MadKit v American Express (Charges & PPI)

[MadKit]

I received this yesterday regarding a charges/PPI claim from Amex/Glovers Solicitors. I have not received an AQ as this is being dispensed with and no court date yet. I filled in a claim online with MCOL with the obvious restrictions on claim details. I've been asking for a detail POC for PPI with no responses, could someone please tell me what I need to respond to the below:

 

1. Please provide a schedule of the charges that form the basis of your claim, specifying the date that they were applied to the account and the precise nature of each charge.

 

2. You state that these charges exceed the Defendant's losses caused by such breaches. Please identify the breaches to which you refer.

 

3. You state that: "The Term permitting the Defendant to levy such charges is unenforceable...". Please identify the Term(s) to which you refer and explain the basis you allege the Term is unenforceable.

 

4. You state that: "If charges are a fee for a service they must be reasonable under S.15 Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982." Please identify the services to which you refer, and explain and what basis you allege that the charges (if a fee for such a service) is unreasonable.

 

5. Please clarify your position in relation to the Repayment Protection Policy. For the avoidance of any doubt, you stated that your that claim relates to the fact that as a self employed person you were not entitled to claim on this policy. Please confirm whether this is correct and if so provide full details of the factual and legal basis of your claim.

 

6. Please set out any other material facts upon which you would seek to rely in support of your claim.

 

7. Please provide proper particulars of your interest calculation including the date from which interest is claimed .... even in the knowledge that you are claiming the contractual rate of interest compounded annually, our accounts department is not able to reach the figure you provided.

 

Please note that should you fail to respond to these requests, it is open to us to make a formal request for further information to CPR Part 18 of the Civil Procedure Rules, and our client is entitled to apply to the court for an order requiring you to provide the information requested if it is still not forthcoming. In the event that we are forced to make such an application, we will ask the Court to order that you pay our client's legal costs.

 

We look forward to hearing from you prior to 22 June 2007.

 

Now I know some of the responses match with what has been posted already but I'm not so sure what to write for some of the other paragraphs. The solicitor keeps phoning my mobile and leaving threatening messages regarding costs and this is the same woman who asked me not to enter judgment as they were sending me a settlement letter! A complete lie as all they did was enter a defence that is muddled, complex and completely incorrect in reporting what I said.

 

Help!!

 

[MadKit]

Update - I had a hearing for the first claim for PPI charges to which they sent a barrister. I asked for assistance on the site and had no response so had to go it alone! I am now waiting for the court date and they have modified their defence. I really need help now so please could one of the Mods or Plats assist me as they are bound to send another barrister and fight me all the way. I do have a case as I was self employed on short term contracts for the entire time the PPI was deducted, they say this must have been a verbal agreement and they don't keep tapes of these conversations for more than 6 years (it was under this when the claim started) and therefore I must have agreed to it. This PPI was not in place from the beginning of the card agreements and there are no signed agreements or documents relating to this and I know from their terms and conditions that I could not have claimed and obviously didn't.

 

Please can I have some advice and help as I need to respond to their letter and new defence.

 

:o

[hellhasnofury]

Update - I had a hearing for the first claim for PPI charges to which they sent a barrister. I asked for assistance on the site and had no response so had to go it alone! I am now waiting for the court date and they have modified their defence. I really need help now so please could one of the Mods or Plats assist me as they are bound to send another barrister and fight me all the way. I do have a case as I was self employed on short term contracts for the entire time the PPI was deducted, they say this must have been a verbal agreement and they don't keep tapes of these conversations for more than 6 years (it was under this when the claim started) and therefore I must have agreed to it. This PPI was not in place from the beginning of the card agreements and there are no signed agreements or documents relating to this and I know from their terms and conditions that I could not have claimed and obviously didn't.

 

Please can I have some advice and help as I need to respond to their letter and new defence.

 

:o

 

Hello Madkit,

 

I am so sorry that you have had to go it alone, Unfortunately I have not had to file a claim against a company. Please pm Reidnet to help you. he is excellent and very helpful.

