I think, about the interest is a minor error but should I retrosectively ask the bank to disclose any defaults through a SAR?

 

I have my "letter before action" ready and rearing to go!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and Welcome!:)

Firstly no worries about including the interest in your first letter, there have been quite a few people that have come over from MSE (I love that site, but this is the best for bank charges) and done the same thing.

Not sure about the default thing, wouldn't you have had a letter if you had been defaulted??

Good luck, let us know how you get on.

Barty:)

I WON!!!! :D :D :D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/lloydstsb-successes/1774-barty-lloyds-tsb.html

 

IF I HAVE BEEN HELPFUL PLEASE CLICK THE SCALES:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Barty... and thanks for the reply!!

 

I haven't had any letters from the bank regarding defaulting, so I'll assume I'm ok on that front! Unless I hear differently!

 

Thanks as well for putting my mind at ease over the interest bit. I agree MSE does good work, but will stick with CAG now!

 

Will of course update here as things progress.

 

Thanks... and good luck to you all. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Update...

 

Have received reply to my LBA. Basically, I have cocked up by quoting the Consumer Contracts Regulations. The reply states that these don't apply to me as I'm a business customer (even though I'm self employed and a sole trader, it is a business account).

 

I have come across various threads this morning stating that business a/c holders shouldn't quote the CCR, so I'm wondering whether to continue to court action stage or re-submit the LBA letter?

 

A lesson learnt... if you think you've done enough researching... do some more!!!

 

Any advice please???? :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Just updating...

 

I have re-sent my LBA, taking the opertunity of revising the schedule of charges to go back to the opening of the account (Aug 1997).

 

Well worth doing as it covers a period of glandular fever, which hit me hard... but not as hard as the bank charges incurred!!!

 

Will make a reference here that I made an appointment to see bank manager at this time, who was extremely uncooperative and recommended I take out health insurance... horse - door - bolted?!?!?! That was the only way she was prepared to help me out.

 

Anyway, no reply to revised LBA, as yet, so I'm about to start the N1 claim. After recent events in Birmingham, I've been reading threads carefully, in order to understand and get things 100%.

 

Keep you posted...:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all...

 

I am about to fill out my N1. Hoping to do this tomorrow evening, in a view to taking it in to court on thursday.

 

I have noted that the preliminary letter template has been ammended to include a request for T&Cs, but the N1 template hasn't.

 

Should I hold off with the N1 until I have a copy of the original T&Cs?

 

I, as many others have been doing, have hunted high and low looking for my originals, but am sure they came off worse in a battle with my shredder some time ago!!

 

The best I can do, is the T&Cs from July 2003 (from Internet Archive Wayback Machine link). Can they be used in court, or will I have to wait for someone to find thiers and post them up?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Update...

 

Recieved a "notice that acknowledgement of service has been filed" letter from court today. SC&M are intending to defend. They have 28 days from "the date of service of the claim form" to file the defence. The "notice of issue" said that the claim was deemed to be served on 2nd June... is this the date that the 28 days starts from???

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Update time!!!

 

Recieved Lloyds defence (via the court). I believe it to be the standard 9 point defence, mentioned on many threads here.

 

Here is a brief outline, courtesy of Lisam696969 (thanks!!):

 

1. The Claimant Has Been A Customer Of Bank At All Material Times

2. By Opening An A/c With Bank Enter Into A Commercial Agreement With Bank , Entitled To Charge For Banking Services By Using A/c Customer Acknowledges The Charges Are Incorporated Into A/c . Etc Etc.

3. By Maintaining The A/c In Credit Or Within Limt Set Can Avoid Any Or Most Charges . If Customer Fails To Ensure Sufficient Funds Then Making A Request To Borrow Banks Money .and Then Bank Provides A Service. Etc Etc

4. There Is No Breach Of Contract Etc Etc.

5. Given Advance Warning Of Any Charges And Letters Sent In Advance Etc Etc.

6.the Charges Are Fair And Reasonable And Not Unlawful.

7.customer Notified Of All Charges In Plain English At Hte Conclusion Of Contract And On Statements.for Service Provided Under Reg 6 Of Consumer Contracts Regulations Are Not Subject To Assesment Of Fairness.

8. Not Penaltys Or Damagesthey Are Charges

Entitled By Contract And Fair And Reasonable .

Denied That Unlawful Or Contravene Any Statute .

9.Claim Denied In Its Entirety And Not Entitled To Claim Anything.

 

There is no mention of AQs (allocation questionaire) in the covering letter, so am I correct in thinking that this is not going to be required, as seems to becoming the norm?

 

Also, I not from the defence that they have written nothing in relation to my claim being over 6 years. Is this a good sign?

 

:|

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly... thanks nic for your reply. I really appreciate your input, especially as you spend so much time giving your advice and help to many, many others here... thanks!! :)

 

Also, a big hello to deep... ;) , who has subscribed to this thread. Feel free to join in (when you get back from your hols!!! :) ).

 

I got TWO letters from the court yesterday, both saying the same thing... the court have received my allocation questionaire and I now need to pay the fee of £100.

 

Somewhat startled, as I hadn't had any correspondance inviting me to send in a AQ, let alone sent one in!!!

 

Thinking that they have dispensed with the AQ and just not informed me, I went in there today and yes, AQ has been dispensed with.

 

I have printed out the draft order and covering letter here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/hsbc-bank/78873-new-after-28-days.html

 

This will be sent off tomorrow... unless anyone thinks differently!!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Pandora... Hi Dee...

 

How lovely of you both to pop by!!! :D I trust you're both well.

 

No news here... STILL waiting for a court date... and impending application for a stay!!! It's been a while since I sent the Draft Order off to court, so I guess a call to the court will have to be made soon. Post Office strikes aren't helping... especially as my postman seems to be under the impression that he only has to work one day a week whilst it's ongoing!!!

 

On the other hand... my plans on claiming my business a/c charges are being brought forward. I was going to wait until the personall a/c had been settled before hitting them with the business, but with the possibility that it may well become drawn out, I thought sod it!!!

 

I'm currently working on adapted POC's and when they're ready "passive v LTSB business" will be launched to keep everyone updated!!!

 

Take care... and stay in touch!!! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi Dee...

 

Spooky you should choose today to drop by again, as I was going to supply an update tonight!!!

 

I've not been around too much the last couple of weeks, so have some catching up to do!!

 

Anyway, I finally rang court today as I still hadn't been sent a court date. Apparently, Watford District Judges are taking it upon themselves to issue blanket stays to all claims until 31/3/08. I got the impression that they are not even waiting for the banks to request them. :-x

 

I'm a bit irritated as the N1 was filed so long ago, but kinda thought it would come to this. Obviously, there are templates here to oppose the stay, so I will go down that road when confirmation of the stay is received.

 

Regards the business claim, I have had a reply from photoman (re: POC), so hopefully, will be in a position to file claim soon.

 

Ps. Dee... will pop over to see how things are on your thread!!! :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...