Ok....Here's how things work...Please don't think I'm insulting your intelligence by the way, I'm just going to explain things in simple detail, hoping I'm making myself understandable. DCA's buy a portfolio of debts. These portfolios contain somehwere between 200 and 2000 'debts'. Said DCA's pay anything from 2p and 12p in the pound for the whole portfolio amount. The price is dependant on the amount of 'white data' contained with the debts. 'White data' is basically debtors details..phone numbers..current addresses etc. Depending on the DCA, they will (or should) send you a 'hello' letter, introducing themselves and explaining that they are now 'owners' of the debts. Thereafter, certain DCA's (Cabot is a great example) like to sit on these debts, allowing them to accrue interest, for anything up to four years, then they come chasing. They'll threaten all sorts, but in a very high percentage, they are just empty threats. Some DCA's get to work straight away trying to recoup the monies owed. The first thing to do with these DCA's is (as you know) send them a CCA request and wait and see what they come back with. If they haven't sent you the Original (or a readable copy of) Agreement within 14 days, the debt is officially in dispute and you are perfectly within your rights to withold any further payments until the original agreement (with all the correct terms and conditions) turns up. If, as has happened in many cases, there is no OA to speak of, then no further payments need be made until the debt becomes statute barred and falls off of your Credit Files. Even without and OA the debt, of course, is still owed but there's nothing a DCA can do to enforce it. If a legitimate OA is produced then the next step is to negotiate a Full and Final payment with the DCA. It's of my opinion that a DCA would usually accept 40% of the debt as F & F, but your negotiations should start at about 20%, barter your way up to no more than 40%. However, if you do negotiate a settlement figure, you must (before you pay) insist the DCA writes to you and states that the agreed amount is in F & F settlement of the account, make them assure you they will never chase you for the remainder of the account, nor will they sell the remainder on to another DCA. Finally, get them to agree to wipe your credit file (that's completely wipe it and not just mark it as settled) in respect of the debt. If the DCA tries to play hardball, then you will need to advise them that if that's the case ( they not accepting your F&F offer) then you will have to go down the road of reclaiming all the unlawful charges on the account. DCA's will insist this s done with the original lender, however me and many many others believe ths can be done with the DCA. This is a bridge you can cross as and when, so don't worry about it for now. In respect of Cabot themselves...Farming a debt out to another DCA is usual practice for them. It's very easy to get Cabot's collection boys off the trail, just write to them and tell them the debt's in dispute and it's against OFT guidelines for them (in your case, Link) to be chasing the debt and you'll be reporting them (Link) for doing so. Link, or whoever, will very quickly give the debt back to Cabot. There are many little 'tricks of the trade' to learn with dealing with DCA's, all of which can be picked up from here. And just to finish; My situation is thus (and I'll be very brief).... Sent CCA's to eight different DCA's regarding 10 different debts...I have had four of those debts written off (no OA)...and I am stil awaiting for 6 others, and have been doing so for over 2 years...I haven't paid a penny to any one of them and the debts total about £30k. They all become statute barred quite soon. There is hope and you will get all the help you need from people on here...some more sympathetic than others ;-) The thing is not to worry, DCA's have no powers and are very reluctant to go to court, and even then I know of many cases where they have lost (Cabot in particular). Don't concern yourself with ethics...after all, Ken Maynard (head of Cabot) recently bought himself a £4 million mansion...you think he cares about ethics??...nuff said Keep us posted and ask any questions you have.