 

Another person who is at the court stage is itsmeandonlyme. I do know that she had to amend her poc and she got some really good help.

 

I wish you luck.

[itsmeandonlyme]

Hello Madkit,

 

I see...., i wouldn't mind to know who did you ask for help? can you PM me?

You should also PM BF if they submited defence.... I also haven't seen anybody here fighting with Amex and not aware about their legal support.

How do you know they are sending barrister? Have you got a copy of your POC?

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

Itsme

[MadKit]

Hi Itsme, they sent a barrister to the first hearing! I have now received a full and amended formal defence. The court case is 3 September but the DJ ( love that) has asked for all documents by the end of July. They are relying mainly on the fact that they sent a letter saying congratulations you now have PPI! They say it must have been a verbal agreement but as it is now over 6 years (it wasn't when I started this) they must have deleted the conversation. I cannot ever remember having this conversation and I am 100% sure that I wouldn't have asked for this either as it was just after my Mum died and I was struggling financially and definitely would NOT have asked for more money to be taken off!

 

Thanks once again for your response and I will be PMing you as well.

 

:o

[MadKit]

Update on this. Amex have sent a signed application form, there is no credit or PPI agreement! I have received their amended defence and they are saying two things on the PPI side, it must have been an oral agreement and that the insurance agreement (oral or otherwise) cannot be contested as it is not part of the CCA and therefore not regulated.

 

Any ideas? Court case is beginning of October and I've asked for help on the reply to defence but I wonder if I should also pursue the CCA side at the same time as they have passed the 12 days plus 30 days and produced no signed agreement as there isn't one.

 

[Blossomandebony]

Hi Madkit,

 

Don't know how relevant this is, but I went to a hearing recently where I claimed a refund for Mortgage Payments Insurance, which I could not remember signing for.

 

Unfortunately, the Building Society produced a mortgage agreement, with the MPI included, and signed by me. Therefore, I lost the case, which is fair enough.

 

The point is, the Judge really stressed the importance of the signature - this is the sole reason why they won the case. In your case there is no signed agreement and I think that this puts you in a strong position. As for their claims about phone call agreements, it sounds like they're clutching at straws. Hang in there and fight this case all the way.

[MadKit]

Thanks Blossomandebony, sometimes it feels like the whole world of nasty knowledgeable people against poor little me! I actually can't believe that they are arguing this and not just paying back the charges and the PPI when they clearly have no documentation. Never mind, I will have my day in court again, let's see if they send the baby faced assasin of a barrister again!

 

:o

[hellhasnofury]

Thanks Blossomandebony, sometimes it feels like the whole world of nasty knowledgeable people against poor little me! I actually can't believe that they are arguing this and not just paying back the charges and the PPI when they clearly have no documentation. Never mind, I will have my day in court again, let's see if they send the baby faced assasin of a barrister again!

 

:o

 

Hello Madkit,

 

Live is never easy is it. If they say it was an oral agreement, they have to prove it:D . Yes they have no documentation.but they will still argue. Keep all of your documentation for the court as I am sure you know this.

 

Regarding the ca issue, if they have defaulted , have you reported them to the Information Commisioners Office, This will help you in court:D

[MadKit]

I am about to report them as I started the PPI claim and then sent the letters and they are over the 12 + 30 day limit. They had to produce the agreements for the court case as I asked the judge to make this part of the order. They have only produced a letter they sent apparently to me saying welcome to the PPI, a copy of the application form and the amended defence.

 

Oh and I have SO much documentation for court.

[hellhasnofury]

I am about to report them as I started the PPI claim and then sent the letters and they are over the 12 + 30 day limit. They had to produce the agreements for the court case as I asked the judge to make this part of the order. They have only produced a letter they sent apparently to me saying welcome to the PPI, a copy of the application form and the amended defence.

 

Oh and I have SO much documentation for court.

 

:D And what about the oft

[MadKit]

Oh yes! I'm sending out the non-compliance letter today, they are not the only ones who have not supplied an agreement but I figure if I can hit American Express from both sides, I will get them. I desperately need to respond to their defence and have sent you both a PM in the hope that I can get some help on this.

