Jump to content



  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Simply confirming no mediation and the claim is proceeding to allocation.   Andy
    • Thanks for the swift response. Will continue to read around.   I have a date of march 10.
    • First of all, they always say that you should be prepared to give up ground. If you are convinced as to your rights in the matter – and we certainly are – then there is no reason for you to give up any ground at all. You may come under pressure to give up ground – but you don't have to concede any ground. The benefit to Hermes is that they don't end up going to court so that they are spared extra expense and also there are spared the embarrassment of a judgement against them. When you are given the mediation date, then let us know and then we will go through it with you. However, read up on all of the threads in this sub- forum. You will find exactly your situation have occurred several times and have already gone to mediation and you will find that we have already given explanations on each one of the points. Familiarise yourself with the stories and the principles involved. When you get your mediation date then come back here and let us know.
    • I have read the page on mediation, but wanted to clarify a few details.   I have been given an arranged time for the mediation call. The email from the court states:   "for mediation to be successful, you would need to be willing to negotiate on the amount of the claim and have a degree of flexibility".   Should I have to give up ground? At this stage, I feel I am owed what I have lost, and what the claim has cost me, not to mention my time. The email says if you aren't willing then mediation is unsuitable.   It then also suggests:   "It is crucial that you are able to briefly and accurately explain your claim or defence. It is vital that you have prepared for the mediation by putting together a brief summary of your opening position. Only the key points are necessary at this stage as the longer the time taken discussing the disputed issues will reduce the time available for exploring settlement options."   I am of course aware of my opening position - that they were negligent and lost my item and thus I believe I am due recompense. However, I am not certain of the legal particulars of my argument.   Furthermore:   - Should I mention that the defendant may not wish to proceed to court as it may support a precedent for others in a similar situation to also claim against them? - Are there any other things I should be mentioning to the mediator?   Appreciate the guidance.
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4336 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Yeah i can see that....think i may just do a ticklist coz it will be easier for me to understand. Will post it up later. If everyone thinks its ok, I will drop it off at court 2mrw and send link a copy in time for the big day.... Pudst x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 357
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I don’t think you need to give anyone a copy pre-hearing (it’s not the trial) even if it’s a skeleton argument.

If it’s just a tick list it’s for your benefit really – to make sure all the issues are properly covered and you don’t miss an important point that the judge needs to be aware of.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No line spaces made it dead hard to read....

Edited by pudsters14
line spaces
Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, yes, yes!!! I'm the proud owner of a 2nd DN from Link!! Yesterday I posted here that I received a DN for an account that not even belongs to me (as proved to me by Link themselves by sending me a copy of the Credit Agreement: nothing related to me, not the signature, the name, or the address on the agreement).Today I got the second DL, this time for an MBNA account that I indeed owe about 300 pounds, but for which I've got a repayment agreement with Link. However, for this account, they included a second sheet of paper (haven't got a scanner to upload it here), so I'll tell you what it says:------------------Dear Customer,Thank you for your recent payment.The enclosed default notice was sent as your agreement with MBNA Europe Bank had not been terminated; the default notice is a legal requirement before the agreement can be terminated.Your current repayment agreement with us to clear your debt is still valid. Please do not stop making your agreed payments.Your current repayment agreement with LINK Financial is not being terminated.You should make your payment as normal this month to us.Please accept our apologies if this has caused you any confusion as this was not our intention. If you have any questions do not hesitate to contact our office on FREEPHONE 0800 064 4499LINK Financial.-----------------I checked all my dusted documents and I could not find a DL notice from MBNA, only threats that they would send me one (that was almost 2 years ago)... so maybe LINK can get away with sending me a DL notice now. And if I read this correctly, they do not expect a reply in this case.Nevertheless, I will complain to them about the first DL I received for an account that I do not even hold. And I also plan to complain to the FOS / TS and OFT for that

 

I've found this on another thread... will it help....Pudst x x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites

24th September 2008 - I get another DN. This still doesnt allow time for service as is dated 24th and gives me a remedy date of 8th October 2008. I have had absolutely no other paperwork from Link.I have checked my file and do not have a DN from MBNA however i know for a fact they registered one with the CRA. They only paperwork MBNA sent from the S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) request was a list of charges. I think this was before the DN was registered anyway.I will check the balance now and type it on.