Charging Orders A Charging Order is an order which secures a money judgment against the judgment debtor’s property or interest in a property. Creditors usually apply for Charging Orders as they are a reasonably easy method of ensuring the likelihood of them receiving their money back at some point in the future. Some creditors have a policy of applying for Charging Orders as a matter of course, some will apply as the debtor’s debt is large or their total indebtedness is high. Some will try the Charging Order route if they are offered a nominal instalment amount by the debtor, or that it will take many years to clear the debt. Charging Orders have many advantages for the creditor, for a start they can turn an unsecured debt into a secured one, this could put extra pressure on the debtor to treat the debt with a preference. Statutory interest will run on the order, unless it is below £5,000 or regulated by The Consumer Credit Act. Some creditors may argue that a Charging Order will secure contractual interest. There is no time limit to apply for an order and the process can start in the creditor’s chosen county court. The order would never be included within an Individual Voluntary Agreement, it is a debt which does not prove in a bankruptcy although the creditor could waive the Charging Order and apply to make the debtor bankrupt. I must stress that on some occasions securing a charge against a property isn’t necessarily a bad thing at all, providing conditions are attached to it. If a debtor is unable to make any payments against a debt they may wish to consider offering the creditor a voluntary charge. The same might apply if the debtor is terminally ill or a single house owner with no heirs. The great thing with a voluntary charge is that it might be easy to ensure conditions are attached to the charge, these conditions could be that the creditor is not allowed to request an order for sale and also that all interest is frozen when the charge is applied. The Charging Order Process The process follows CPR 73.3: Application for a Charging Order. 1.The creditor successfully obtains a County Court Judgment (CCJ) 2.There is no instalment order granted / The debtor defaults on the instalment order 3.The creditor applies for the Interim Charging Order (no hearing) [n379] 4.Interim Charging Order made [n86] 5.Hearing for the Final Charging Order (Can be transferred to debtor’s local court) 6.Interim Order discharged or Final Charging Order Granted [n87] The creditor could then start the process for an Order for Sale, this is very rare as usually the creditor is happy to sit on the Charging Order. If the creditor wishes to apply for an Order for Sale, there would be another hearing. When can a creditor apply for a Charging Order? First and foremost, a creditor would have had to have obtained a money judgment against the debtor. If the judgment is ‘forthwith’, the demand is for immediate payment of the debt. In theory, the debt would become due and payable at once – a creditor could apply for the Charging Order as soon as it was granted. Section 1: The Charging Orders Act 1979: Where, under a judgment or order of the High Court or a county court, a person (the “debtor”) is required to pay a sum of money to another person (the “creditor”) then, for the purpose of enforcing that judgment or order, the appropriate court may make an order in accordance with the provisions of this Act imposing on any such property of the debtor as may be specified in the order a charge for securing the payment of any money due or to become due under the judgment or order. If there is an instalment order in place, a creditor would not be able to apply for a Charging Order. Section 86(1) The County Courts Act 1984: Where the court has made an order for payment of any sum of money by instalments, execution on the order shall not be issued until after default in payment of some instalment according to the order. This was further considered in the case of Mercantile Credit V Ellis in The Court of Appeal 1987. It was found that the wording of the Charging Orders Act states quite clearly that no further action could be taken without a default in payment. It should be noted, however, that in the case of Ropaigealach V Allied Irish Bank CA Nov 2001 where an instalment order is made AFTER an interim charging order has been made, a court has the jurisdiction to make a Charging Order final. There are various tactics which a creditor will use to try and obtain the Interim Order, they will try their best not to allow the court grant an instalment order on a CCJ. If a debtor wishes to admit the claim and request instalments, the creditor may argue the instalments are unacceptable and that a Charging Order is more appropriate. A creditor might also seek a re-determination if a court accepts a debtor’s offer of instalments. Some creditors have even been known to ask a district judge to consider a Time Order to change the judgment to forthwith. How to try and stop the Interim Charging Order being applied for Charging orders are notoriously difficult to stop, District Judges are usually reluctant to turn down the creditor’s application. Creditors do not usually opponse another creditor’s application either. The Charging Order process isn’t automatically transferred to the debtor’s local court, the would have to request this (possibly at a cost). When a County Court claim form is received and a debtor wishes to make an admission it is imperitive that a reasonable offer of payment is made. If it is accepted then ensure that the payment is made on time each month. Never offer a nil payment. It is important to ensure that the N9A admission form is sent within time to the correct address on the claim form. It may be worth considering sending the form recorded delivery, send a copy to both the creditor and the court. What if you have been served with an Interim Charging Order The first thing to do is to check to see whether the correct process has been followed. Always check to ensure that the creditor is actually chasing the right person! At this point we will assume that any potential challenge to the legality of the Judgment has been carried out (CCA request, Challenging default notices etc). It is worth checking to ensure that the judgment has been entered correctly, did the N30 form outline the determination process correctly? If it didn’t you could consider a set aside. It is worth checking the day the Interim order was applied for to see if the CCJ was actually in default on that day. If an application to vary the terms of the CCJ has been sent to the court prior to the Interim Order request ensure that the court considers the variation before considering the Interim Order. The creditor must send a copy of the Interim Charging Order and Affidavit to all those with a legal and/or beneficial interest in the property, for example the mortgage lender. If this doesn’t occur the hearing will be adjourned. Objections to The Final Charging Order It might be worth seeing if any of your other creditors are willing to object to the Charging Order being made final especially if there are any who are owed significantly more than the original creditor. Alternatively you may well find that you have grounds to object to the charging order being made final. Any arguments that you wish to raise need to be filed with the court and the creditor at least 7 days prior to the Final Charging