 

Thank you again for your responses!

 

:grin:

[MadKit]

Ah well, a few PMs but no help on my reply to their defence. I know everyone is busy but I now have only 2 days to reply. If there is anyone on the site who has some legal knowledge, PLEASE help me!

 

[hellhasnofury]

Ah well, a few PMs but no help on my reply to their defence. I know everyone is busy but I now have only 2 days to reply. If there is anyone on the site who has some legal knowledge, PLEASE help me!

 

 

Hello Madkit,

 

Sorry you have no responses,:o who have you pm'd. Maybe try Laiste, Sequenci, Rory32 and tomterm8, they I feel would be you best bet.

 

Fingers crossed.

 

What did you put into your poc and what have they said in their defence.

[MadKit]

Thanks but have tried 3 of the 4! I will ask Rory32 now, otherwise am not sure how to do this!

 

[hellhasnofury]

Thanks but have tried 3 of the 4! I will ask Rory32 now, otherwise am not sure how to do this!

 

 

Hello Madkit,

 

Come one its not over till its over. Sometimes its the time of day that caggers come on the site, it appears that it is late eveing, so there is time yet:-D

 

I have posted a thread on the general debt section, that is where most of the legally minded experts hang out. I have asked for them to look at your thread. I hope you don't mind:? I feel it would be useful for you to post up your poc, so they can see what you sent.

 

and also their defence, would that be possible:?

[MadKit]

Thanks for your message, I guess I am feeling a bit sorry for myself! And I really appreciate your help and certainly don't mind. Here is the defence along with my comments in red:

 

IN THE xxxx COUNTY COURT

Between: XXX -and-

 

 

AMERICAN EXPRESS SERVICES EUROPE LIMITED

Defendant

AMENDED DEFENCE

1. It is admitted and, insofar as it is not alleged, averred that by a written agreement ("the Credit Agreement"), made between the Defendant and the Claimant, the Claimant was, at all material times, a holder of an American Express card no.3791 XXXXX ("the Card"). Paragraph 1 of the Particulars of Claim is accordingly admitted, save that it is averred that the Credit Agreement was entered into on 16 December 1998. There is no credit agreement, all they have sent is an application form that was filled in on this date. There is no formal CC agreement.

2. It is averred that the Defendant cancelled the Claimant's card account on or about 26 January 2005, in accordance with the account terms and conditions. The outstanding balance on the Claimant's account (namely the sum owed to the Defendant by the Claimant) on the date that the Claim was issued was £4,594.67. If there is no signed agreement, how can I be bound by their terms and conditions?

3. As to paragraph 2 of the Particulars, it is denied that the Payment Protection Insurance ("the Insurance") was entered into at the same time as the Credit Agreement. The Claimant entered into an oral agreement with the Defendant for the provision of the Insurance ("the Insurance Agreement") on or about 9 March 2001, which incorporated the Defendant's standard terms and conditions. In accordance with the terms of the Insurance Agreement, insurance premiums were charged to the Claimant's Card from April 2001 to December 2004. I did not enter any oral agreement, this is denied. It was shortly after my Mum’s death and I was in serious financial difficulties. Again there is no signed agreement.

 

4. It is denied that the Insurance formed part of the "overall credit bargain". In this respect, the Defendant avers that:-

a. The Insurance Agreement was entered into approximately 2 years and 2 months after the Credit Agreement.

b. While the Insurance was specifically arranged for the benefit of customers of the Defendant, it was not a requirement of the Credit Agreement that the Claimant enter into a contract for Payment Protection Insurance, with the Defendant or otherwise.

5. The Defendant is unable to admit or deny paragraph 3(a) of the Particulars, the Claimant not having provided sufficient information for the Defendant to understand the case it is required to meet. The Claimant has not explained the manner in which she was allegedly misled or specified the false information that was allegedly provided by the Defendant's agent. The Claimant is put to strict proof. There is no proof as there is no recorded conversation that they allege must have taken place and I seriously do not remember there being any such conversation which is why I went for the misrep.

