Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

HFC Loan - Is this an enforceable CCA?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5005 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

Having spent most of the afternoon reading the posts on trhis site i wonder if i might ask for your invaluablke help/advice :)

 

On the 22/4/07 i sent a cca to HFC Bank over a debt that they have defaulted me on with Experian. As yet all i have received is a replay from their 'Executive Complaints Dept' telling me they are looking into it. I already know that the debt has been reassigned cos I have been paying Wescot 50 quid a month. So my questions are:

 

As i have had no reply to my original letter, and certainly no sign of the original agreement let alone a copy, nor a deed of assignment, nor a true copy of the default notice, am i right in thinbking that they are now in default under the 12 day rule? and also now commiting an illegal act under the 30 day rule cos the debt is now unenforceable?

 

If the answer to these is yes do I then write to them disowning the debt and report them to TS?

 

Do I also write to Wescot? and if so send them copies of my correspondence with HFC? cos if HFC can't supply the info i requested i'm pretty sure Wescot won't be able to too.

 

And finally :) Do I stop all further payments and request any monies back that i have paid Wescot as it would appear they are enforcing a debt that doesn't exist under CCA?

 

Sorry to go on but i would really like to know exactly where to go form here and where i stand right at this moment.

 

Last but not least! - Thank you for such a wonderful and helpful forum!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Having spent most of the afternoon reading the posts on trhis site i wonder if i might ask for your invaluablke help/advice :)

 

On the 22/4/07 i sent a cca to HFC Bank over a debt that they have defaulted me on with Experian. As yet all i have received is a replay from their 'Executive Complaints Dept' telling me they are looking into it. I already know that the debt has been reassigned cos I have been paying Wescot 50 quid a month. So my questions are:

 

As i have had no reply to my original letter, and certainly no sign of the original agreement let alone a copy, nor a deed of assignment, nor a true copy of the default notice, am i right in thinbking that they are now in default under the 12 day rule? and also now commiting an illegal act under the 30 day rule cos the debt is now unenforceable?

 

If the answer to these is yes do I then write to them disowning the debt and report them to TS?

 

Do I also write to Wescot? and if so send them copies of my correspondence with HFC? cos if HFC can't supply the info i requested i'm pretty sure Wescot won't be able to too.

 

And finally :) Do I stop all further payments and request any monies back that i have paid Wescot as it would appear they are enforcing a debt that doesn't exist under CCA?

 

Sorry to go on but i would really like to know exactly where to go form here and where i stand right at this moment.

 

Last but not least! - Thank you for such a wonderful and helpful forum!!!

 

If you sent your request on 22/04/07 (by rec del I hope!), then they default on this on 14/05/07 (12 calendar days plus 2 for posting). If tehy do not provide your agreement by this time, you are within your rights to with-hold payment until they do. They tehn have a further 30 calendar days to produce the agreement before they commit an offence.

 

If this happens, post back here then and we can take it stage by stage from there.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks tiglet for your reply. I made a msitake with my dates and actually sent the cca on the 22 March and although i forgot to rec del it they sent me a letter aknowledging the fact that they have recieved it so i guess that is the same :)

 

That being the case they are now in default and are commiting an offence as the are way past the 12 and 30 day deadlines - yes?

 

If so where do i go from here? bearing in mind that Wescot now have the debt and i am currently paying them a monthly sum?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Withold payment, send them the letter telling them they ahve defaulted on the CCA 1974 and send a complaint to the OFT.

All help is merely my opinion only - please seek legal advice if you need to as I am only qualified in SEN law.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Withold payment, send them the letter telling them they ahve defaulted on the CCA 1974 and send a complaint to the OFT.

 

agreed

 

Mike

If I've helped tip my scales

 

Blair Oliver & Scott, £2500 written off December 2006 Default removed January 2007:D

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/56001-mike220359-blair-oliver-scott.html

 

Monument, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

Lloyds TSB didn't sign the agreement!