Order Hearing (CPR 73.8). If there are divorce proceedings pending, the Charging Order hearing will be adjourned pending the outcome of the ancillary proceedings. If you would like to enter into an IVA, the Interim Charging Order would be dropped as an IVA Interim Order would be made. Section 1(5) of The Charging Orders Act 1979 reads: In deciding whether to make a charging order the court shall consider all the circumstances of the case and, in particular, any evidence before it as to— (a) the personal circumstances of the debtor, and (b) whether any other creditor of the debtor would be likely to be unduly prejudiced by the making of the order Some possible arguments which could be used to oppose the Final Charging Order are: - Could there be other methods of enforcement which could be used by the court to enforce the debt? - If the total indebtedness of the judgment debtor is less than £5,000, could they have an administration order instead? - Could the creditor have offered a secured loan instead of an unsecured one? - A recent change in circumstances shows that reasonable repayments can now be made (evidence would be needed) - All the missed payments have now been paid - There is little or no equity in the property - The CCJ is very small compared to the amount of equity - If the CCJ is for a CCA regulated agreement can the court consider a Time Order instead? - Granting a Charging Order would unfairly prejudice other creditors who have accepted pro-rata payments - The debtor is about to go bankrupt or enter into an IVA, the creditor would have an unfair advantage if they were to have their debt secured. If only one owner of the property is liable for the debt: Providing there us no pending divorce proceedings, a husband/wife or any other beneficiary of the home is entitled to make representations as to all the circumstances of the case. They could try and minimise the percentage of the equity of the debtor by showing evidence of: - Contributions towards mortgage payments - Contributions towards the deposit - A declaration of trust at the time the property was purchased The Final Hearing The court has the following options - Make the Charging Order final - Discharge the Interim Order and dismiss the application - Decide any issues in dispute - Direct a trial of any such issues Prior to the hearing the Judge would have read any objections, each party will also have the chance to make oral representations at the hearing. The vast majority of Charging Order applications result in the Order being made final. One thing to seriously consider is that if the Order is made final then conditions should be attached to it, these conditions would stop any further enforcement. A popular condition is that further action should not be possible providing an instalment is kept up with. Another popular condition is that no enforcement should be possible until all the children have left home. If no conditions were made at the time of the Final Charging Order hearing, it is possible to vary the terms of the Order via an application on the N245 form. Set Asides & Variations These are dealt with under CPR 73.9 You would need to apply to the court which made the original order. Setting aside a Charging order is usually called “Discharging”, this is under s3(5) of the Charging Orders Act. The arguments for discharge must not have been made to the court previously. Sometimes a creditor may wish to discharge their own Charging Order, as an example they may wish to make a debtor bankrupt., they could still issue a statutory demand even though they have a charge in place (s269 Insolvency Act 1986). You can vary the terms of a charging order via form N245. Satisfying the Charging Order If the debt has been paid off, along with all costs, an application can be made to the court for a certificate of satisfaction, this can then be sent to the Land Registry. Interest on Charging Orders Statutory Interest Statutory interest would continue to run whether or not the order specifies it. The N86/87 forms allow ‘any interest’ to be included, this means statutory interest. This doesn’t apply to Consumer Credit Act regulated debts or Charging Orders of debts below £5,000 unless they have been transferred to the High Court for a High Court Charging Order. (The County Court (Interest on Judgment Debts) Order 1991) The judgment would carry statutory interest if it was made on or after July 1st 1991 and the judgment is for at least £5,000. If a judgment has a payment ordered to be made on a specified date or by instalments, no interest will be payable either until that date or, on the amount of any instalment until it falls due. If a judgement carries statutory interest, so will the Charging Order, even if not mentioned within the order itself. [Ezekiel v Orakpo]. S3(4) COA 1979 states that “A Charging Order shall have the like effect and be enforceable in the same courts and in the same manner as an equitable charge” Contractual Interest Many creditors are trying to argue that Charging Orders carry contractual interest after judgment even if the judgment itself doesn’t. There are plenty of arguments against this. ** New info for judgments obtained after 1st October 2008 ** I've written a blog on the subject here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/entry.php?191-Post-judgment-interest-on-CCA-regulated-debts In a nut-shell post judgment interest can no longer be applied to CCA regulated charging orders at all. - Charging orders and their effect are determined by the Charging Order Act 1979 Section 1 COA says that a Charging Order is made ‘for the purposes of enforcing that judgment or order’ and that the charge is for ‘securing the payment of any money due or to become due under a judgment or order’. Although enforcement of a Charging Order is not execution of a judgment, s1 means that the order and the judgment must be coextensive. Therefore no money can be recovered in excess of what is due or to become due under the judgment. - Section 3(4) opens with the words ‘Subject to the provisions of this ACT…’ and so unless the interest is due under the judgment or order under the Interest on County Court Judgements Order, it cannot be included in the Charging Order - The amount of interest depends on the amount of interest due on the judgment. - Some CCA regulated agreement judgements do not have an interest post-judgment clause. - Even if there is an interest post-judgement clause on a CCA regulated agreement the lender still cannot enforce these rights by levying contractual interest – unless that rate forms part of the judgment, the lender would have to bring seperated action for the interest. (Supreme Court Practice 1999 Ed. Para 42/1/24 and Re European Central Railway 1877 4 Ch.D.33 - The claimant may try to use s3(4) COA to claim that an equitable charge attracts interest on the principle sum. However, the rate of interest payable under an equitable charge depends on its terms. In the case of a CO, the judgment debt would be in essence the princinple sum. The rate payable on this sum is prescribed by statute or set out in the judgment. S3(4) wouldn’t justify applying a different rate. Orders for sale An Order for sale is the way to enforce a Charging Order, it would allows the claimant the right to take possession of the property and to sell it so that they can recover the monies within their charge. The process is applied via Part 73.10 CPR. For