6. Further, the Defendant does not fully understand the Claimant's paragraph 3(a) reference to section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ("the Act"), since the Claimant has advised the Defendant and the Court that the Claim is for a refund of the Insurance premiums charged to the Card from September 2001 to May 2002 ("the Premiums"). The Defendant will rely on the Claimant's Witness Statement dated 18 May 2007. The Claimant has also stated in written correspondence that the legal basis of the Claim is Tortious Misrepresentation, and that the factual basis (as repeated in the Particulars) is that the Insurance was mis-sold because the Claimant was self-employed and, accordingly, unable to claim under the policy. This is what I am claiming as although I did not verbally accept this so called agreement, I would have been unable to claim on this policy due to the fact that I was self employed and obviously no claims were in fact made.

 

7. The Defendant avers that if (which is denied), the Claimant is entitled to a refund of the Premiums, the Claimant must have established a valid claim against the Defendant III relation to the Insurance Agreement that was entered into in 2001. There is no insurance agreement.

8. At the time the Insurance Agreement was entered into the Defendant's insurance services were administered by a separate division within its organisation, Amex Insurance Services. In 2005, following the introduction of regulation by the Financial Services Authority, the Defendant's insurance services were transferred to a limited company, American Express Insurance Services Europe Limited. They keep trying to change the name of the Defendant.

9. To the extent that the Claimant refers to discussions between the Claimant and the Defendant's agent(s) on or about 9 March 2001, the Defendant does not accept the first part of paragraph 3(a)(i) of the Particulars of Claim, and the Claimant is put to strict proof. The Defendant avers that, in accordance with its usual practice, the Insurance Agreement would have been entered into orally by telephone, and that the Defendant's agent would have explained the nature of the policy and advised the Claimant that the Insurance Agreement would be governed by the Defendant's standard terms and conditions. Am not sure what they mean here, as I am saying they did not talk to me, how can they claim that I am governed by terms and conditions that they cannot apply as there is neither a CC or an insurance agreement.

10. The Defendant currently retains records of such telephone conversations for approximately two years. Since more than six years have passed between March 2001 and the issue of the Claimant's Claim, the Defendant no longer possesses such a record and is unable to plead as to the date or precise contents of the telephone conversation that it contends took place. However, the Defendant avers that the Insurance terms and conditions ("the Terms") were sent to the Claimant under cover of a letter dated 9 March 2001 which stated, inter alia, the following:-

"I am pleased to confirm that you are now enrolled in the Repayment Protection Scheme as requested. I enclose your Summary of Cover which gives you full details of this insurance .....

 

... .It is important that you carefully read the eligibility conditions, exclusions and limitations contained within the Summary of Cover to ensure that cover is applicable to you and meets your requirements. This is particularly important if you have an existing medical condition, you are self-employed or you work on a fixed term contract basis.

Should you decide not to continue with this valuable cover, please write to us advising us of your decision to cancel within 28 days of receiving the Summary of Cover and any premiums paid will be refunded .... "

A copy of the Defendant's letter dated 9 March 2001 is attached to this Defence.

This was not a Registered letter and wasn’t signed for and surely just sending a letter doesn’t mean that I actually agreed to anything.

11. As to the second part of paragraph 3(a)(ii) of the Particulars, it is denied that the Insurance was invalid as a result of the Claimant's self-employment. The express written terms of the agreement for the Insurance, which are attached to this Defence, included the following:-

"Work Any paid work, including Self-Employed Work (but not Temporary Work – contract work is regarded as being temporary work), of at least 16 hours per week."

"Are You eligible for this insurance?

To be eligible for insuring Your Account You must:

be over 18 but under 65 at the Insurance Start Date not be receiving State pension

be at Work, not absent due to sickness or injury (other than for a minor ailment of less than 5 days duration), and

not be aware of any likely Unemployment" Of course I was likely to become “unemployed”, I was working on a short term contracts that only needed 1 weeks notice and could have been cancelled at any time

 

... .It is important that you carefully read the eligibility conditions, exclusions and limitations contained within the Summary of Cover to ensure that cover is applicable to you and meets your requirements. This is particularly important if you have an existing medical condition, you are self-employed or you work on a fixed term contract basis. And this is exactly what I mean!