 

This one is irrelevant now as the account was terminated after the issue of the first (invalid) DN. They cant un-terminate the agreement every time they feel like it to correct a mistake.

 

The fact that MBNA didn’t default you is very strange and worth a mention – also I think the MBNA default could be checked against the records with the credit reference agencies (keep that back for later if you need to be absolutely sure).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will scout round my house... i remember printing off my credit file and not sure whether it would show the MBNA default.... Will do my checklist tonight and post up for you to see..... MBNA did default me but didnt send me a hard copy.... will save that though if can get the evidence... Pudst x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are sure about them defaulting you then you can ask for the original MBNA DN to be made available – the questions would be was the account terminated by MBNA (which stuffs Links claim – on the back of a live agreement) and was the MBNA DN valid (could have been wrong date or amount etc…)– you won’t know this until you see a copy so don’t put forward any arguments regarding the MBNA DN other than you want to see a copy.

If the judge thinks that the MBNA DN is irrelevant to this case then you can make the point about MBNA possibly terminating the account before Link bought it – which makes it very relevant.

Hope that makes sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep it makes sense... I will post up my check list in a bit. Will use yours as a starting point.Thanx....Thanx.... Thanx.... Thanx for all your help!!!! Pudst x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites

Checklist done. Will post up in a min.************************************************************************************************************* Just been reading one of the letters sent from Link. They have stated that the agreement was defaulted on 1st December 2007 (this would have been MBNA) does this mean that I have got evidence that MBNA did some form of default/termination.... does this help me? ? ?? ?? LOL I'm really looking at every word now............................ They have put in their letter, 'The above reference number relates to an agreement signed on the 08th June 2004 for the issue of a credit card issued by MBNA. The agreement was defaulted on 01st December 2007 and subsequently legally assigned to Link Financial Ltd for recovery, a letter of assignment would have been sent to you at this time.' This is in the letter when they acknowledged my defence..... ******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************Let me know what you think... If this is important I will need to add it to my checklist, sorry abt all the stars and dots but my computer has gone nuts again and isnt putting in line spaces........Pudst x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites

probs!

Edited by pudsters14
probs
Link to post
Share on other sites

In the XXX County CourtClaim Number: XXXXXXXX

Between

Link Financial Limited – Claimant

And

Pudsters14 – DefendantThis is a test!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Checkpoints

 

 

The Paperwork:

 

• No agreement/paperwork sent by Link to substantiate this claim.

• No letter before action was sent.

• Link are frustrating proceedings by not providing paperwork – it was really hard to compose a defense and impossible to calculate any possible counter-claim.

• Link sent a letter (dated 30th May 2008) stating that they will not provide me with any paperwork until they are completely satisfied that I am their customer. If there is doubt, why have they issued a court case?

• Link are claiming that this alleged debt was assigned to them on 21st January 2008 however it took them until 8th April 2008 to contact me.

• Link asked in their allocation questionnaire to rely on ‘hearsay’ evidence. However the only paperwork they attached to this form is a letter introducing Link to the customer (me). This letter is not the one that was sent to me. It only has minor differences but still has been produced after the fact and is not an ‘exact’ copy. My name is even spelt wrong on the letter attached to the AQ.

• The Particulars of Claim are very vague and do not properly disclose the relevant details.

• As above refused my Sect 18 request for information.

 

 

 

If Link have/refer to the Agreement:

 

• The agreement is an application.

• The terms and conditions are not linked to the signature document.

• The two documents have different serial numbers (bottom left & bottom right) which puts further doubt as to whether the documents are linked.

• The application refers to Section 11 but this does not appear on the terms and conditions supplied which suggests that the terms and conditions are (a) not linked and (b) incomplete.

• It is unenforceable by virtue of s127(3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 because the signature document is deficient of the prescribed terms as outlined in schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983.

• I need to see the ORIGINAL and not a copy.