jointly owned property the court would also have to consider the Trust of Land and Appointment if Trustees Act 1996 (TLATA). S15 of TLATA outlines criteria which may give some protection against an Order for Sale. At the end of this piece I’ve outlined the relevant sections of law with additional relevant notes. Defending an Order for Sale Responding to a claim Under CPR 8.30 The defendant must (a) file an acknowledgment of service in the relevant practice form not more than 14 days after service of the claim form; and (b) serve the acknowledgment of service on the claimant and any other party. (2) The acknowledgment of service must state – (a) whether the defendant contests the claim; and (b) if the defendant seeks a different remedy from that set out in the claim form, what that remedy is. Transferring to the debtor’s local court There is not provision for a transfer. An application court be made under CPR Part 30 Rule 30.3(2)(b), which would give the District Judge discretion to agree to transfer the case on the grounds of fairness or convenience to the debtor. It is vital that all preparation for the hearing has been carried out, check the Affidavit to ensure that the correct details of the Charging Order have been recorded together with outstanding balances, the value of the property and all the information required under PD73.4.3 has been provided. Anyone with a legal or equitable interest in the property has a right to be present, to be represented and to be heard. If there are divorce proceedings then ensure that the solicitor involved in the divorce has been referred to interventionist action can be taken. The Hearing At the hearing the court may do one of four things: - Grant the order for sale - Adjourn the case on terms - Make a suspended order on terms - Dismiss the application If the house is jointly owned the court has the duty and the power to declare what the extent of the debtor(s) beneficial interest is under s14 of The Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TLATA). Under s15 TLATA the court should pay attention to: - Whether there is sufficient debtor equity in the property for the Charge holder to justify the sale - The intentions of the persons(s) who created the trust. The property is held in trust for all the beneficiaries by the named legal owner(s); and The purposes for which the property is held. As an example this could be to provide a home for children as long as they chose to live there or for an elderly relative etc. - The welfare of any minor who occupies or might reasonably be expected to occupy any land subject to the trust as his/her home - The interests of any secured creditor of any beneficiary CPR 73.10 is outlined here: 73.10 (1) Subject to the provisions of any enactment, the court may, upon a claim by a person who has obtained a charging order over an interest in property, order the sale of the property to enforce the charging order. (2) A claim for an order for sale under this rule should be made to the court which made the charging order, unless that court does not have jurisdiction to make an order for sale. (A claim under this rule is a proceeding for the enforcement of a charge, and section 23© of the County Courts Act 1984 provides the extent of the county court's jurisdiction to hear and determine such proceedings.) (3) The claimant must use the Part 8 procedure. (4) A copy of the charging order must be filed with the claim form. (5) The claimant's written evidence must include the information required by the relevant practice direction. Practice Direction 73 4.3 4.3 The written evidence in support of a claim under rule 73.10 must – (1) identify the charging order and the property sought to be sold; (2) state the amount in respect of which the charge was imposed and the amount due at the date of issue of the claim; (3) verify, so far as known, the debtor's title to the property charged; (4) state, so far as the claimant is able to identify– (a) the names and addresses of any other creditors who have a prior charge or other security over the property; and (b) the amount owed to each such creditor; and (5) give an estimate of the price which would be obtained on sale of the property. (6) if the claim relates to land, give details of every person who to the best of the claimant's knowledge is in possession of the property; and (7) if the claim relates to residential property – (a) state whether – (i) a land charge of Class F; or (ii) a notice under section 31(10) of the Family Law Act 1996, or under any provision of an Act which preceded that section, has been registered; and (b) if so, state – (i) on whose behalf the land charge or notice has been registered; and (ii) that the claimant will serve notice of the claim on that person. Practice Direction 73 4.4 4.4 The claimant must take all reasonable steps to obtain the information required by paragraph 4.3(4) before issuing the claim. The Trusts of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 (TLATA) TLATA only applies to jointly owned property (Wells v Pickering HC, 17th May 2002). It was determined that the considerations of s14 & s15 TLATA to protect the welfare of children do not apply to solely owned property. 14. Applications for order. (1) Any person who is a trustee of land or has an interest in property subject to a trust of land may make an application to the court for an order under this section. (2) On an application for an order under this section the court may make any such order: (a) relating to the exercise by the trustees of any of their functions (including an order relieving them of any obligation to obtain the consent of, or to consult, any person in connection with the exercise of any of their functions), or (b) declaring the nature or extent of a person’s interest in property subject to the trust, as the court thinks fit. 15. Matters relevant in determining applications. (1) The matters to which the court is to have regard in determining an application for an order under section 14 include: (a) the intentions of the person or persons (if any) who created the trust, (b) the purposes for which the property subject to the trust is held, © the welfare of any minor who occupies or might reasonably be expected to occupy any land subject to the trust as his home, and (d) the interests of any secured creditor of any beneficiary. (2) In the case of an application relating to the exercise in relation to any land of the powers conferred on the trustees by section 13, the matters to which the court is to have regard also include the circumstances and wishes of each of the beneficiaries who is (or apart from any previous exercise by the trustees of those powers would be) entitled to occupy the land under section 12. (3) In the case of any other application, other than one relating to the exercise of the power mentioned in section 6(2), the matters to which the court is to have regard also include the circumstances and wishes of any beneficiaries of full age and entitled to an interest in possession in property subject to the trust or (in case of dispute) of the majority (according to the value of their combined interests). County Courts have jurisdiction to determine an application under CPR 73.10 only if the amount owing under the charge does not exceed the County Court Limit, currently £30,000. If the amount is higher the application must be made to the Chancery Division of the High Court.

