Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see, shame, I think if a claim is 'someone was served' then proof of that should be mandatory. Appreciate your input into the WS whenever you get chance, thanks in advance
    • Paper trail off the original creditor often confirms the default and issue of a notice...not having or being able to disclose the actual copy or being able to produce a copy less so. Creditors are not compelled to keep copies of the actual default notice so you will in most cases get a reconstituted version but must contain accurate figures/dates/format.     .    
    • Including Default Notice Andy? Ok, I think this is the best I can do.. it all makes sense with references to their WS. They have included exhibits that dates don't match the WS about them, small but still.. if you're going to reference letters giving dates, then the exhibits should be correct, no? I know I redacted them too much, but one of the dates differs to the WS by a few months. IN THE ******** County Court Claim No. [***] BETWEEN: LC Asset 2 S.A.R.L CLAIMANT AND [***] DEFENDANT ************ _________________________ ________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF [***] _________________________ ________ I, [***], being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in this claim. 1. I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimant’s witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 2. The Claim relates to an alleged Credit Card agreement between the Defendant and Bank of Scotland plc. Save insofar of any admittance it is accepted that the Defendant has had contractual agreements with Bank of Scotland plc in the past, the Defendant is unaware as to what alleged debt the Claimant refers. 3. The Defendant requested a copy of the CCA on the 24/12/2022 along with the standard fee of £1.00 postal order, to which the defendant received a reply from the Claimant dated 06/02/2023. To this date, the Claimant has failed to disclose a valid agreement and proof as per their claim that this is enforceable, that Default Notice and Notice of Assignment were sent to and received by the Defendant, on which their claim relies. The Claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit *** is a true copy of the agreement and are the true Terms and Conditions as issued at the time of inception of the online application and execution of the agreement. 4. Point 3 is noted. The Claimant pleads that a default notice has been served upon the defendant as evidenced by Exhibit [***]. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 5. Point 6 is noted and disputed. The Defendant cannot recall ever having received the notice of assignment as evidenced in the exhibit marked ***. The claimant is put to strict proof to verify the service of the above in accordance with s136 and s196 Law of Property Act 1925. 6. Point 11 is noted and disputed. See 3. 7. Point 12 is noted, the Defendant doesn’t recall receiving contact where documentation is provided as per the Claimants obligations under CCA. In addition, the Claimant pleads letters were sent on dates given, yet those are not the letters evidenced in their exhibits *** 8. Point 13 is noted and denied. Claimant is put to strict proof to prove allegations. 9. The Claimant did not provide a true copy of the CCA in response to the Defendants request of 24/12/2022. The Claimant further claims that the documents are sufficient to pursue a Judgement and are therefore copies of original documents in their possession. Conclusion 10. Without the Claimant providing a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA, the Claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt. 11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. On receipt of this claim I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity from the claimant by way of a Section 78 request. The Claimant failed to comply. I can only assume as this was due to the Claimant not having any enforceable documentation and issuing a claim in hope of an undefended default judgment.   Statement of Truth I, ********, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in it’s truth. Signed: _________________________ _______ Dated: _____________________
    • AMEX and TSB the 2 Creditors who you need to worry about the least, ever!  Just stop paying them and forget about it, ignore all their threat o gram letters.  Only if, and with these 2 it's a massive if, you end up with a claim form you need to respond, and there will be plenty of help here.
    • No, nothing from Barclays. Turns out i have 2 accounts on here, and i posted originally on the other one. Sorry about that.  
  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

rob & way,no agreements


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5949 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

sent cca requests to 2 'debts' managed via robinsone& way. today, i received back both copies of my cca request letters,and both cheques,along with a headed note saying ' no copy of agreements on catalogue accounts, signed,though cannot understand signature.

they have also sent a separate letter stating'

We refer to your recent communication requesting a signed agreement relating to the above account.

as with most home shopping accounts,you will not have signed a credit agreement.you are deemed to have agreed to the terms and conditions of the credit,which were relayed in the catalogue itself,when you placed your first order.

by ordering goods from the catalogue,you are liable for payment of those goods. if you are denying responsibility for the debt, we would ask what steps you have taken to return the goods you did not intend paying for?

 

the debt remains outstanding and we require an offer of payment by return.

 

 

so...........no credit agreement, plz can someone put a letter on here that i can write back to state they cannot enforce this without a credit agreement? plz.......