Should you decide not to continue with this valuable cover, please write to us advising us of your decision to cancel within 28 days of receiving the Summary of Cover and any premiums paid will be refunded .... "

A copy of the Defendant's letter dated 9 March 2001 is attached to this Defence.

11. As to the second part of paragraph 3(a)(ii) of the Particulars, it is denied that the Insurance was invalid as a result of the Claimant's self-employment. The express written terms of the agreement for the Insurance, which are attached to this Defence, included the following:-

"Work Any paid work, including Self-Employed Work (but not Temporary Work), of at least 16 hours per week."

"Are You eligible for this insurance?

To be eligible for insuring Your Account You must:

be over 18 but under 65 at the Insurance Start Date not be receiving State pension

be at Work, not absent due to sickness or injury (other than for a minor ailment of less than 5 days duration), and

not be aware of any likely Unemployment" As previous comments

__ I

 

"Insurance Benefits ...

Life Insurance Benefits If You die, We will pay your Outstanding Balance at the date of Your death.

Accidental Death Benefit In the event of Your accidental death, we will pay American Express Services Europe Limited a sum equal to the Outstanding Balance, in additional to the Life Insurance Benefit. ..

Disability Benefit If You are Disabled for 30 consecutive days, We will pay an amount equal to the Monthly Benefit on or after the 31 st day and continue to pay similar amounts for each complete calendar month until:

- Your period of Disability ends, or

- Your Outstanding Balance, at the date You became Disabled, is cleared, or

- We have paid 24 Monthly Benefits for anyone continuous period of Disability.

Unemployment Benefit If you are Unemployed for 30 consecutive days, We will pay an amount equal to the Monthly Benefit on or after the 31 st day and continue to pay similar amounts until:

Your Unemployment ends, or

Your Outstanding Balance, at the date You knew You would be Unemployed, is cleared, or

We have paid 24 full Monthly Benefits for anyone continuous period of Unemployment.

"What is not covered?

We will not pay benefit for the following:-

 

.•.

"Insurance Benefits ...

Life Insurance Benefits If You die, We will pay your Outstanding Balance at the date of Your death.

Accidental Death Benefit In the event of Your accidental death, we will pay American Express Services Europe Limited a sum equal to the Outstanding Balance, in additional to the Life Insurance Benefit ...

Disability Benefit If You are Disabled for 30 consecutive days, We will pay an amount equal to the Monthly Benefit on or after the 31 st day and continue to pay similar amounts for each complete calendar month until:

- Your period of Disability ends, or

- Your Outstanding Balance, at the date You became Disabled, is cleared, or

- We have paid 24 Monthly Benefits for anyone continuous period of Disability.

Unemployment Benefit If you are Unemployed for 30 consecutive days, We will pay an amount equal to the Monthly Benefit on or after the 31 st day and continue to pay similar amounts until:

Your Unemployment ends, or

Your Outstanding Balance, at the date You knew You would be Unemployed, is cleared, or And there is the thing, being on a fixed term contract with notice, I knew I could be unemployed at any stage

We have paid 24 full Monthly Benefits for anyone continuous period of Unemployment.

"What is not covered?

We will not pay benefit for the following:-

 

..•.

... Unemployment if You are Self-Employed, unless You become Unemployed due to the involuntary financial insolvency of Your business and You have evidence of notification to the Inland Revenue that You have ceased trading."

As is apparent from the Terms set out above and the remainder of the Terms, the fact that the Claimant was self-employed did not render the Insurance as a whole invalid. Surely if any part of the insurance is invalid, this is what I was saying

12. Paragraph 3(a)(ii) of the Particulars is denied. As set out above, the Insurance was valid notwithstanding the Claimant's self-employment. Further, it is averred that the Claimant was covered in the event of unemployment, subject to the requirement that the unemployment must have come about as the result of the Claimant's involuntary financial insolvency. The Claimant was, in addition, eligible for Life Insurance, Accidental Death and Disability benefits. So I could have claimed if disabled or dead!! Not much cover there and PPI is specifically for unemployment cover and it seems to me that in this and the above clause they are actually saying I wouldn’t have been covered.