Here is the bit on the s69 interest.

Write back and ask for the missing / extra info ...

Hi I think I'd write and take them up on their offer of extra information and ask them to confirm that they do not have the CCA.

Corrie star helps write of Bank of Scotland debt Natalie Martin 11-Jun-2009 Coronation Street star Michael Le Vell, who plays Kevin Webster in the TV soap, has helped a Wetherby man to successfully get £15,000 of credit card debt written off. Le Vell, a director of claims management company Ratio Money, attended Leeds County Court with a leading QC to support a self-employed 60-year old man in his long-running dispute with Bank of Scotland. Mitchell originally had a judgement against him after delaying payments to his credit card while he waited for the bank to supply specific information. Le Vell says: “This is another victory for the consumer. “Although Bank of Scotland gave up its fight and agreed to write off his debt, amazingly they refused to pay his costs. “However, as a final blow to the lender, Judge Langan ruled that the bank needed to pay all the costs in full and said that the bank didn’t fight the case because it feared highlighting failings and opening the floodgates to further claims.” Ratio Money successfully highlighted that the man's credit card application didn’t contain the prescribed terms and conditions – and therefore didn’t comply with the Consumer Credit Act. Bank of Scotland argued that the terms and conditions had been given as a separate document when he applied for the card at the Wetherby branch of Halifax, but he denies ever receiving them. However, under the law, a credit agreement is only binding if it is a single document that has been signed by both parties and contains all the prescribed terms." AC

They morally need to sort him somewhere else for a start,dont worry someone with the knowhow will be along,Im just bumping your post up!!

