Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre action protocol) failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
    • Hi, we are looking to get some opinions on weather or not to bother fighting this PCN. This comes from a very big retail park parking where there are restaurants, hotel, amongst other businesses. The parking is free but I suppose there must be a time limit on it that I am not aware of. We were in the area for around 4 hours. Makes us wonder how they deal with people staying in the hotel as the ANPR is on what appears to be a publicly maintained street (where london buses run) which leads to the different parking areas including the hotel.  1 Date of the infringement 26/05/2024 2 Date on the NTK  31/05/2024 3 Date received 07/06/2024 4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? [Y/N?]  YES 5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Entry and exit photos however, based on the photographs we are almost sure the photos are taken on public street. This is the location I believe photos are taken from.  https://maps.app.goo.gl/eii8zSmFFhVZDRpbA 6 Have you appealed? [Y/N?] post up your appeal] No Have you had a response? [Y/N?] post it up N/A 7 Who is the parking company? UKPA. UK Parking Administration LTD 8. Where exactly [carpark name and town] The Colonnades, Croydon, CR0 4RQ For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. British Parking Association (BPA) Thanks in advance for any assistance.  UKPA PCN The Collonades-redacted.pdf
  • 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

racer1 v Next Directory / Debt Managers Scotland


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6073 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

Hi Bisper's i'm back as promised,

These Next characters are slippery little suckers, you may remember i wrote back to them after offering them a repayment offer and they have not yet responded, well they did this morning, well not them personally a DCA called MOORCROFT have written to us stating their intention of intended litigation, i think it's a different DCA to yours, but i'm going to fire off a CCA for MOH and see if that stops them in their tracks, She cannot ever remember signing an agreement with them. The thing that makes THEM really STUPID is that they were made a sensible offer of payment, but declined it, their pure greed could possibly cost them dearly.

You would think these agencies would want to ensure all the legal paperwork was in place before they accepted these cases, just goes to show what a hopeful greedy load of vultures they are! :p It really is a case of them just "trying their luck" half the time!

keep going, onwards and upwards!!! :D

:D B & Q Store Card *Settled* - £365 (912 AUD)

:D First Direct 1 *Settled* - £1089 (2722 AUD)

:D First Direct 2 *Settled* - £469 (1172 AUD)

:D Goldfish *Settled* - £372 (930 AUD)

:D Barclays *Settled* - £903 (2257 AUD)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Right....have the letter here, can anyone help please?

 

First thing of note is that the letter is dated 21 March 2007 - but the postmark is 23 May 2007!!!!

 

 

Dear Ms XXXX

 

Thank you for your recent letter regarding your Next Directory account.

 

I write to confirm that Next does not hold a signed credit agreement for you. Under section 127 (3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 this debt is therefore unenforceable. We must inform you, however, that we have received legal advice that an uneforceable debt is still a debt.

 

However, the good that have been charged to your account have been ordered by and delivered to you, without payment in full having been made for them. Therefore your account remains in debt to the Next Directory.

 

In light of this, and in the absence of any rvidence to suggest that you did not order and / or receive the goods delivered, Next will continue to seek payment of the balance of £267.58 owed by you.

 

A default entry will therefore be made on your credit reference file, which may affect your ability to obtain credit in the future. Making payment to clear the balance will enable your credit files to show as satisfied.

 

Yours sincerely

 

XXXXX

 

So....they're still trying to get the money back, but they admit the debt is unenforceable and they don't hold a CCA, therefore they can't enforce it, correct?

 

Will try and send a letter back to them today.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just wondering whether they can apply a default rather than a CCJ, as they agree it's un-enforceable through court (CCJ) but could they still lodge a default? Defaults appear to be given out like chocolates, Can you contest a default with the CRA? Watching with interest!:confused:

:D B & Q Store Card *Settled* - £365 (912 AUD)

:D First Direct 1 *Settled* - £1089 (2722 AUD)

:D First Direct 2 *Settled* - £469 (1172 AUD)

:D Goldfish *Settled* - £372 (930 AUD)

:D Barclays *Settled* - £903 (2257 AUD)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can anyone please help? Spoke to TS who have me numbers for other people who say they can't help. CCCS don't seem to have a clue either and keep putting me on hold....constantly.

 

Advice appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If they go for a CCJ your defence is where is the credit agreement. If you ask for it in the court and they don't produce it the judge will chuck it out!

 

The Office of Fair Trading is interested in Next chasing monies against unenforceable accounts see post #36 in this thread

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/store-cards/69695-next-directory-covered-cca-2.html?highlight=Next+directory

Link to post
Share on other sites

What can I do now about them saying it's unenforceable but still coming after me?

 

And what can I do about the default? a) can they do it and b) is that letter good enough notification, I thought they had to do something different?

