Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Honestly you are all amazing on this site, thank you so much for your help and time. ill keep an eye out and only return when i receive a claim letter for sure also, i updated my address with amex and tsb before i even missed payments. the initial address was my family home but i dont reside there. to avoid a bombardment of letters there i have now updated my address, will they send all threats etc to the new address? Or old address?   do you reccomend i send both tsb and amex my update in address via a letter?
    • 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: _____________________
  • 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

Help! Ltsb Defending Claim! (scotland)


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6195 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

:D Good News at last. Hubby called SC&M this afternoon in a last ditch attempt to settle our claims. They have paid the money into his account this afternoon inc 8% interest! Phew!

Now getting to work on our Wasted Costs Claim (following the step-by-step instructions def :oops: )

I know we were lucky with this one, I just want to say thanks to those that helped esp stevokenevo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi folks. Received a letter from Lloyds this afternoon (not SC&M) with details of the settlement they paid yesterday. Its quite a funny letter - "the bank intends to defend this claim", "there is no merit in your claim" blah blah blah and then "oh by the way we have put £x into your account today as full and final settlemnt of the claim" :D

Anyway, they have given us 4 "conditions we have to meet in order to get the money eh, that they have already given us :rolleyes: .

 

2 points concern me -

1) "The payment will be in full and final settlement of the claim" Does this mean we wouldn't be able to claim in the future for other bank charges?

2) "The terms of this agreement are confidential...." Well no I dont think so. Im not comfortable with them dictating terms to us when we where the ones bringing action against them!

 

Can anyone confirm the 1st point? Is that what it means? Cos while we have been doing this claim, they have taken lots more charges!! (Prob trying to recoup their costs!) :mad:

 

A

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats what it is supposed to mean, what i did was just fired my next claim straight into the court without hesitation.

 

A while back when more people were making multiple claims, they would send the letter back with the points they didnt like scored out and initial'd.

 

Janet-M took them to task and insisted on the settlement being without condition, dont know if it made any difference to her in the end, just the principle i think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Stevokenevo sorry wasnt on yesterday, basically your offer with conditions attached is as follows

If you were to claim again for previous charges before the settlement date they would use this against you. In the future if you accrue further charges simply go through the same procedure as there is no mention of charges in the future or your running of the account in the future, some banks have attached conditions such as this is your settlement in full and we expect you to run your acount in line with our terms and conditions and they try and use this to deny a further claim and if a further claim is made they may close the account you have.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry, they did add the condition about "running the bank acc according to T&C's etc" (didnt note before as didnt think they were important)

 

What do you reccomend we do regarding these and our next claim?

 

Note with the letter they sent, there was nothing to sign and send back

 

:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

basically your offer with conditions attached is as follows

If you were to claim again for previous charges before the settlement date they would use this against you.

 

Settlement date? Dont know what you mean Bigmac. Sorry:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

The settlement date is the date they pay your claim.

 

Some banks like the yorkshire and clydesdale banks have been defending second claims on the same account, on the basis that you should have claimed all your charges in a one'r.

 

LTSB have not jumped on this band wagon yet, so, taking into consideration all the things you have been through so far, i would suggest if you have more charges to reclaim, you get the claim in asap.

 

I know you had two claims in at the one time and the first has been settled, when is the second due??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve - they settled the second claim at the same time as the first :grin: . Thats what I meant by us being very lucky.

 

The "running your account properly" condition is a grey area as the new lot of charges where accrued before the recent settlement/conditions.

 

You think we should proceed with the claim asap then? (We have already issued a LBA a few weeks ago).

 

Should I just continue to send LLoyds/SC&M my letter revoking their conditions...what can they do? Take their money back...dodgy ground for them if I took it back to court!:wink:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats great news, they settled bot your claims at once, i didnt realise that!!

 

Yes get your next claim in ASAP.

 

dont worry about any more LBAs or anything, they have had enough time, and seeing as they are still charging you means they have not learned a lesson.

 

To be honest, i wouldnt bother with a letter RE the conditions, unless the letter says you have an amount of time to respond i.e if we dont hear from you in 8 weeks we will take it you have accepted the conditions blah blah

 

And finally, dont worry, they cant take your money back again ;-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

thats cool thanks. The 14 days stipulated in the LBA is up on Monday, so we will fire the next claim to the court then.

 

In the first 2 letters sent to LLoyds re this 3rd claim, the amount was for £450, but the have charged another £200 since then. When we are putting our claim into the court next week, can we claim for the updated amount or does it still have to be the £450?

 

You would think I would have a clue about this by now eh??:wink::???::roll:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...