I would think so as they are both contracts under seal

Hi Blondie I’ve had a look at the documents you have posted and it does seem you have been the victim of the system. So that other Caggers can appreciate the issues, I’ve set out below a time line of events as I understand them and also reposted a couple of the important documents. In my opinion, there are some major flaws in which the court has operated but the application you made isn’t the best I have seen and probably have gone against you. It shouldn’t have done and you should have been able to defend the case by just using the form you filled in. However, that didn’t happen and I think the judge has been harsh although probably acting within the rules. A decent judge should have allowed for the fact that you are a litigant in person and granted some leeway. Here’s the time line. Please correct as necessary: Pre litigation Oct 1997 – Loan for £10,000 with PPI cover from Universal Credit Ltd trading as Cavendish Finance, then part of the Lloyds TSB group. March 1998 - Universal/Cavendish become part of the Paragon Group July 1998 - Universal/Cavendish stop collecting direct debits May 2001 - Repayments start being collected by Paragon July 2007 - Unable to meet latest increased repayment. I & E budget sent. Sept 2007 - Repayments to Paragon stopped Nov 2007 - N1 claim form from Northampton County Court Legal Proceeding with Cope’s 22 Nov 07 N1 from ‘Arrow Global Receivables Manag Limited’ 6 Dec 07 Ack of defence from Northampton County Court May 2008 Cope’s request Stay to be lifted and application for SJ 25 July 08 Notice from local court. SJ application to be heard 5/9/08 31 July 08 Cope’s write to Court 2 Sept 08 Court grant judgment for £19413 on grounds no response to claim 5 Sept 08 SJ hearing vacated 28 Oct 08 Interim charging Order 16 Dec 08 Hearing for Final Charging Order – adjourned for set aside application 11 Feb 09 Set aside application dismissed. Treated as application to vary SJ Cope’s order to file response by 4 Mar 09 7 Apr 09 Case Management conference. Cope’s agree to reduction of £3161. Further response ordered from Cope’s to interest reduction claim 28 Apr 09 Response from Cope’s refusing further reduction 19 June 09 Adjourned case management conference to consider interest Attachments I have blown up parts of the agreement. I don’t think it is enforceable and invite other Caggers to comment. Tactics The hearing on 19 June is to determine the interest due on the repayment you originally made. Cope’s refuse to reduce their claim by an amount to cover the interest. I would hope that the judge finds this is surprising, since the interest is simply the amount (£3161 x the number of months x the interest rate) but given your luck with the judge, I doubt it. I suggest you explain that to the judge but to make matters simpler for the judge, you should have a figure in mind that you would accept. You might to think about £50 per month since you paid over the £3k. ( £3161 * 19.95% APR = £52.55 per month). Let the judge determine a figure. Don’t argue with him at this stage. Go onto to ask for a reduction in the amount of the monthly repayment to a level you can afford. You will need to have done an income and expenditure assessment to show if you want to pay less than £100 per month. I haven’t said anything about the original judgment. IMO, that was wrong for a whole host of reasons. But raising the issue again on 19 June will only antagonise the judge. If he asks a direct question if you owe the money, I suggest the answer is you do not consider you owe the claimant anything and that you are waiting for the Court to determine the amount of the judgment before considering your next course of action. Now, to determine what needs to be done next, you need to get access to the court file and get a copy of your original defence and the letter dated 31 July 2008. As a party, you can view the court file and take copies of documents but the court may charge a small fee. Bear in mind that the court file will be with the judge on 19 June, so you will either have to go to the court on Monday or Tuesday or wait until after the hearing. If you could then take out your personal details and those identifying the court, and post them up, I think other Caggers could advise whether it is possible to appeal or to make a proper set aside application again. CCA.pdf CCJ.pdf N1 claim form.pdf

Send them this after inserting your information. Dear Sirs, I acknowledge no debt to your company. Account in serious dispute. Re account noxxxxxxxxxx and my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 I am in receipt of your letter dated xxx2009 and note its contents. On xxxxxxx2009, I wrote to MBNA requesting that MBNA supply me a true copy of the executed credit agreement for this account. You appear to be under the impression that you have sent "a true copy" of an agreement, In response to this request, when in fact I all that have been supplied with an unreadable document which does not comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The document sent purporting to be a credit agreement does not contain any legible prescribed terms as required by section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 198311553) made under the authority of the "1974 Act" sets out what the prescribed terms are, I refer you to Schedule 6 Column 2 of SI 198311553 for the definition of what is required. Since this document is illegible it is rendered unenforceable by s127 (3) consumer Credit Act 1974, which states 127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner). This situation is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced. In addition should you continue to pursue me for this debt at this time, you will be in breach of the OFT guidelines, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading's guidance on debt collection The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states 2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows: h_ Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment I require you to produce a compliant and legible copy of my credit agreement and terms and conditions to confirm I am liable to you for this alleged debt, if you cannot do so I require written clarification that this is the case. Should you ignore this request I will report you to the Office of Fair Trading to consider your suitability to hold a credit licence in addition to a complaint to Trading Standards, as you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 Any attempt of litigation will be vigorously defended and I will counter claim for all quantifiable damages. Please note you may also consider this letter as a statutory notice under section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any data in relation to this account with immediate effect. This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies. Please confirm that you have complied with my request under section 10 of the Data Protection Act. I respectfully request a response to this letter by 4pm 26th June 2009 Yours Print do not sign your name.

If the debt is over 6 years old and you have not made a payment towards it or acknowledged it then if it was me i'd send this letter here (NOTE Scotland is 5 years for statute barring and requires a different letter) - http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/599-letter-sent-when-debt-is-statute-barred (send this recorded delivery) Once you state that you have no intention of paying towards a debt that is barred by statute, they CANNOT continue to harrass you, if they do please let us know.....once you send the letter above, you shouldn't hear again !! - have a read of this - The Office of Fair Trading: OFT imposes requirements on Mackenzie Hall to improve handling of disputed debts - in the meantime I will move this thread to the debt collection forum...

