Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.   9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

feralkat

Fealkat V Abbey - Judgement what happens next?

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 4487 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Hi All, After my success with LLoyds, I'm now helping out a friend with her battle against Abbey - bring it on!!

 

I followed all the steps detailed here and following the bog standard replies, started a claim with MCOL on the 18/06/07.

 

Having not received any communication or defence from them I entered a Judgement of default on the 11/07/07. I still haven't received anything from them and have phoned the court who have told me that I can start the warrant procedure whithin a reasonable time.

 

I've read and re-read the forums and it appears that usually Abbey DO enter a defence at some point so I'm confused not to have heard anything.

 

Would someone mind advising me on how long I should wait before executing the warrant or what my next step should be?

 

Many thanks in advance for any help which will be gratefully received!!

 

Feralkat :)


:)Lloyds ***WON*** £3,500 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest louis wu

I think the thing to do is to call the court, and ask them what the judge would consider a 'reasonable time frame'. Explain that you are not a solicitor, but believe Abbey are abusing their position and wasting yours, and the courts time.

 

See what the say, but I suspect that the judge will give them at least a fortnight to comply.

 

Keep us informed

 

louis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Louis - I thought that 14 days would be fair and the lady I spoke to at the court thought that it sounded OK.

 

I guess I'll take the next step on the 15th July - a week today.

 

Does anyone know if many other people have won in this fashion?

 

Many thanks

 

Feralkat


:)Lloyds ***WON*** £3,500 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feralkat

 

There is a good chance that Abbey will ask for the judgement to be set aside once they receive your warrant of execution. Do a search for threads by Elisedriver as she had this happen to her, as did NatalieC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the buggers keep denying receiving any paperwork, its absolutely staggering the amount of paperwork that seems to get lost on its way to them


Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll look those two up - thanks!!

 

How can they lose post that is sent recorded delivery?!! You'd think they would come up with something better - the dog/hamster/baby ate it or something!! They've had plenty of practise now :D

 

Thanks for your advice guys!

 

Feralkat


:)Lloyds ***WON*** £3,500 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again!!

 

Well I still haven't heard a peep from Abbey - I find it completly staggering that they have not responded at all!!

 

The address that I used with MCOL (and all previous letters) was the local branch address, they replied to the first letters that I sent there (the usual 'Sorry you're not happy letters') but have ignored anything from the courts :???:

 

Do you think that I should now start the warrant procedure? They have had over 2 weeks since the judgement so they have had plenty of time.

 

Should I amend the address with the MCOL to a central office, could that be the problem? I think that if they have replied from the branch address before there is no reason why they can't reply from there now?

 

Any thoughts gratefully received - please!!

 

FeralKat


:)Lloyds ***WON*** £3,500 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'bump'

 

Help please - really not sure what to do now.

 

Feralkat


:)Lloyds ***WON*** £3,500 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Feralkat, ring MCOL, there should be a form that you fill in to file for judgement (have you already done this?) if you have done this it is time to send the Baliffs in, again MCOL and tell that that you want to do this, it costs about £50? but this is recoverable


Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have done the judgement - will execute the warrent now. I'm hoping that the 'test case' won't affect this because Abbey have not replied I'm hoping that they cant apply for a stay on the basis of the test case?

 

What do you think?

 

Many thanks for your reply

 

Feralkat


:)Lloyds ***WON*** £3,500 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well in all honesty, they might apply for a stay anyway. But you might as well go for it anyway, they might just cough up, oh and if the baliffs are going in, take your camcorder lol and perhaps the local press might be interested, see Rekas thread :-)


Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't that just be LOVELY - I'd invite everyone from here and we could all go and laugh at them!!

 

Will execute the warrant and then let you know how I get on :)

 

Many thanks

 

Feralkat


:)Lloyds ***WON*** £3,500 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would pay to see abbey shamed on the TV with the baliffs going in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck FK


:madgrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hallo All,

 

Well, I have today issued the warrant - I'm guessing (from what I have read in other threads) that Abbey will now apply for a stay?

 

If they do not do that, does anyone know what is likely to happen next?

 

Does anyone have any ideas on how the test case might affect the claim at this stage?

 

Many many thanks for any help :D

 

Feralkat


:)Lloyds ***WON*** £3,500 :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...