Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Absolutely for the agreement they are referring to.... puts them on notice that this is going to be a uphill fight.   Andy 
    • Particular's of claim for reference only 1. the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account (16 digits) 2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. 3. The debt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  4. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Suggested defence 1. The Defendant contends the particulars of the claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.3 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. 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 of October 2017. It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant 7.1 PAPDC. 3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification. 4. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a default notice pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. 5. Paragraph 3 is denied. i am unaware of any legal assignment or notice of assignment. A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales solicitors when acknowledgement of receipt of CPR request was received, but this was not the original.   6. Paragraph 4 is denied. Neither the original creditor or the assignee have served notice pursuant to sec86c of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 Notice of Sums in Arrears and therefore prevented from charging interest on debt regulated by the CCA1974. 7. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974. The claimant has acknowledged receipt of request but has failed to comply. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of balance or Default Notice requested by CPR 31.14 8. It is therefore denied with regards to defendant owing any monies to the claimant. therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to:  a.  Show how the defendant has entered into an agreement with HSBC. b.  Show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default notice pursuant to section 87 (1) CCA 1974. c.  Show and quantify how the defendant has reached the amount claimed for. d.  Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity  to issue a claim. 8.  As per civil procedure rule 16.5 (4) it is expected claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 9.  Until such time the claimant can comply to a section 78 request he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement 10. 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.     .
    • OK, well rereading the court orders from March, in the cold light of day rather than when knackered late at night, it is quite clear that on 25 June there will only be a preliminary hearing about Laura representing her son.  Nothing more. It's lazy DCBL who haven't read things properly and have stupidly sent their Witness Statement early. Laura & I had already been working on a WS, and here it is.  It needs tweaking now after reading the rubbish that DCBL sent and after all of LFI's comments.  But the "meat" is there. Defendant's WS - version 1.pdf
    • Morning, I purchased a car from Big Motoring World on 10th December 2023 for £14899.00. On the 15th December I had a problem with the auto start stop function of the car in which the car would stop in the middle of the road with a stop start error message. I called the big assist and the car was booked in for February. The BMW was with them for a week and it came back with the auto stop start feature all fine and all error codes cleared on the report from big motoring world. within 5 days I had the same issue. Warning light coming on and the car stopping. I called big assist again and the car was again booked in for an other repair in May. Car was taken back in may, they had the car for a week and returned with the report saying no issue with the auto stop start feature and blamed my driving. Within 5 days of having the car back it broke down again. This time undrivable. I had the rac pick my car up and take to Stephen James BMW for a full diagnostic. The diagnostic came back with the car needing a new fuel system as magnetic swarf was found.  I have sent big motoring world a letter stating all the issues and that under the consumer rights act 2015 I have asked for a replacement vehicle. all reports from Stephen James BMW have been sent over to big motoring world. Big motoring world have come back and said they will respond to my complaint within 14 days for the date of my complaint letter. I am not feeling confident on the response from them, what are my next steps?   Thanks in advance. 
    • That is really good is that a mistake last off "driver doesn't have a licence" I assume that should be keeper? The Court requested me to send the Court and applicant proof of my sons disability from their GP this clearly shows he has Severe Mental Impairement, he is also illiterate.  I naively assumed once the applicant received this that they would drop the claim.  It offends me that Bank has asked the Judge to throw the case out at the preliminary hearing and to make us pay up.
  • Recommended Topics

  • 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
  • Recommended Topics

nat west-Intrum Justia-Fredrickson - Please Help


moneydragon
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5419 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

  • Replies 94
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Did u send rorys letter to them?

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

right well was it the letter on page 2 reminding them of the money laundering rules?

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Un usual companys normally tumble at that point.

 

Anyway maybe u should do as the letter threatens and report them to the relivant authorities as mentioned in the letter

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Un usual companys normally tumble at that point.

 

Anyway maybe u should do as the letter threatens and report them to the relivant authorities as mentioned in the letter

 

Godmother

 

Thanks for your reply

 

Would that mean that I will need to take them to court?

 

:(md

Edited by moneydragon
Link to post
Share on other sites

DEtails of these procedures we contained in the credit agreement/application form you would of signed (the form that they can't find)
I'd like them to use this bit of reasoning in a court and see how the judge takes it. It's no good stating you would have signed something, they need to show you did sign something. It is entirely possible that there was an admin error and your account was authorised without a signature - we've all seen threads where there has been no debtor signature on the form.

 

I had a very similar statement from BOS for OH's account. This was part of my reply.

 

To state ‘there was a properly executed signed agreement’ and ‘I can confirm that the copy of the agreement was not illegible at the time of signing’ is bordering on ridiculous. Unless you provide me with the legible, signed copy of the agreement you allege you hold (sorry, that you allege you held), complete with all prescribed terms, you will be well aware that you have no power to enforce this account.

 

As a matter of interest, are you able to back up your claims by proving that you were indeed working for the Bank of Scotland, in the department where applications were received, in 1996? Are you further able to prove that you were witness to me signing a legible agreement including all prescribed terms? If not, then I have to ask how you can make such sweeping statements.

... As you do not have a valid, signed, legible, enforceable agreement, there is not now, nor can have ever been any contract between your company and myself. Therefore you do not now, nor have ever had the right to process my data in any way, and any markers placed with credit reference agencies have as such been placed unlawfully.