Loan, overdraft, credit card? if credit card then cca if loan then cca if overdraft then sar

the SAR will give you the evidence for the case. For the set aside the not living at the property and not receiving court papers is key. You cant prove a negative so its difficult to prove you "didnt" live there but you can prove you lived somewhere else. Utility bills that have the new address for around the time the court papers were issued would be pricless, Letters to utilites asking to change billing details, letter to council to change Eroll info all these sorts of things count as showing you lived somewhere else. S.

The law is on your side - I don't just think it. If a company was entering defaults on my credit reports without any proof whatsoever that the debt existed and was mine, I'd be raising a Small Claims action against them to remove the defaults.

Just note that my experience with HSBC/First Direct is that they will take it to the wire. My settlement was immediately before the court case. I would suggest that you ask them to explain why the quoted case does not apply to them. Also log every call and in your defence you can then claim tel harassment - further reason for the courts to award damages.

If only you had the time, you could be a professional letter writer. Your use of the obvious to these muppets is second to none. Just a shame they won't understand it as you have used words of more than 2 syllables. Ps - Thanks for the compliment

Hi WelshWizard... Try a read of this... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/191791-knocked-back-dca-sec.html S.

It is all a con.Sometimes they do not even have a legitimate contract with you. Even if they do, they are not entitled to the amounts they claim. It is a golden rule in damages under contract law that the party awarded the damages is NOT permitted to make a profit. They are ONLY allowed to be put in the position they would have been in but for the breach. So if parking cost £1.00 per hour and you stay for two but only pay for one, what is required to put them in the position they would have been in but for your breach? Easy, £1.00 and not any telephone number in favour with them on that day. They dare not take you to court, not just because they know that you do not owe the money they claim but also because they can never recover from you what it will cost them to go to court. Remember they are a limited company which means it does not matter where you committed the 'offence' the case will be automatically transferred to your home court. So if they are in Exeter and the PCN arose from your parking in Dover then, if you live in Carlisle, that is where the case will be heard. How much will it cost them to send someone to Carlisle? How much to hire a solicitor in Carlisle? Apart from court fees no costs are recoverable in the county court unless the claim is for more than £5,000.00. Whatever we may think of them they are commercial organisations acting like any other, that is, for profit. Where is the profit in spending, say, £500.00 to win £150.00? There are two other good reasons for not taking you to court, although they may not realise one of them. Think of the Emperor's new clothes, it only works as long as no one realises he has no clothes on. Court would expose their activities as just a [problem]. Why take that risk for £150.00. I have been thinking whether the actions of some of these companies is actually criminal. A District Judge is the level of judge who would deal with these cases. They are all ex-solicitors. Most would have dealt with criminal law during their career, and believe me some of them have minds that would make a razor look dull. If their actions raise a doubt about their legality, some District Judge is going to think it. He (or she), although they are hearing a civil case can refer matters to the 'proper authorities' (as they say) if they believe a crime might have been committed. Fear not, these companies have far more to fear from you than you have from them. It is just that in general we are a law abiding and fair minded society that does not like to defy what appears to be authority. They cynically play on this. They have you thinking along the railway lines they have set out for you. Think outside those lines and take the initiative away from them. You will be surprised what you will think of. Re your ticket. It is not a parking permit, it is just a receipt for the money you have paid to park. Otherwise how will you be able to show that you have paid? No one can tell you what you must display in your windscreen (except for the police and the road fund disc - but that is because the law says so). However commonsense suggests that displaying it on your windscreen will help everyone including your self. They will not take your father to court, but in the unlikely event that they do, just produce the receipt - end of case. I bet you cannot get another ticket like the one your father had, therefor it must be genuine. One last point about the appeal, as someone else has commented you were never going to win it. You should have told them your father is the Pope and that he was in the Vatican all that day. He would still lose the appeal.

Hello BritishPhoenix! Firstly, welcome to CAG. You will get help. Sorry for the above reception, that is not representative of CAG. I know the hassle you are going through, and totally understand the way you have tackled it. Indeed, I wish I had done the same, instead of working like a dog, in the deluded assumption that bankers were reasonable, and were trying to help. At 01:10, it's too late to start advising, so I'll come back to this in the Morning...indeed, make that the Weekend, as I have a few jobs Tomorrow. But the key now is to draw up what can only be called a battle plan, and then deal with each issue carefully. There may be ways to get some of the parasites off your back, but it's more likely that you will have a few more years of hassle until the Debts get to the Statute Barred stage at 6 Years...even then, you will get maybe 1-2 years of tail end hassle, although by then, they cannot touch you. The next 2-3 years are the key, and how you handle them can make a big difference to your future sanity and financial well being. Good luck with it all, and I will do all I can to help, as will others. Cheers, BRW