13. As to paragraphs 3(b) and 3© of the Particulars, the Claimant has not specified the "incorrect details" to which these paragraphs refer. The Defendant does not accept these allegations. If the "incorrect details" relate to the Claimant's employment status, the Defendant avers that this has no relevance to the Claimant's Claim since the Claimant's characterisation of her entitlement under the policy is mistaken. Again, am confused to if they say I was covered or not.

14. As to paragraph 3(d) of the Particulars, a copy of the executed Agreement is attached to this Defence, although the Defendant avers that this is irrelevant:- It is not the executed agreement, it is an application form. I can send you this but it clearly is an application form and has no terms or conditions etc.

a. The Claimant's Claim relates to the Insurance Agreement entered into in March 2001, not the Credit Agreement entered into in November 1998.

b. For the avoidance of any doubt, the Defendant avers that the Insurance Agreement was not itself regulated by the Consumer Credit Act, and was not required to be executed. ? What does this mean?

 

15. Further and in the alternative, the Claim Form in this action was issued on 20 April 2007, more than 6 years after the date that the Insurance Agreement was entered into (which cannot have been any later than 9 March 2001). The Claimant has not properly set out the legal basis of the Claim but it is clear that it is based upon misleading information allegedly provided by the Defendant's agent to the Claimant at the time that the Insurance Agreement was entered into, and the Defendant therefore avers that the Claim must lie in misrepresentation. The Defendant will rely on the Claimant's letter to the Bedford County Court, dated 18 June 2007. The Defendant avers that the Claimant's Claim was therefore statute-barred by, at the latest, 10 March 2007, pursuant to the provisions of the Limitation Act 1980. The initial correspondence was entered into on 10 February 2001 which is well within this time and they had all the correspondence with them at the hearing.

16. As to paragraph 4 of the Particulars of Claim, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to payment in the sum of £4,638.47 or any sum, by way of restitution or damages, in the manners claimed at 4(a) to ©, or at all. It is also denied that the Insurance Agreement offered no benefit to the Claimant (as alleged at paragraph 4(b) of the Particulars), for the reasons set out at paragraph 12 of this Defence.

17. As set out in the Claimant's original Claim dated 20 April 2007 and in subsequent correspondence, it is averred that the figure of £4,638.47 comprises the Premiums totalling £420.77 plus compound interest at the rate of 30.24%. The Claimant has provided no recognisable legal basis for her claim that she is entitled to interest at this rate and it is denied that the Defendant has applied interest to the Claimant's account at this rate. Even if the Claimant is so entitled, the Claimant's calculation does not resemble a compound interest calculation and it is denied that the Claimant would be entitled to interest in the sum calculated. CC agreements and CI have been paid out.

18. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to further interest, costs or the removal of alleged but un-particularised default notices (as requested at paragraph 4(g) of the Particulars). The Defendant takes these default notices to be those issued in relation to the Credit Agreement, and avers that the Claimant has not provided any recognisable legal or factual basis in support of the request for their removal. I require removal of these as if you add up all the charges, I actually owe them nothing

 

19. Save for the admissions made above, the Defendant makes no admissions to the Claimant's claim and the Claimant is put to strict proof.

20. In the circumstances, should the Claimant be afforded the opportunity to amend its claim and/or provide further particulars the Defendant reserves the right to plead further.

21. The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

Statement of Truth

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true.

I am duly authorised by the Defendant to sign this statement.

Signed

Partner with Glovers, Solicitors for the Defendant

 

[TINK660]

Madkit

 

Did you get anywhere with the ppi element of your claim against Amex as I am considering starting a claim on the basis that I was self-employed and not eligible to claim. After an accident a couple of years ago left me unable to work for 3 months I applied to make a claim only to be informed that I had to produce evidence of cessation of trading eg letter to the revenue, plus last years accounts - needless to say I couldnt claim because I didnt intend to cease trading just needed to claim for a couple of months because of my injury!