 

 

Dispute:

 

• Link Financial have taken further action despite the fact they were fully aware of the ongoing legal dispute. ( I spoke to Shaun Jones at Link Financial as soon as I received the first letter)

• MBNA also sold the alleged debt whilst there was an ongoing dispute.

Selling the debt on:

 

• I was not sent a notice of assignment from MBNA.

• I was not provided with any copy of the Deed/Notice of Assignment under Pre-court Protocol (Sect 18).

• Do Link have any right to the alleged debt? Failure to provide a Deed of Assignment would mean NO!

 

 

The Default Notice:

 

 

• The alleged amount demanded in the default is inflated with penalty charges.

• The default demands the alleged balance and not any arrears.• The default notice doesn’t allow enough time to remedy the alleged breach (14 days exactly so not allowing for service)

• The default notice does not specifically identify the debt (the reference number means nothing and it does not state what type of account the default notice refers to)

• Second invalid default notice sent on 24th September 2008. The reason Link Financial have given for this is that the account was never properly terminated from MBNA therefore this surely gives Link no right of action on this claim.

 

 

The amount of claim:

 

 

• How do they arrive at the amount claimed?

• What was the balance on the account when it was sold on?

• How much of the balance includes penalty charges?

• Does the balance contain any insurance products? (I wouldn’t agree to this due to a heart problem I have)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right its a bit higledy pigledy but ive used a code to put in line spaces.

 

It's readable.... any suggestions let me know.... please read my post no #234 and let me know what you think!

 

Thanx again!!!!!!! :)

 

 

 

Pudst

x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've added a couple of bits but other than that I think you've covered everything. I would cover it in this order:

 

The paperwork/none compliance of court procedure by Link

The original dispute with MBNA

The amount of claim

The Agreement

The Default

 

Checkpoints

 

 

The Paperwork:

 

• No agreement/paperwork sent by Link to substantiate this claim.

• No letter before action was sent.

• Link are frustrating proceedings by not providing paperwork – it was really hard to compose a defense and impossible to calculate any possible counter-claim.

• Link sent a letter (dated 30th May 2008) stating that they will not provide me with any paperwork until they are completely satisfied that I am their customer. If there is doubt, why have they issued a court case?

• Link are claiming that this alleged debt was assigned to them on 21st January 2008 however it took them until 8th April 2008 to contact me.

• Link asked in their allocation questionnaire to rely on ‘hearsay’ evidence. (see note on hearsay evidence taken form another thread)However the only paperwork they attached to this form is a letter introducing Link to the customer (me). This letter is not the one that was sent to me. It only has minor differences but still has been produced after the fact and is not an ‘exact’ copy. My name is even spelt wrong on the letter attached to the AQ.

• The Particulars of Claim are very vague and do not properly disclose the relevant details.

• As above refused my Sect 18 request for information.

 

 

If Link have/refer to the Agreement:

 

• The agreement is an application.

• The terms and conditions are not linked to the signature document.

• The two documents have different serial numbers (bottom left & bottom right) which puts further doubt as to whether the documents are linked.

• The application refers to Section 11 but this does not appear on the terms and conditions supplied which suggests that the terms and conditions are (a) not linked and (b) incomplete.

• It is unenforceable by virtue of s127(3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 because the signature document is deficient of the prescribed terms as outlined in schedule 6 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983.

• I (request to see the original copy to remove all possible doubt) need to see the ORIGINAL and not a copy.

 

 

Dispute:

 

• Link Financial have taken further action despite the fact they were fully aware of the ongoing legal dispute. ( I spoke to Shaun Jones at Link Financial as soon as I received the first letter)

• MBNA also sold the alleged debt whilst there was an ongoing dispute.

Selling the debt on:

 

• I was not sent a notice of assignment from MBNA.

• I was not provided with any copy of the Deed/Notice of Assignment under Pre-court Protocol (Sect 18).

• Do Link have any right to the alleged debt? Failure to provide a Deed of Assignment would mean NO!

 

 

The Default Notice: (issued xx/xx/xxxx)

 

No default notice sent by MBNA that complies with s87/88 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and yet the account was defaulted on 01/12/2007

• The alleged amount demanded in the default is inflated with penalty charges.