Found this on Cornucopia's MBNA thread. Hope she won't mind me posting it here too. Made me laugh 'til I cried and thought some peeps on here might need cheering up; A newspaper ran a competition asking for a poem with the most romantic first line, but the least romantic second line. Here are some of the entries they received: I thought that I could love no other Until, that is, I met your brother Roses are red, violets are blue, sugar is sweet, and so are you. But the roses are wilting, the violets are dead, the sugar bowl's empty, and so is your head. Of loving beauty you float with grace If only you could hide your face. Kind, intelligent, loving, and hot This describes all things you're not. I want to feel your sweet embrace But leave that brown bag on your face. I love your smile, your face, your eyes - Damn, I'm good at telling lies! My darling lover, beautiful wife: Marrying you screwed up my life. I see your face when I am dreaming That's why I always wake up screaming. My love, you take my breath away What have you stepped in to smell this way? My feelings for you no words can tell Except for maybe "go to hell." What inspired this amorous rhyme? Two parts vodka, one part lime. Thanks to OP, Battleaxe.

Hi goin4it , welcome to the forum It's great to see you've done your homework and your plan of action for your personal account is spot on ......... As regards your business account , I'm no expert on this I'm afraid , but there is a link on the forum which will probably help : Business claims for bank charges - The Consumer Forums By all means come back and ask if you've got any questions on your personal account (or Business for that matter), someone will answer ... and we're user -friendly .

Write to the cretins at Mhall and tell them to remove your mum's phone number from their database/back of envelope whatever. tell them to confirm they have done so in writing. Any further calls to that number will be treated as harrassment and the matter reported to the telephone regulator and the police. That is a separate offence to the other matters so it is important you write. Also write and ask MHall for a copy of their complaints procedure. They must send you details - Ignoring your request is a cause for complaint in itself. Then make a complaint stating they are rude, aggressive and bullying. They have eight weeks to respiond and resolve the complaint. If they don't you can ratch up the complaint to the Financial Ombudsman. You can copy the OFT into this as well. All this just shows you have tried to resolve the matter and it those cretins at Mhall who are playing silly beggars. Oh and I would ignore their demands for payment. Just tell them the matter is in dispute and until they resolve your complaint you won't be opeing your wallet to them. If they start action bolshi - tough on them.

42 Man Ime Glad We Think Along The Same Lines The Usual Crap From A Certain Insurance Co Is Bog Off Corporate Sensativity Only A Disclosure Order Through The Courts Would Force Them To Release This Data We Are In Need Of A Cast Iron Template In Law To Use Go For It

Hi, I think you now need to send in a defence statement t court and I can help you write that. Gather together all the correspondence you have sent to Preferred and also their letter to you. Put in date order and we will send in copies of it all to back up your statement. You will also have to let the court know that you are unable to attend the hearing - it is very unlikely that Preferred will agree to postpone the date, as they will think your non attendance will work in their favour. However, with a good defence statement you should get a suspended possession order. Ell-enn

I cost Royal Mail at least £5k on 1 case that had 3 court hearings. I lost due to their exemption from Cirminal Responsibility built in to the Postal Services act. All I wanted was my £180. Did I feel any better? Only when the judge agreed it was a bum deal and refused to award expensed due to their ongoing bad faith, but I had to waste a lot of time too. Just be careful, as there's no such thing as a 'sure thing' when you go to court.

Most county courts now have a duty solicitor. May I suggest that you take your paperwork, plus the hearing letter down to the court and see what the lawyer can do for you. If Preferred are subscribers to the Mortgage Code, then you might well have grounds for getting the hearing set aside. This is because a possession hearing should be the last resort, not simply a timed process that Preferred follow without regard to communications and offers. The courts time is valuable and should not be used when there is any other way. If Preferred are ignoring your attempts at finding a solution (and their morals mean that this is the norm for them in my experience), then they are contemptible. As you will not be available on the day set, you need to apply for a postponement - again the duty lawyer can sort out the right forms to enable you to do this. Do not just sit back.

Sorry to hear about the problems, im not sure if your mother is Fully Comprehensive but the details below may help: If you make a claim for an accident that is not your fault and the driver of the car that hits your car is not insured, you will not lose your no claim discount or have to pay any excess. Conditions We will need: • the vehicle registration number and the make and model of the car; and • the driver’s details, if possible. It also helps us to confi rm who is at fault if you can get the names and addresses of any independent witnesses, if available. When you claim, you may have to pay your excess. Also, if when your renewal is due, investigations are still ongoing, you may lose your no claim discount temporarily. However, once we confi rm that the accident was the fault of the uninsured driver, we will repay your excess, restore your no claim discount and refund any extra premium you have paid. This promise is for comprehensive policy holders only. Also check to see if you mother opted to pay extra for the Gauranteed Hire Car Option, this will enable her to receive a hire car free of charge for upto 14 days.