 

Tink

[MadKit]

Hi there, here is the long sad story hopefully in brief form.

 

Fought Amex for return of PPI and charges, charges were "refunded" to the closed card account, including my court fees so for all my effort I never saw a penny of it.

 

Amex only ever had an application form, no signed CCA etc and refused to refund PPI even though they had applied this without my consent or knowledge.

 

After numerous changes of solicitors, somehow or another they had an order made on 31 March 2009 that I knew nothing about. There is also reference to a judgment or order on 7 January 2009, I sent in a response but they said it was received too late as the application had been received on 23 December 2008, I received notification on my return to UK on 6 January 2009. The solicitors knew I was not in the country as I had told them that I was sending a cheque early for agreed payment and deliberately sent through a CCJ when they knew I wouldn't be able to respond.

 

Short story long, towards the end of June 2009, I recieved this from Brighton County Court.

 

"On 15 June 2009 ....... heard neither party and the court orders that

 

1. The charge created by the order made on 31 March shall continue.

2. The interest in the asset (my house) ..... below stand charged with the payment of the sum etc etc

 

The real awful thing here is that the solicitors have now sent me a very threatening letter telling me they are going to make application for an Order for Sale. American Express in the meantime have sold the debt on to CapQuest, before the charging order was made final. Surely they can't do both?

 

How do I fight this? The solicitors have given me one week to accept the full and final offer of more than £5600, way more than the offer that Amex offered me 2 months ago and that the solicitors have not even mentioned and I obviously can't pay this.

 

I want to get rid of this charging order, I have been reading other posts here and I have a lot of debt and many of these are much higher than the Amex one and already have one charging order on the house from an unsecured loan which I have just started to fight as well. Neither one of these took into account creditors I already have, a secured loan that I am fighting for return of PPI and there is no valid signed CCA.

 

Do I need to fill in an N244 and what do I need to put in there?

 

Help! Please!

 

[Alphageek]

Your post is a little confusing. Don't want to appear mean, perhaps I am just too tired to follow it.

 

Anyway, form what I can gather, it sounds to me like you need to seek to get the Amex CCJ(s) set aside.

 

Can you post some more details about the situation and we'll see what help me and your fellow CAGers can offer.

[300]

Concur geek

[MadKit]

I was away when this court case was decided. Before the date, Amex sold the debt on and I am not sure if they told Brachers about this. I assumed the court case would not take place but it did and Amex "won".

 

What do I do now?

 

Help please!

 

I can attach the summons from the court but it is normal stuff, "if you don't pay +£6,600 by 26 September we will seize your goods."

 

[shakespeare62]

I would post up a copy of the court claim form with the Particulars of claim (your ID removed) as well as copy of the General Form of Judgment Order.

 

If it was sold before the judgment was made, then I suspect there would be an abuse of process issue here. How could the claimant be pursuing judgment after they have sold the debt on ?

 

Also the solicitors, may be in serious breach of the solcitors code of conduct for failing to notify the Court e.g. on grounds of possible misrepresentation etc.

 

Post up my friend asap.

Edited September 23, 2009 by shakespeare62

[shakespeare62]

I would also seriously consider sending a subject Access Request (SAR) to Amex asap. you'll need to send it special delivery.

Edited September 23, 2009 by shakespeare62

[MadKit]

Thanks Shakespeare62, I have sent a couple of SARs and have received a copy of the application form a number of times. I also tried to have them return PPI as I never requested this, was self-employed too and they have no proof that I was even asked about it. The judge did make them pay back my charges and agreed that a claim for PPI could be re-instated as a separate claim.

 

I will try and post the original court claim but as I need to respond to the Notice of Issue of Warrant of Execution (received 22 September) very quickly (before 26th September), I was wondering what I should send to the court before the latter date. I really don't want the bailiffs on my doorstep on Monday!