cheque cashers ltd

[alanfromderby]

Having real problems locating this company. Can you post the exact name of the company as shown on the claim. I would suggest a call also to the Trading Standards department closest to their office.

 

From what you have said their only claim is against the builder.

[alanfromderby]

The problem is that there are numerous similar companies. I have, of course, looked through the normal sources available.

 

My particular areas of interest are whether they are properly registered, what their position is with the FSA, whether they are registered under the DPA, are they are subsidiary of a bigger company, are they a franchise - it all helps to produce a picture of what one is dealing with.

[alanfromderby]

Interestingly, they don't appear to be registered under the Data Protection Act.

 

I do wonder whether they are going through an aggressive process, which would normally result in a company/small business paying up, just to avoid the hassle of court.

 

My inclination would be to hit them with everything - including a warning that you will be asking the Judge for full costs on the basis that their claim is without merit, and purely intimidatory.

[alanfromderby]

The bottom line is that you have never entered into any contract with Chequecashers. The cheque you gave to the builder was conditional on the work being completed - the builder failed to finish that work, therefore the contract was broken.

 

The only contract that Chequecashers can rely upon, is the contract between them and the builder.

 

Effectively, the presentation of the cheque by the builder to Chequecashers, in the full knowledge that he had no intention of completing his side of the contract has to be fraud. I would also suggest that his actions in using such a service as this would back-up the contention that he never had any intention of finishing the job.

 

The argument being used by the BCCA seems to go totally against the view of the banks, and contract law. Indeed, if they are correct, then the very process of stopping a cheque would be unlawful - this is clearly total nonsense.

 

It is worth noting that the BCCA have no legal status, and there website makes it clear they have been set up to look after the interests of their members - not their customers. This is an extract:

 

The British Cheque Cashers Association exists to serve its members. As stated in the overview, it's key role is to provide representation of their interests to Government -whether in Whitehall or Brussels - and to the relevant regulatory bodies.

 

It also seeks to enhance understanding of the industry, and to promote the interests of cheque cashers generally, by helping to shape a climate of opinion which enables members to conduct their businesses profitably.

 

I also have some serious questions over CashFlow Chequecashers Ltd.

 

1) The are not registered with the FSA - okay, probably fine.

2) The do not hold a Consumer Credit Licence - but they are offering credit.

3) They are not registered as a data processor under the Data Protection Act - but they clearly hold personal information.

 

If it was me, my next call would be to Trading Standards.

[alanfromderby]

Just as a post script to the above - the BCCA are effectively doing the same job as the British Bankers Association. Don't forget that the BBA are the ones that keep saying to the press that bank charges are perfectly legal.

 

The BBA have no choice but to promote the views of its members (the banks), just as the BCCA is promoting the views of its members (cheque cashing companies).

[alanfromderby]

Do they class themselves as Bankers.

 

 

And if they do, they are breaking the law as they don't hold a Consumer Credit Licence.

 

Banged to rights, I think!

[alanfromderby]

I would change your last paragraph as follows:

 

The Claimant has not complied with any pre-action protocols, has failed to provide details of any contract or liability between Cashflow Chequecashers Ltd and the Defendant. The Defendant believes this claim has no merit and is purely intimidatory, and will be seeking an early Application to Strike Out this claim, along with a counter claim for the costs.

 

I would then write to Cheque Cashers with a copy of your defence, and give them 14 days to confirm that they will withdraw the action - otherwise you will make an application to Strike Out - along with a counterclaim for costs.

 

If you do have to apply for a strike-out, you will have to pay a £65 fee - but of course that would be reclaimable, I would also include within any strike out application, a request for costs due to the behaviour of the claimant. If it comes to this I will advise on the relevant CPR's at the time.

[alanfromderby]

To answer blazing-badger - I think the intention would be to avoid it going to court.

 

Actually, you would not be counterclaiming as such - it was early in the morning and I used the wrong term.

 

My suggestion would be to submit the defence now, with a copy to Cheque-cashers, and a letter along the lines of what I said above.

 

If they do not agree to withdraw, you could then issue an Application for Strike Out (on form N244), which would include a request for costs due to the behaviour of the Claimant.

[alanfromderby]

I have PM'd.

[alanfromderby]

Thanks for that ET, that is very interesting.

[alanfromderby]

It is also worth contacting the Information Commissioner, as they are clearly holding personal data without a registration.

[alanfromderby]

You need a form N244 - which is available on the court services website. You will need to include the basis of your strike out application CPR 3.4(2) - and additionally you will be asking for summary judgement.

 

You will need to include what costs you are seeking - and the basis of seeking those costs CPR 27.2(g) - which would include the claimants failure to follow pre-action protocols CPR 44.5(a) - you are entitled to claim £9.25 per hour for preperation work on your claim (within reason) CPR 48.6 (PD 52.4).