Allied International Credit

[steven4064]

I think that CAR are beiung presumptious - Practice Direction 16 is quite clear - why do they think it doesn't apply to them?

 

You should also look at the Civil Evidence Act 1995 as copies of docuents are hearsay evience - see s2

2 Notice of proposal to adduce hearsay evidence

 

(1) A party proposing to adduce hearsay evidence in civil proceedings shall, subject to the following provisions of this section, give to the other party or parties to the proceedings—

(a) such notice (if any) of that fact, and

(b) on request, such particulars of or relating to the evidence, as is reasonable and practicable in the circumstances for the purpose of enabling him or them to deal with any matters arising from its being hearsay.

and, in any case, s8 says

8 Proof of statements contained in documents

 

 

(1) Where a statement contained in a document is admissible as evidence in civil proceedings, it may be proved—

(a) by the production of that document, or

(b) whether or not that document is still in existence, by the production of a copy of that document or of the material part of it, authenticated in such manner as the court may approve.

(2) It is immaterial for this purpose how many removes there are between a copy and the original.

[speedtrip]

hmmmm interesting and helpful information whihc puts a different slant on things.

 

ARe there examples of when this approach being used successfully?

 

Do you think it would help to write to lloyds pointing this out to them and that I expect to reply up them producing the original document, ideally at a pre trial hearing

[steven4064]

You could try

[speedtrip]

Looking as the following regarding "hearsay evidence" .i.e. a document purported to be a a copy of the original then this may be admissable if they can show due diligence in order to give it sufficient weight, i.e document control procedures that satisfy the court.

 

I wonder if I should write to them with my list saying, I assume you intend to comply with S2 to help me prepare my defence, or should I keep quiet.

Admissibility of hearsay evidence

 

1 Admissibility of hearsay evidence

 

(1) In civil proceedings evidence shall not be excluded on the ground that it is hearsay.

(2) In this Act—

(a) “hearsay” means a statement made otherwise than by a person while giving oral evidence in the proceedings which is tendered as evidence of the matters stated; and

(b) references to hearsay include hearsay of whatever degree.

(3) Nothing in this Act affects the admissibility of evidence admissible apart from this section.

(4) The provisions of sections 2 to 6 (safeguards and supplementary provisions relating to hearsay evidence) do not apply in relation to hearsay evidence admissible apart from this section, notwithstanding that it may also be admissible by virtue of this section.

Safeguards in relation to hearsay evidence

 

2 Notice of proposal to adduce hearsay evidence

 

(1) A party proposing to adduce hearsay evidence in civil proceedings shall, subject to the following provisions of this section, give to the other party or parties to the proceedings—

(a) such notice (if any) of that fact, and

(b) on request, such particulars of or relating to the evidence,

as is reasonable and practicable in the circumstances for the purpose of enabling him or them to deal with any matters arising from its being hearsay.

(2) Provision may be made by rules of court—

(a) specifying classes of proceedings or evidence in relation to which subsection (1) does not apply, and

(b) as to the manner in which (including the time within which) the duties imposed by that subsection are to be complied with in the cases where it does apply.

(3) Subsection (1) may also be excluded by agreement of the parties; and compliance with the duty to give notice may in any case be waived by the person to whom notice is required to be given.

(4) A failure to comply with subsection (1), or with rules under subsection (2)(b), does not affect the admissibility of the evidence but may be taken into account by the court—

(a) in considering the exercise of its powers with respect to the course of proceedings and costs, and

(b) as a matter adversely affecting the weight to be given to the evidence in accordance with section 4.

3 Power to call witness for cross-examination on hearsay statement

 

Rules of court may provide that where a party to civil proceedings adduces hearsay evidence of a statement made by a person and does not call that person as a witness, any other party to the proceedings may, with the leave of the court, call that person as a witness and cross-examine him on the statement as if he had been called by the first-mentioned party and as if the hearsay statement were his evidence in chief.

4 Considerations relevant to weighing of hearsay evidence

 

(1) In estimating the weight (if any) to be given to hearsay evidence in civil proceedings the court shall have regard to any circumstances from which any inference can reasonably be drawn as to the reliability or otherwise of the evidence.