:D

 

Citicards, didn't sign the agreement

:D

 

RBS tut, tut!

:rolleyes:

 

Morgan Stanley, oh dear

:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter sent today recorded and will be organising a complaint to the OFT. My payments are to Wescot who have admitted in previous correspondence that they are acting as clients for HFC so is it ok to stop payments to them as of now?

 

Just want to get everything straight..and thanks both of you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

Having sent a CCA to HFC bank they have finally replyed albiet several weeks late.

 

Included was the original CA (no problem with that, definitley mine),

A statement of accounts, and a template letter of a default notice what would have been sent out, no name address etc.

 

Does this constitute compliance with my original request? Personally I don't think so cos my original argument was that i found a default on my credit file with no knowledge or ever receiving any notice, hence my CCA.

 

Also on the statement it states 'passed to Wescot solicitors on 24-5-05'. Yet the default was placed on experians site on the 4-6-05. If I am right Wescot has bought this debt and as far as i'm aware that terminates my contract with HFC, including all its clauses which give them persmission to transfer my data. So why are they still doing it a week later with Experian?

 

Any help/advice/observations will be gratefully accepted

Link to post
Share on other sites

If HFC have complied with your request for a CCA... then the account was not sold to Westcott. Some on here will argue over the legalities of a Default Notice, but if a creditor has the original CCA.... they also have the right to default you. You can argue that the Default Notice didn't contain this and that... but if the creditor has the CCA... and it is indeed a CCA and not an Application Form, then the debt remains enforceable.

 

You have to ask yourself what you want out of this. Of course, you are free to write back and say that they have not provided a true copy of the Default Notice and put them to proof.... but while they have an enforceable CCA, I don't really see the point.

 

I am sure someone will come along and shoot me down in flames now.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with prioityone, it depends what you want to get of it. I would only argue a DN if the creditor cannot produce the CCA, which in your case they have so I wouldn't see the point.

No one can make you feel inferior without your consent :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for both your input. I don't particularly want anything out of this..other than that if they are going to place default on my record that is was done in the correct manner and in a legal way. I have no record of any sort of receiving a default notice..if i had i would have attempted to do something about it hopefully.

 

What they have sent me is a template of what they might of sent and the date when they say i was defaulted. Id doesn't prove to me that one was actually sent to me..at my address, and if that is the case then as far as i am aware the default hasn't been served properly and so shouldn't have been recorded on my credit file

Link to post
Share on other sites

If HFC have complied with your request for a CCA... then the account was not sold to Westcott. Some on here will argue over the legalities of a Default Notice, but if a creditor has the original CCA.... they also have the right to default you. You can argue that the Default Notice didn't contain this and that... but if the creditor has the CCA... and it is indeed a CCA and not an Application Form, then the debt remains enforceable.

 

You have to ask yourself what you want out of this. Of course, you are free to write back and say that they have not provided a true copy of the Default Notice and put them to proof.... but while they have an enforceable CCA, I don't really see the point.

 

I am sure someone will come along and shoot me down in flames now.

 

:)

 

Hi Priority,

 

I haven't come along to shoot you down in flames, but I am more than a little concerned about the dismissive attitude you are taking in respect of Default Notices. A Creditor does NOT have the right to default you if the DN does not contain the correct information and/or does not conform to the prescribed form. He cannot bring the contract to an end in this circumstance and it would give the debtor a right to claim damages on that basis. There is no less a requirement for consumers to be protected where DN's are concerned as there is in respect of credit agreements needing to contain the prescribed terms etc...

 

You are arguing two separate points here:-

1. If the creditor has the credit agreement and it isn't defective in some way, the debt is enforceable- I agree with that proposition.

 

2. If they have said agreement, they have a right to default you-no they do not!

 

These two points raise entirely different arguments! There may be an enforceable agreement, but if the process of terminating the agreement has not been carried out as per the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983, it will render the termination unlawful. Creditors have a legal obligation under the CCA 1974 to be no less careful when terminating a contract, as when they enter into an agreement with a potential customer.

