Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They wont take you to court. I'm not sure what they'll do about the letters and if they will or wont send you the letters from their retail prevention company, but you can ignore those letters. You'll be just fine don't worry.
    • Yeah I figured, unlikely I'll need credit anyway mortgage all paid off etc so I'll take that on the chin and learn from the experience. Probably would've beaten that too had I remembered the protocol, first time ever going through the process though sob it wasn't familiar to me  Oh well  
    • This is my slightly amended WS taking on board your previous comments, any suggestions for amendments would be most appreciated.  Thank you for you time.   1.        I am the Defendant in this matter. 2.        The facts in this statement come from my personal knowledge. 3.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020. 4.        The alleged Letter of Claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address. 5.        The Judgement debt was not familiar to me so I began investigations to ascertain what the debt related to and how such a figure had been equated in any event. 6.        I made immediate contact with the Court, the Claimant Solicitors and the Claimants thereafter, asking them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.  7.        I sent a Data Subject access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided – See appendix 1 which details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclaycard as well as copies of correspondence between us. 8.        I do not admit to entering an agreement with Barclaycard in 2000. 9.       The claimant has failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis and therefore this claim should be automatically struck out.  10.    The claimants have failed to disclose a true executed copy of the original agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim. They are not entitled to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 12.   The reconstituted standard Barclaycard agreement that the claimant has included in the court bundle does not satisfy any CCA request and so the claimant is and remains in default of my CCA request and therefore unable to enforce the alleged agreement. 13.  The claimants have failed to provide proof the assignment, such as a deed of assignment. 14.  The claimant has failed to provide a statement of account setting out how the alleged debt accrued under that agreement 15.   Despite numerous requests to the claimant, I have still not seen any evidence, such as an original agreement or deed of assignment, that substantiates the claimant’s assertion that I owe the debt to the claimant, nor evidence of how the debt was accrued. 16.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are 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 its truth.
  • 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

CCA 1st Credit / Connaught **SET ASIDE WITH COSTS**


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5592 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

Just called the Courts today and the Judge has accepted the set aside hearing.

 

Will not post when it is just now but I cant wait.

 

Do you think Connaughts will turn up????

 

HAK

 

 

Still nothing back of the Magistrates Court yet!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Just called the Courts today and the Judge has accepted the set aside hearing.

 

Will not post when it is just now but I cant wait.

 

Do you think Connaughts will turn up????

 

HAK

 

 

Still nothing back of the Magistrates Court yet!!

You will soon get a letter from the CON men advising you that they are withdrawing their SD. However unless you hear from the Courts that you are not required then you should go along on the date and ask for costs against the CON men

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers for that ODC.

 

Thats what the woman form the Courts said turn up anyway if they back out.

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just been talking to a Solicitor.

Due to Con man issuing the SD without prior collection is not seen likley by the Courts and as we know abuse of the system.

She has said also to ask the Judge at the set aside hearing to guide you to take out a civil claim against them for harrasment etc...

 

What do you think?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its just a real shame that the onus for sorting out these disreputable DCA's is down to us...I do think the court itself should do something to stop the DCA's interpreting the rules and regulations in order to apply as much pressure as they want to debtors (or people they just assume are the debtors) without censure.

 

I think it is time that the Courts applied punative measures to DCA's that have been proven to harrass, intimidate and make life misery for ordinary people.

Advice given is my opinion only, I am not a legal or financial expert (far from it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

just sent off a cca request to 1st direct myself today,this thread is very interesting reading!! Im a bit shocked that dca's read our posts!!!

I sent one last week to bryan carters too, I never thought I would be doing all this!!

I have been reading lots of posts for about a week and a half now, but im not quite sure what a set aside is, could someone point me in the right direction to read up about it.

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

42 MAN

 

Firstly great to see you as a site helper :D.

 

i am just doing my defence for the Court claim and should be on to the SD shortly.

Are you around today?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi 42MAN/ MONX

 

I cant seem to get started on this. Totally lost:confused:

 

Any pointer in to what to take with me??

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remember HAK....you disputed the debt before the SD came through, they have not contacted you stating that it is their intention to drop the SD......i'd be pretty annoyed...!!! It is a serious abuse and a waste of the courts time to use the Insolvency service as a method of collecting disputed debts !!

 

You might find this interesting to HAK !!!

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/135078-me-1st-credit-stat.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got it 42 Man!!

 

Cheers

 

Ive printed a load of legistlation of with rulings if needed.

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Just found this below

It again mentions signatures

 

 

Legal Loophole in a Statutory Demand

 

A statutory demand must show a named person or persons from the Creditor or their agent/solicitor whom you can contact directly. This is Rule 6.2 of The insolvency Rules 1986.

This means that if the statutory demand doesn't give the name of a person you can speak to then it is not valid. If you try to contact the named person and they won’t put you through then it is also invalid.

Be aware that named people on accompanying letters are not part of the Statutory Demand - only those on the Demand itself are valid.

Important - make notes of dates/times you try to call the named person on the statutory demand, together with the name of the person that you spoke to and a note of what was said. Write and confirm everything said by Special Delivery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

UPDATE

 

Just got a letter from CON saying the SD was issued in error and they are writing to the Courts to say they will not be attending...

 

Should I still go?

Can I claim costs?

 

HAK

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...