Now to be fair they have still written back saying they have the right to process, which I am asking them to fully explain given the above, but it has upset them in terms of threatening OH. Their letters previously were very much that they had an enforceable agreement and would chase it to the end, now they are just saying that just because it is unenforceable does not mean they can't chase.

 

My point is though, if you pull Interim up on how exactly they know there was a signed agreement, they won't be able to answer. They would need to have someone in the office taking in the signed documents, who was there when your account opened and can swear that they saw yours there. Seeing as the account was not even with them this will not be a question they can answer, and it may just be enough - combined with repeating the money laundering angle which they appear to have ignored - to make them pass it on to someone with two brain cells who will realise the futility of them carrying on.

 

I have no experience of the court process whatsoever, and the thought frightens me immensely, but I think I would be right in saying that if you put the above into a letter, outlining how impossible it is for them to back up their statements in a court, and give them x amount of time to answer before you'll start proceedings, it may put a fire up their respective bums? Of course I guess this would mean you'd have to be willing to go the whole way with it to remove the markers if they still don't budge.

 

I'm sure other far more knowledgeable people will be able to tell you if the above is viable or not:)

 

Lexis:)

Time flies like an arrow...

Fruit flies like a banana.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply lexus200 - very helpful and gave me more confidence to fight on I was getting to the stage perhaps it was time to admit defeat.

 

As I opened this account in 1979 anyone working there then will either be retired of or even 6 feet under by now.

 

I dont recal signing an agreement only completing an application form.

 

If you dont mind I will use your letter as part of my reply.

 

md:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would appreciate someone looking over this as to as my reply to thread 27

 

I note your comments however, to state that We consider that our processing of your personal data is fair, lawful and warranted in the circumstances. Details of these procedures we contained in the credit agreement/application form you would of signed when you applied for the card”.

 

Unless you provide me with the legible, signed copy of the agreement you allege you hold (sorry, that you allege you held), complete with all prescribed terms, you will be well aware that you have no power to enforce this account.

 

As a matter of interest, are you able to back up your claims by proving that you were indeed working for the Nat West Bank, in the department where applications were received, in 1979? Are you further able to prove that you were witness to me signing a legible agreement including all prescribed terms? If not, then I have to ask how you can make such sweeping statements.

 

As you do not have a valid, signed, legible, enforceable agreement, there is not now, nor can have ever been any contract between your company and myself. Therefore you do not now, nor have ever had the right to process my data in any way, and any markers placed with credit reference agencies have as such been placed unlawfully.

 

I should not have to remind you that without evidence of me signing or agreeing to any data protection terms and conditions you are unable to retain your data on file nor share it with outside agencies and that any attempt to do so will be in breach of the Data Protection Act

 

By attempting to process my data clearly shows that Nat West has failed in its obligations to comply with the various anti money laundering regulations in not keeping such documents. This, as I’m sure you are aware, is a very serious offence will have no option but to report this matter to The Financial Crime Branch of HM Treasury and any other authorities as I see fit.

 

Thankyou for looking- md

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just subscribing to this excellent thread following an early reply from Money dragon. Thanks. I am going through the same process with NW. Have just sent them Rory's letter today. Here's hoping!!!:)

My opinions are not expressed as an agent or representative of The Consumer Action Group. My advice is given freely but please remember to always seek professional advice from a qualified legal adviser before acting. If I have helped you please feel free to click on the black star below.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Thanks for your reply

 

Would that mean that I will need to take them to court?

Reporting them to the OFT etc does not require any court action on your behalf.

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

Subbing and sending Rory's letter to NW.

Halifax Current Account £1583 WON 2007:)

Egg Credit Card £1822 WON 2008:)

BarclayCard £982 WON 2008:)

Natwest Current Account £2133 WON 2006:)

IF Accounts £1728 WON 2007:)[/size]

 

MBNA CCA request sent 10.2.09

BarclayCard CCA request 10.2.09

Barclays Bank SAR 16.2.09[/size]

 

Let the games continue...:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Please help

 

I have received the following from Nat West today and I urgently need help on what to do:

 

It has come to our attention that we advised you incorrectly reagrding the status of your account. We overlooked the fact that your account was opened in 1980 and S78 was brought into force on 19.5.1985. Schedule 3 of the 1974 act states that s.78 applies to an agreement made before 19.5.1985 where the agreement would have been regulated agreement if made on that day.

 

As such under regulation 9 of the copy documents regulations specifies that in the case of an agreement made before 19.5.1985 it is sufficient to supply a copy of the current terms - that acts as a true copy. As we have supplied these documents to you, we have now fully complied with the request which means the agreement is enforceable. You should continue/or now make payments to the account to avoid any further action being taken.

 

This is a new one!!:confused:

Edited by moneydragon
Link to post
Share on other sites

yep i have never heard that b4. Erm maybe PMing 42man might help. REMEMBER to link ur thread.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yep i hope he will as i would be interested to see what he has to say re the letter.

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The regulations on supplying copy documents ((Consumer Credit (cancellation notices and copies of documents) regulations 1983/1985) state that for an agreemement prior to 1985 the creditor only needs to provide a copy of current terms & conditions if they no longer can provide a true copy of the original.With the above in mind I would summise that they no longer have the original and are therefore digging their heals in rather than admit the fact.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm really not sure to be honest, I think i've only ever seen a couple of cases of 'pre 85' agreements.....have they sent any copies of your 'application' ?

Thanks for your reply 42man, no they haven't sent me a copy of my application they only say that by supplying me with a copy of the current terms is sufficent and that I should now make payments.

 

md:(

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...