 

You may not see the point of arguing these issues in respect of the legal validity of DN's, however, in terms of "building a case" (a phrase you have heard me utter a thousand times) against a creditor, it is just as valid as raising arguments on the basis of harassment. If an issue raised helps to reduce or discharge a debt, then that is a good thing is it not? Debtors have to put ALL cogent arguments forward in their defence. If we are going to start advising people to disregard relevant legal arguments, we are not going to do anybody any favours! Law is a subject which requires the consideration of what one might deem minute points; that does not make them any less relevant! I don't for a moment by the way, think that issues to do with DN's are minute! You posed the question for shieldblaster to ask himself what he wants out of this, and I would venture that it is to achieve the best possible outcome for his financial circumstances; that involves exploring ALL the legal arguments to support his position, which is impossible if we are going to encourage him to only consider whether the agreement is valid or not! This is a very narrow and misguided proposition in my opinion, as to which legal principles are relevant. On what legal basis have you arrived at this conclusion?

 

The issues surrounding DN's are not insignificant and should not be portrayed as such, it is counter-productive.

 

Regards,

 

Laiste.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Laiste,

 

As I have said in an earlier post, if OP wants to contact the creditor and put them to prove that the DN was issued in the correct manner, then it remains his choice to do so.

 

Whilst I respect your view, I also maintain my own. If OP was "building a case", then I agree that it would be important to fight with anything at his disposal... but OP is not building a case. He is not being sued by this creditor. Therefore, if any case was to be brought.... he would be bringing it himself.... hence my query about what he wants to achieve from this ?

 

You say that "Debtors have to put forward all cogent arguments forward in their defence". I agree.... but as OP is not being sued, there is no defence to argue.

 

As such, I see no point in arguing with them over the DN issue because at the end of the day, the debt is still enforceable with the CCA that is in their possession.... and OP is not challenging that fact.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PO and thanks once again for your input.

 

So if I am reading you right you are saying that because the creditor confirms i have been defaulted and sends me a template of what they might have sent me without any details pertaining to me, or without proof of postage to my address or receipt of said DN then i am to accept that and sit back whilst they destroy my credit record and credit score? Because if that's what you are saying (and i could be wrong) they haven't a chance in hell. If they have followed the proper and legal route as Laiste has pointed out then I will happily accept that, as I am happy to pay of the debt and am doing. But if they haven't then I want them to be held accountable and I want their default shifted from my CR. It's a point of law that i'm after if anything...Do things right and legal..if you have I haven't a problem with you..if you haven't then I have.

 

Hi Laiste,

 

As I have said in an earlier post, if OP wants to contact the creditor and put them to prove that the DN was issued in the correct manner, then it remains his choice to do so.

 

Whilst I respect your view, I also maintain my own. If OP was "building a case", then I agree that it would be important to fight with anything at his disposal... but OP is not building a case. He is not being sued by this creditor. Therefore, if any case was to be brought.... he would be bringing it himself.... hence my query about what he wants to achieve from this ?

 

You say that "Debtors have to put forward all cogent arguments forward in their defence". I agree.... but as OP is not being sued, there is no defence to argue.

 

As such, I see no point in arguing with them over the DN issue because at the end of the day, the debt is still enforceable with the CCA that is in their possession.... and OP is not challenging that fact.

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi PriorityOne,

 

You must be in a privileged position to know definitively that Shieldblaster is not intending to pursue HFC in this matter! He stated in an earlier post that he wants to know that the DN has been applied, "in a correct manner and a legal way". Whether that means Shieldblaster will pursue them or not, I wouldn't presume to know, but having all the correct arguments at his disposal should he decide to, or in the event that HFC pursue him is by no means a pointless exercise! If he has been defaulted there is every chance the matter may proceed to litigation at some point, I know HFC very well and they are very litigious, so being thoroughly prepared for that eventuality is time well spent IMO. I speak in terms of a defence, because sooner or later if you have a debt that you can't pay, or are only able to make nominal pmts, you will have to put forward arguments in your defence, or find a way to meet that obligation, those are your only choices! Whether the points I have raised are relevant now, or at some point in the future, they are nevertheless relevant. I stand by my points made in my last post entirely.