• The default demands the alleged balance and not any arrears.• The default notice doesn’t allow enough time to remedy the alleged breach (14 days exactly so not allowing for service)

• The default notice does not specifically identify the debt (the reference number means nothing and it does not state what type of account the default notice refers to)

Second default notice sent on 24th September 2008 is invalid because the previous default notice terminated the account.

 

The amount of claim:

 

 

• How do they arrive at the amount claimed?

• What was the balance on the account when it was sold on?

• How much of the balance includes penalty charges?

• Does the balance contain any insurance products? (I wouldn’t agree to this due to a heart problem I have)

 

Note on hearsay evidence - if they are going to rely on this then they need to comply:

e) if copies of any of the above documents are to be relied on in court rather than originals, a copy of the Notice of proposal to adduce hearsay evidence required under s2(1) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 together with proof of the authenticity of the document(s) as required under s8(1)(b) of the Act, including but not limited to:

 

(i) a copy of the procedure(s) used for copying, storing and retrieving documents

(ii) a copy of the relevant log entry showing the time and date of the scan or copy, the name of the member of staff making the copy, the method used for copying, storage and retrieval and time and date of destruction of the original document(s)

(iii) copies of internal and external audit reports covering the entire period from the date of the copy to the present to demonstrate that the procedures have been complied with

(iv) copies of Quality Assurance accreditation certificates covering the entire period from the date of the copy to the present to demonstrate that the procedure(s) and audit process(es) comply with the appropriate quality standards.

 

I can't add much more than that other than to wish you all the best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

good luck pudsters14

 

x ciao maz

Im happy to help with support and my own thoughts, but if I offer any thoughts to your problems please take it as from my life experience only and not of any legal standing. Always take further advice from the legal experts in your final action.:)

 

my new motto is,,,",Taking back control of your life and home - such peace is priceless"

 

This is all due to truecall device , have a serious peek at this you will be thankful like I am x laters angel :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I second that, good luck Pudsters:).

 

Second default notice sent on 24th September 2008 is invalid because the previous default notice terminated the account.

 

Does a default notice actually terminate an account or is it a step towards termination? Sorry, don't want to cause any confusion or upset, but also don't want to give the other side any inaccuracy to nit pick with. Perhaps one of the legal bods could confirm for us?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Does a default notice actually terminate an account or is it a step towards termination? Sorry, don't want to cause any confusion or upset, but also don't want to give the other side any inaccuracy to nit pick with. Perhaps one of the legal bods could confirm for us?

 

Depends on what it says on the DN – the one sent to pudst (page 2 I think) clearly says they will (not might) terminate the account on a certain date.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that Atwozee, that's good to know. Didn't mean to cause any confusion, just worried about anything the other side could possibly use against Pudsters. Yes, I am such a worrier, I even worry about other people

Link to post
Share on other sites

Crikey Pudsters, you have done very well to sort that lot out.

 

Good luck.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pudsters, re your dodgy formatting. Do you type directly into the reply box or do you type into one of your computer's word processing programmes such as Word, Works or perhaps Note Pad, then copy and paste your text over ?. If you are doing the latter, it could be your formatting that isnt transferring correctly.

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

 

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

 

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

 

 

BCOBS

 

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

 

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

 

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya all, thanx for all your input...

 

I will add the additions into my copy...

 

 

Cit B - I type directly into the box but it just doesnt recognise my line spaces. Dont understand it, it did this before but corrected itself.

 

 

I'm a bit nervous about Friday but also keen to get it sorted. Will have my friend with me on the day so thats good.

 

 

Thanx Atwozee for adding in those bits! It means a lot.

 

 

If I discover anything else or anyone can think of anything else pls post it up here.

 

 

Pudst

x x x x x

Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s natural to be nervous under such circumstances.

I’m sure once you get into it and start putting your points across you will be okay. Don’t get emotional – it’s not worth it.

The other side will try to sidetrack you and confuse things – that’s why you’ve got your checklist. Try to note down anything the judge says if you can. Don’t let them get moralistic on you – this is about the facts of the claim nothing more.

Don’t forget to take a copy of your defence as well as your checklist.

There are lots of people routing for you :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...