 

Thanks for other link.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They shouldn't default you but they will eventually when you have missed enough payments. The bottom line is that the ultimate action for them, court, is no longer an option. And that would be the only way to force you to pay.

 

They will merely make a pain of themselves with calls letters and a default. All you can do is make yourself more of a pain by complaining to OFT for a start.

 

I am also currently research what other options are open to people where the company has admitted no agreement exists. But it will be a few weeks before I get to a point of being able to post about it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok thanks. Best way of complaining to OFT letter? Tried calling earlier but was on hold forever....!

 

Be helpful if there was also a contact number of people who can help. TS / Consumer Direct said they couldn't, gave me phone numbers of others who also said they couldn't etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here you go,

 

"So people if you have stuff you want investigated about NEXT Retail Limited t/a Next Directory Ltd (licence number 534644) , please do write to Andy Lowther - Enquiries and Preliminary Investigations Centre - Markets and Projects. Sorry all this is under his signature on the letter!

 

Address - Office of Fair Trading, Fleetbank House, 2-6 Salisbury Square, london EC4Y 8JX"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok a response letter....please tinker as necessary.

 

 

ADDRESS

30th May 2007

Paula Forster

Agency Liason Department

The Next Directory

Collections Department

PO Box 3000

Rotherham

S97 3EU

Dear Paula,

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

ACCOUNT: NAME AND ADDRESS

 

I refer to your letter dated 21st March 2007.

Firstly, I fail to understand how you can send a letter on 21st March 2007 in relation to my CCA request dated 27th April 2007. Furthermore, the fact your letter is dated 21st March 2007 and the postmark bears the date 23rd May 2007 shows some alarming inefficiency in your department. I am sure you wish to draw a swift conclusion to these matters and expect you to be much prompter in any further responses.

As you have confirmed Next does not hold a signed credit agreement for myself, it is indeed correct that under section 127 (3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 this debt is unenforceable.

Furthermore, in my view you cannot place any defaults on my credit reference file as these will be being placed illegally due to the absence of a signed credit agreement. By doing this in my view you will be acting illegally in your attempt to place any defaults under the Consumer Credit Act.

I am prepared to offer the sum of £20 in full and final settlement of my account as you cannot provide a copy of original signed credit agreement. The sum of £20 will be in full and final settlement of my account and I also request The Next Directory to remove all defaults on my credit reference file which in my view will be placed illegally.

I expect to hear from you within seven working days.

Yours sincerely,

NAME

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got home to another letter from Next last night but a bit of a weird one!

 

 

 

29 May 2007

 

Address

 

Dear Ms XXXXXX

 

Thank you for your recent letter, and I am concerned to learn of the problems you have experienced.

 

At Next, both customer service and the high quality of our merchandise are extremely important to us. I can assure you that this matter will be investigated, and we will be in touch with you at the earliest opportunity.

 

In the meantime, however, if you would like to contact us, please do not hesitate to call us in the Customer Relations Department, on the telephone number shown below, where any of our team will be happy to assist you.

 

Yours sincerely

 

 

Customer Relations Team

 

Firstly - I've only CCAed and SARed them recently. Is this letter in response to one I sent them in Feb or so, stating that the courier didn't come to collect returned items for two months and when she did was just plain rude? If it is, bit of a slow reply....

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Right more help needed please.....

 

Last week I received a letter from the DCA stating even with out the CCA agreement they're going to keep pursuing me. Now attached to the DCA letter was a "copy" letter from Next dated 20th June 2007. I haven't received that letter from Next at all, only the copy from the DCA. Last time Next "wrote" to me in March but it was postmarked May.....I'm hanging on at the moment and not replying to Next until the originaly letter has been received but so far it's 2.5 weeks since it was supposedly written!

 

Firstly, am I right to keep waiting until I receive the correspondence from Next? And also can the DCA pursue me for it when there is no CCA? As far as I knew they couldn't!

Link to post
Share on other sites

They haven't called me as I've asked them to stop calling.....

 

If it doesn't turn up in a few weeks I'll send a short letter, pointing out I think they may have forgotten to post something....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Serious Bispers, they cannot continue to pursue you without the credit agreement, IF and it is a big IF it went to court, the first argument on your side would be is that no CCA exists for this debt.

 

Robinson Way went after me for a Next account- not mine I have to add- and they insisted that they were going to carry on chasing me even though they weren't sure I was the debtor and there was no CCA. I just returned their correspondance to them with 'NO CCA=NO DEBT' written in marker pen, I also wrote on one 'You have been reported to Mr XXXXXX at Manchester trading standards' and I never heard from them again.

 

I'd report Debt Managers to your local TS if you haven't already done so, get that ball rolling!

 

Good Luck

TF x

All my knowledge has been gained from personal experience and the sharing of advice from fellow members.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...