 

I am sure that Shieldblaster will confirm his intentions regarding the DN in due course, as it's inappropriate for me to comment on his PM's to me, suffice to say, if he does feel that he needs to start proceedings vis a vis the DN, he has the ammunition at his disposal to do so.

 

Regards,

 

Laiste.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Laiste, at no point have I ever said that I was in a "privileged position" over anyone..... all I have done is express an opinion different to your own.

 

As it is now very obvious that the pair of you have been in touch via a PM(s)... and as this is getting a tad childish now.... I am leaving the thread.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Laiste, at no point have I ever said that I was in a "privileged position" over anyone..... all I have done is express an opinion different to your own.

 

As it is now very obvious that the pair of you have been in touch via a PM(s)... and as this is getting a tad childish now.... I am leaving the thread.

 

Priority,

You have entirely misconstrued my comments. I did not not suggest in my last post that you had said you were in a "privileged position over anyone", I asserted my own viewpoint, given your previous comments, that you seemed to be giving a definitive perspective on what Shieldblaster was intending to do regarding the DN. If you re-read your own comments it is abundantly clear that you considered it a complete waste of time arguing/pursuing matters in respect of the DN, as Shieldblaster was neither the subject of legal action or intent on issuing proceedings. I do not believe that Shieldblaster had confirmed his intentions one way or another, which is why I was dismayed at what you were saying. Shieldblaster has a right to know what the relevant arguments are, if and when he decides to pursue the issue and it would have been remiss of me not to give him that information.

It was "very obvious" to you well before your last post that Shieldblaster and I had been in touch through PM's, as he stated this fact to Lan in a reply, a few messages up.

If you are suggesting that I am childish, then I take complete exception to such comments Priority. You have taken a couple of unfair and unjustified sideswipes at the fact that I am raising arguments in respect of the legalities of DN's, for reasons I cannot fathom. You haven't just expressed a difference of opinion you have been quite scornful of the issues I have raised. Paying attention to detail and not dismissing arguments has enabled me to win cases, and I am very happy with the methods I use to achieve this. If I can help others on and outside this forum do the same, so much the better.

Nannamoon,

That is your view, I disagree.

Laiste.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sorry that PO has decided to leave the thread and that she regards a full and frank discussion as 'a tad childish' as she was the one to point out that she has a right to her opinion, which i respect, but she must also extend that right to Laiste as well, who after all was merely expressing hers.

 

I am also uneasy with the fact that someone who has so obviously been around these forums for some time so easily accepts that cos the CA says they have sent a default..without proof of any sort..then we must accept that everything is above board and legal-like. If I have learnt anything in my short time on this forum it is patently obvious that that isn't the case and that DA's are actually quite economical with the truth or for whatever reason do not abide by the laws as laid down and I for one applaud Laiste's attempts at trying to make people..especially newcomers..aware of that fact so that we are at least furnished with all the facts and information to make an informed decision on future actions

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest NATTIE

Guys, can we keep this on the matter in hand because i am confused by 2 points on this. Is the fact that the original CCA that has been provided mean that it is enforceable or are we saying, that aside, that a specific original Default Notice is at issue? My understanding from reading is that from post 1 CCA provided and that both Laiste and Priority One have confirmed from what i have read that it is enforceable, or have i missed something ie Default Notice bit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The question was whether or not a default notice had to be proved by the creditor/dca and that they in fact issued it whilst following the correct procedures.

 

Sheildblaster does not contest the credit agreement but does contest that he/she ever received a default notice so has requested proof that it was sent in the first instance, a copy of what would have been sent on what date does not prove it was sent or received.