Link to post
Share on other sites

What a load of rubbish, no fully executed agreement = no action, it was good of them to confirm in writing that they don't have one. No matter what they insinuate or say by you doing this or you doing that and you are deemed to have .... at the end of the day they have no proof that you agreed to anything without this, it is the law. There are some great letters on here for dealing with this and telling them where to get off, check out some other similar threads, however please don't worry they cannot enforce this debt, it is up to you now how you deal with it or not !!

Link to post
Share on other sites

THIS IS THE LETTER IN REPLY TO THEIRS, DO U THINK THIS WILL BE FINE>

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

This is to confirm i have recieved and filed the returned copies of cca requests and

un-cashed cheques along with YOUR signed & headed confirmation note, stating

no copy of agreements on alleged catalogue accounts, today 20/7/07 together with

a separate letter stating you require an offer of payment by return for alleged debts.

As you are 'probably' aware, a debt can only be reinforced with a properly executed

agreement, as you have written to confirm this does not exist, I want written notification

that the alleged debts are not enforcable, I already know that no entry concerning these

accounts are on my credit file, and that is what led me to write for cca requests. as you

will be aware that a true credit agreement default will be held on a defaulters' credit file,

as supported by a signed credit agreement.

 

As you will know, under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a judge is not permitted to make

any enforcement order unless the creditor can provide a true signed copy of the original

credit agreement. This means that unless you can produce such an agreement, this alleged

debt IS NOT enforceable in law. I have made a reasonable and lawful request for a true signed

copy allowed by the Act. Indeed, The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) states that "if a

creditor/owner fails to comply with a valid request within a period of 12 days (not including the

date of receipt of the request) he may not enforce the agreement at all. This prevents

enforcement with or without a court order. If a default lasts for a month (for example a calendar

month) it constitutes an offence.

I must advise you that any alleged accounts you state i hold with you is now in legal dispute.

Whilst the accounts remains in dispute, you are not permitted to ask for any payment, nor am

I obliged to offer any payment to you. Furthermore, whilst the dispute remains, you are not

entitled to charge any interest on the account, nor make any further charges to the account.

I expect no other communication from you in respect of this matter except for confirmation of

compliance with my requests.

As always, a copy of this letter will be filed together with all your other correspondence

concerning these matters, for future reference.

 

I await your notification

 

 

 

hehehehe

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look there are quite a few threads on here regarding Catalogue debts being unenfoceable because no CCA is available. The letter you received from Robberscum Way is just a typical standard computer generated letter from this bunch. They specialise in buying debts that are unenforceable or statute barred. They next letteryou get from them will be along the lines of

 

THIS IS NOT A COURT DOCUMENT (although clearly designed into making you think it is:rolleyes: )

 

THIS DOCUMENT IS VALID EVEN IF NOT READ BY YOU (what utter bollocks)

 

Dont worry about them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly Robinson Way gave up with me after only one letter, but since the alleged debt was disputed with the OC anyway and I had reported them to TS they didn't have much choice.

 

Shame, because I planned to send them a letter headed:

 

THIS IS NOT RECIPE FOR GENTLEMENS' RELISH

 

THIS DOCUMENT IS VALID, EVEN IF YOU THINK IT IS A FISH

Link to post
Share on other sites

thank you for the reply ODC, still gonna send the above letter, and proof of postage of course (free) haha , o i hope they send the next letter then, i'll have some fun with that one haha.
Send them the letter. They will buckle like they always do when you call their bluff.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

update, today,for both alleged debts, (remember no credit agreements,and i have the proof off them), i recived identical letters saying the following:

 

we are authorised by our client to recover the full amount due,, this is a formal notice of intended court action.we will take action unless YOU PAY TO US THE FULL AMOUNT YOU OWE WIHTIN 7 DAYS OF THE DATE OF THIS LETTER.

if court action is taken and a court conciders your failure to pay to be due to your refusal or neglect to pay, an order for repayment may be made.

 

 

NO CREDIT AGREEMENT, so isnt it unlawful to be still asking me for money, i thought no credit agreement, this would render it still in dispute.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent this when received a similar letter from La Redoutes Solicitors, use or amend as you wish, should only go if they are over the 44 days and you know they don't have a CCAA:-

 

Mrs The Hawk

The Nest

 

X X 2007

 

 

F W Oakes BA (Law) Solictor

16 Canal Road

Bradford

BD99 4XB

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Re: Mrs The Hawk - Account Number: XXX

 

Your Client : La Redoute

 

I refer to your letter of XX/XX/2007, which was received today.