(2) Regard may be had, in particular, to the following—

(a) whether it would have been reasonable and practicable for the party by whom the evidence was adduced to have produced the maker of the original statement as a witness;

(b) whether the original statement was made contemporaneously with the occurrence or existence of the matters stated;

© whether the evidence involves multiple hearsay;

(d) whether any person involved had any motive to conceal or misrepresent matters;

(e) whether the original statement was an edited account, or was made in collaboration with another or for a particular purpose;

(f) whether the circumstances in which the evidence is adduced as hearsay are such as to suggest an attempt to prevent proper evaluation of its weight.

[speedtrip]

this is the snotty letter from sols following my request to strike out as they were not complying with court directions. This letter enclosed the alleged copy credit card agreement posted above.

 

[steven4064]

You need to be clear:

 

1. the agreement posted earlier may or may not be enforceable - that depends on two things: are the two pages the front and back of the same document? can you actually read it? If they cannot demonstrate that the two pages are the same document then it is not enforceable by virtue of s127(3) of the CCA 1974. If you can't read it, then it is not enforceable and it doesn't comply with s78(1) by virtue of regulation 2 in the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983

 

2. CPR Practice Dirrection 16 para 7.3 says an original of the agreement must be produced in court

 

3. For any other documents, the Civil Evidence Act 1995 applies

[car2403]

this is the snotty letter from sols following my request to strike out as they were not complying with court directions. This letter enclosed the alleged copy credit card agreement posted above.

 

 

Don't you just love those letters - it's always "we" instead of "I" and they use a dubious signature, then sign themselves off as being the Company name.

 

Makes me think someone doesn't like putting their name to something...

[palomino]

That is the correct way for solicitors to sign letters.

Each person signs the firm's name, not their own, as it is the firm that is acting not the person (so to speak).

It is nothing to do with responsibility - unless you view it as making all partners in the firm responsible for the actions of each of them.

[palomino]

deleted

Edited August 8, 2008 by palomino
somehow posted twice

[car2403]

That is the correct way for solicitors to sign letters.

Each person signs the firm's name, not their own, as it is the firm that is acting not the person (so to speak).

It is nothing to do with responsibility - unless you view it as making all partners in the firm responsible for the actions of each of them.

 

Oh yes, I'm aware of that, but I meant it's just a good option to hide behind and not take any responsibility, from a customer service point of view at least.

 

I realise that whatever is said is documented and comes from the company acting...

[speedtrip]

i have just noticed that the account quoted on the poc is different to that on the alleged credit card agreement.

 

i know why this but can i use this in my favour in court?

[speedtrip]

looking at the agreement/application the copy and its border are smaller than the a4 sheet is has been copied onto

 

is this normal with scanned/fiche copies?

 

makes me doubt is legal status

[2Grumpy]

i have just noticed that the account quoted on the poc is different to that on the alleged credit card agreement.

 

i know why this but can i use this in my favour in court?

 

Keep it up your sleeve. Save it in case things are going badly - at the last minute you could ask how the poc relates to the credit agreement. I'm sure they would have to be able to prove it was the same account & that you didn't have two accounts.

[speedtrip]

Given I issued an Subject Access Request (requesting copies of all contracts of the DCA) who in turn passed this onto the OC who responded in full without the Credit Card Agreement. After all they had already told me they didnt have it in previous letter.

 

Given they are supposed to provide copies of all relevant records and i specifically asked for this does this mean they contanvened DPA 1988.

 

After all DPA 1988 does say somewhere they have to keep records for 6 years plus current after account closed. My account was still active as they were trying to collect the alleged debt.

 

If they were unable to provide copy at the time, how can they 2 months later supply it. They have either contranvened DPA as this is not a true record of my account or fabricated the agreement.

 

How could i use this in my defence?

[car2403]

I don't think you can, ST. As they have, eventually, complied with the request, they are unlikely to have breached the DPA as a result. You may be entitled to damage under the Act, but you'd have to show what the damage was and how you've suffered - I can't see how you can do that, personally.

 

Your best form of attack now is to concentrate on the enforceability, or otherwise, of the agreements themselves, as a Judge is unlikely to really consider any argument regarding the timing of the response, IMHO.

[tendogs]

subscribing

[speedtrip]

Thanks CAR,

 

Just hoping there might be something else out there.

 

I think my best approach is to request of the court a hearing with a view to seeing the original document they intend to reply upon in court.

 

At the moment the PS do not look in my favour but neither am i convinced by the T&C.

 

You probably cannot see from the copy i have posted but on my copy which is double sided there is a border/shadow all around the page, ie white space and black border but the border is about 8mm inside the page all the way round and it just does not look right. It may be a microfiche copy and do not like the idea of walking into a FT court relying on it being accepted as a dodgy copy.