No one can make you feel inferior without your consent :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys, can we keep this on the matter in hand because i am confused by 2 points on this. Is the fact that the original CCA that has been provided mean that it is enforceable or are we saying, that aside, that a specific original Default Notice is at issue? My understanding from reading is that from post 1 CCA provided and that both Laiste and Priority One have confirmed from what i have read that it is enforceable, or have i missed something ie Default Notice bit?

 

Hi Nattie,

 

Thank you for the reputation click, it's appreciated.:)

 

I think normal service will be resumed now.;) Judging by the last comments made by myself, Priority and Shieldblaster, we have all said what we felt was necessary and left it at that.

 

If a credit agreement has been furnished by the creditor and it conforms to the requirements of the CCA 1974 and the Regulations made under the Act, there is an enforceable debt.

 

However, if a Default Notice (DN) hasn't been served, or there are problems with it (as with credit agreements) the creditor does not have an automatic right to terminate the agreement. A classic example of a fundamental flaw with a DN, which makes it unenforceable against you, and the termination of the contract unlawful, is the inclusion of penalty charges in the amount requested to remedy the breach. The amount stated has to be accurate.

 

So whilst there may be a debt that is enforceable, unless the creditor gets the termination procedure correct, he is not entitled to default/end the contract. As I have previously stated, the consequences for a debtor when this happens cannot be overstated, so a claim for compensation for unlawfully defaulting/ending the contract should be included in any claim. I believe The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999, would support a debtor in such a case.

 

I hope I've answered your question!

 

Regards,

 

Laiste.:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps it might help here (including me :) ) if I explain where I am coming from and what the dispute is that I have with HFC at this moment in time.

 

I recently checked mt CR file with Experian and found I had a default recorded against me placed by HFC. Now although I was aware that the original bedt had been passed to Wescot I had no knowledege of ever receiving a formal default notice from HFC and this lead to my CCA to HFC in order to ascertain primarily whehter or not a formal DN had been sent to me, and in doing so I would also be able to check whehter they had a copy of the original(enforceable) credit agreement. What I wanted form the start was to make sure that the DN had been placed properly, above board and legal, I WASN'T particularly disputing the debt or what was owed..just the DN

 

They have since replied (albeit lateer than the 30 days) and have included what appears to be on face value (i am checking it closely with assistance :) ) a bona fide CA with proper form and content...OK..no problem with that so far..I owe the money and will repay it as I have been doing for now.

 

Now to my origianl dispute (The default)..All they sent to me was a template of what they MIGHT have sent..nothing to mention my name or address...just basically a blank form. It is a proper DN with regards to form and content as far as I can see...but is it the one that was sent to me?

 

Bearing in mind the implications that can derive from a DN being placed on your CF eg. loss of credit status, adverse responses to automated checks or manual ones come to that...as Laiste has succinctly pointed out..then it is important (to me especially) that it was done properly..ie That the default was sent to me, at my address, and i received it..because if i had it gives me 7 days to do something about it..something i contend i was deprived of cos i contest i never received it in the first place!

 

Had they sent me a true copy of the original DN i wouldn't have a problem (hopefully ;) ) I would have accepted that everything was legal, but unfortunately under the CCA (which i find very ambigiuos on this piont) they are not required to send a me an actual copy and only have to prove that they posted it (which they haven't by the way), but there are other Acts that have been so helpfully pointed out to me which they have to abide by re. form and content etc. and also that they are processing my data in a legal fashion (which carries criminal repercussions if they aren't)

 

So what I want basically is absolute proof that they sent me a DN..that it was to me at my address ie. served properly..and that it was proper in form and content. f they haven't..or didn't..I want the DN shifted from my CR! and if i can prove that they didnt follow the (very strict) rules I will also be after them for wrongful use and processing of my personal data..that includes any CRA's that where complicit in that also.

 

Ok..there it is..hope it makes sense..its helped me anyway ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...