 

Frankly, I am surprised of the need to remind a firm of solicitors about the terms and conditions surrounding my Consumer Credit Agreement request (Consumer Credit Act, 1974); sent and acknowledged by La Redoute on XX/XX/2007. I can only assume therefore that they failed to inform you.

 

Should your client now persist with threats of legal action as stated in your letter, I will welcome the opportunity for a judge to look at several offences committed by La Redoute under The Consumer Credit Act, 1974, as well as your client’s non-compliance with and total disregard for the law on this occasion.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Mrs The Hawk

 

 

I have heard nothing since and that was 2 months ago, good luck !!

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent this when received a similar letter from La Redoutes Solicitors, use or amend as you wish, should only go if they are over the 44 days and you know they don't have a CCAA:-

 

Mrs The Hawk

The Nest

 

X X 2007

 

 

F W Oakes BA (Law) Solictor

16 Canal Road

Bradford

BD99 4XB

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Re: Mrs The Hawk - Account Number: XXX

 

Your Client : La Redoute

 

I refer to your letter of XX/XX/2007, which was received today.

 

Frankly, I am surprised of the need to remind a firm of solicitors about the terms and conditions surrounding my Consumer Credit Agreement request (Consumer Credit Act, 1974); sent and acknowledged by La Redoute on XX/XX/2007. I can only assume therefore that they failed to inform you.

 

Should your client now persist with threats of legal action as stated in your letter, I will welcome the opportunity for a judge to look at several offences committed by La Redoute under The Consumer Credit Act, 1974, as well as your client’s non-compliance with and total disregard for the law on this occasion.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Mrs The Hawk

 

 

I have heard nothing since and that was 2 months ago, good luck !!

Perfect response

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

hehehe.

Received a letter this morning from them,a copy of a letter stating the same as wrote in first post, though the amount is 0.00p So do you think they are hoping i didnt realise they had put zero pence owed,in the hope i'd write again,making a mistake? defo glad i found this site, and realised to keep all letters instead of them finding their way to the bin.

Many many hours reading the threads, still aint in no way near an expert,but this site has truly given me and my partner a whole lot of restful nights instead of sleepless ones.

THANK YOU TO EVERYONE ON THIS SITE, EVEN I HAVE TRIED TO HELP FRIENDS ETC,AND VOICED 'LIMITED' OPINIONS ON HERE,REFERRING OTHER PEOPLE TO MAYBE A THREAD THAT WOULD HELP AND I GUESS THATS THE REASON FOR THIS SITE.......PEOPLE HELPING PEOPLE.........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as you NEVER TALK TO THEM and keep everything in writing they will realise they have no case (eventually as they are not the sharpest knives in the drawer). They will pester and annoy you for a while just like a tramp in the street but when they see they are not getting any money from you they will go and hassle someone else

  • Haha 1

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

update,,,,, the 'debts' has been sold.

On behalf of upstart limited, for whom we act as legal agents, we hereby give notice that the aformentioned debt due by you was legally purchased by our client on the 21st december 2007.

 

this is from scotcall.saying at the top of letter formally robinson way & co originally jd williams

 

 

 

 

so, illegally sold now, i still have all the letters from rob & way, most importantly the letters stating no credit agreement.

could that 'vexitous' thingy be any use here????

any ideas for a letter?

 

also states this debt will be registered with all the credit reference agencies until satisfied.

ok, it already is there, from rob & way 2005, so does this mean rob & ways will disappear, and scotcall will replace it from dec 2007, therefore restarting the 6 years?

Link to post
Share on other sites

i'll have a look about, cb prob already has it written on one of my other threads,lol.

this is the first i've had actually been sold on.

my mac hall was 'past to meritforce, but i already knew it was their 'sister' company, so had the ammo to see them off.

this is the one being a thorn in my side, together with crap 1 passing to another debt collector/solicitor.

ALL whist in dispute..............

Link to post
Share on other sites

they had NO original or copy.

they sent cheques back with a complients slip stating no agreements.

therefore all letters since then up to sept, stated no agreements but you still owe the money.

so, up until today, i heard nothing. then find out its been sold on.

i agree with what you are saying, about it rolls down hill, but it still rolls. The further downhill it goes the less right they have to put a default on.

the default doesnt bother me as such as i have no intention of aplying for debt,loans car etc, so i'll sort out the cra when i get the 'debts' sorted out to say yeah, we have no agreements , you owe nothing, once i have got that done, than i'll sort out the default side of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...