 

Failing the PS not being in my favour, I will have to go down the route of requesting sight of the original and hope the judge will see it my way.

 

Regards,

[speedtrip]

Re Credit Card and Post 219/220

 

I sent list for standard disclosure by special delivery and Royal Mail track and track confirmed delivered. (BTW I usually am able to get digital signatures but not this time)

 

However, I have heard nothing from claimant so again they failed to follow directions laid down by the court. Last time I provided special draft directions suggesting case be thrown out as they had not complied which irritated the hell of the claimant (see snotty letter is earlier post).

 

Given I asked for disclosure under CPR previously and in post 232 it seems from their letter they are being obstructive in not providing what they intend to reply upon in court, or are they suggesting it is the statements and "copy credit card agreement" that is their evidence?

 

Can I/should I write to the court and try again as the list will be 5 days overdue today and as you will see from post 219 this will impact on the 20th August deadline imposed by the court. What is the point of having directions and deadlines if they do not comply?

 

Anyone have a suggestion for a letter?

Edited August 17, 2008 by speedtrip

[car2403]

What did the order say? Was it an "unless" order, in which case just ask the Court Manager to follow the order and strike the claim out.

[speedtrip]

thanks car, can you or someone else have a look at post 219 and the allocation to fastrack letter from court, which appears to list directions. I have complied with list for 13/8 but nothing back from claimant.

 

Given this, cars note above and the notes in the footer of the letter I think there is latitude for me to make application to strike out for non compliance.

 

Given the deadline for inspection is 20/8 it is impossible for me to meet this so i will compile letter for court tonight to run past you all.

 

Cheers

 

ST

[car2403]

That isn't an unless order, though, so you're unlikely to get a strike out at this stage - what you should be doing now is, though, writing to the court telling them they've not complied with court orders and seeking a strike out (which you won't get) or new directions to be issued as an unless order. This way, if they don't comply again, the case can be struck out.

 

Usually, this will mean they will bend over backwards to comply with an unless order, so it really just means a delay in proceedings.

 

I don't think it needs a formal application, IMHO, but the Court does need to know directions haven't been complied with at this stage.

[speedtrip]

Credit Card - awaiting response from court re strike out due to non complinace for list

 

O/D - will start on application to strike out this weekend in respect pre hearing coming up .... looking for lots on input thus the heads up

[jacobhenry1]

Hi - Having read over your various threads I wonder if you could give me any advise?

 

I owe Lloyds around 12k - 8k loan and 4k overdraft.

I contested 3200 charges against odraft which is on hold.

I also tried consistently to take off the insurance on my loan which was equivalent to 1k. They constantly fobbed me off though.

Had few letters from Allied International and phone calls. Ignored all but last letter said if payment was reached within the next 2 weeks they would settle for 50%, ie 6k.

Now i can get these funds and am happy enough to pay this but reading about this company makes me wonder whether i should. I have had nothing from lloyds saying that Allied were taking on this debt.

What do you think? Is it worth the time and stress off battling with them or should i just pay them off.

Any advice would be more than welcome.

Thanks.

[citizenB]

Hi - Having read over your various threads I wonder if you could give me any advise?

 

I owe Lloyds around 12k - 8k loan and 4k overdraft.

I contested 3200 charges against odraft which is on hold.

I also tried consistently to take off the insurance on my loan which was equivalent to 1k. They constantly fobbed me off though.

Had few letters from Allied International and phone calls. Ignored all but last letter said if payment was reached within the next 2 weeks they would settle for 50%, ie 6k.

Now i can get these funds and am happy enough to pay this but reading about this company makes me wonder whether i should. I have had nothing from lloyds saying that Allied were taking on this debt.

What do you think? Is it worth the time and stress off battling with them or should i just pay them off.

Any advice would be more than welcome.

Thanks.

 

Jacobhenry, Welcome to CAG. it might be a good idea to start a thread of your own rather than tag on to an existing one. That way any replies will be tailored to your needs. If you made attempts to cancel the PPI and LTSB didnt do this then you might be able to make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman.

[car2403]

Jacobhenry, Welcome to CAG. it might be a good idea to start a thread of your own rather than tag on to an existing one. That way any replies will be tailored to your needs. If you made attempts to cancel the PPI and LTSB didnt do this then you might be able to make a complaint to the Financial Ombudsman.

 

Here's how;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/welcome-consumer-forums/107001-how-do-i-dummies.html