Interesting article here on a recent case - Yates vs Nemo http://www.i-m-a.me.uk/QuarterlyAccount/magazines/174/174%2029.pdf

I had a problem with a washer dryer which was over the warranty period, I found out who the main board directors were of the parent company in Italy (Hotpoint) and emailed all of them stating the problem and that even after the period of time I wouldn't expect a problem like this to occur. I would always suggest avoiding making your complaint to customer services, go straight to the top, Directors of companies do not get complained directly to on many occasions and customer focus is probably close to the top of their priority list. It works, they replaced my washer dryer with a new one.

Just my thoughts, but how can they reissue a 'new' default notice, this is purely fiction ? And you no longer have any agreement with them ? You might be interested in reading this - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?170345-A-Tale-of-a-Dodgy-DN

"as well as detailing my own legal qualifications" - you aren't QC by any chance, that may have scared them off ?

Lost, you seem to have ignored what a lot of the knowlegable people have said here, you can start getting into some dialogue with the people chasing you, finding out what exactly the debt is made up of...etc and wasting an awful lot of stamps and time and more importantly experiencing an incredible amount of pain in the process. Do spend some time reading around these forums a little more and you will become enlightened I assure you.

Have you disputed this with your lender at all ? It would be interesting to see how they answer this...

It would be good to know if any of the loan companies that were selling sub prime (or otherwise) loans will seek damages from the culprits - if anybody hears anything then post it in here...

I would be dropping en email to the OFT too explaining exactly what has happened.

Here too - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?387645-Cabot-issuing-statutory-demand-via-stewart-barnes-Aqua-Card-debt/page3&highlight=poppay

If it was me in your position then I would certainly be setting this aside, you will (as you correctly found out) need forms 6.4 and 6.5, you will need to take the original demand with you into court along with the 6.4 and 6.5 completed along with any accompanying letters or any other evidence. - please take a look at this thread which you may find useful - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?389230-Help-Lowell-Statutory-Demand-LIttlewoods-Cat-debt-amp-store-card-together-**SET-ASIDE**&highlight=statutory

If it was me in your position then I would be ready just in case they decide to reinstate it - I would be sending a SAR to the original creditor in the the first place - when was the last time you made any payment towards this particular debt ? any chance it may possibly be statute barred ?

Lovely to read - well done !!!

You may find reading the High Court case of Jones vs Link Financial useful - http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2012/2402.html

Get the results of the SAR from Lloyds as soon as possible, make sure you report them to the OFT too, not really sure what you put in your defence, and it seems unreasonable that the judge wasn't able to address just you, or at least give you the chance to speak on behalf of your wife.

Excellent great result....

Apologies, I think you should send the statute barred letter (by recorded delivery)

Don't forget to fax / drop your costs off to the court which have to be in the file at least 24hrs before the hearing - take a look at this thread - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?327997-Statutory-Demand-from-Hamptons-Legal-WON-STAT-DEMAND-DISMISSED/page2&highlight=hamptons

Stand firm on the fact that they have totally disregarded an official request, and state the fact that is quite obvious they are making a deliberate and vexatious attempt to mislead you by stating (show the judge the letter) that they would put any action on 'hold'.

You should show the judge just how angry and upset you are at having to deal with this and in light of the above you request the judge throw out the demand and pay your costs either in the standard or in the indemnity.

And what you must do without fail is report them to the OFT for deliberately misleading you.

Well done NP, great news, can I also urge you to report them to the OFT...it is absolutely vital that you do.

You say you have been paying them for the last 8 years ? The account will only become statute barred if you had not paid any money to them or you had not acknowledged the debt in writing this is usually at least 6 years from the date of default.

Well done, as for requesting a refund of monies paid then I think this is going to be difficult, bereft of any court case or hard proof / evidence of any excessive pressure then I think you will have to let the payments you made go.

If it was me in your position then I would call them and state that you do not want them to visit

especially so as you will be charged for the visit.

These visits are usually to carry out a pre-sue report to look at your belongings in the house.

You are fully within your rights to refuse this, there was some information from the OFT which I can't find at the moment,

but it did state that you can refuse to entertain a visit due to you being charged....

If it was me in your position then I would be sending off a SAR to the original creditor to gain as much info as possible, and to see if they comply, if it is a 'credit' product then a CCA request won't do any harm either - as you may have read a SAR costs £10 (make sure you send any correspondence via recorded) I would send a postal order too. If you do get a stat demand or if anybody leaves a note saying they want to visit you, then keep us posted...

Very crafty the fact that they are attempting to add a mobile phone bill too (do you know anything about this ? - would this part of it be statute barred ?)

- as it stands today they are in default of your request for a copy of your agreement,

if it was me I would be attempting to set this aside.

You have made more than a reasonable attempt to gain information by sending the SAR (as you can't use the civil procedure rules in the insolvency courts to obtain disclosure)

however at the potential setting aside of the demand you can certainly dispute the default notice, the agreement (is the agreement correct ?

does the interest rate match up to what is in the statements ?).

You can always request the judge to give an 'unless' order

whereby unless they provide the

default notice,

statements for the duration of the agreement,

the agreement,

details of all PPI payments

then the judge throws it out,

your set aside should be thorough and explain why you are querying the paperwork and use other case histories to demonstrate your point.

It is becoming riskier to attempt to set aside on the above information but certainly not impossible.

They are extremely afraid that you will go to court,

demonstrate what a complete bunch of idiots they are and you will win your costs.

They sent you somebody else's documents which is a breach of the data protection act,

and deny knowledge of an adjournment to which they sent to you from the court.

If you show your resolve, and know your stuff, and stand up to these bullies you should at least get it set aside if not hit them for costs

- (which need to be in the court 24 hours before the hearing)

Can you remember when the account was opened ? (don't be too specific)...certainly if it was me then I would be applying for a set aside. SAR request sent off to see what comes back, heading off BWLegal at the pass (as they certainly won't have this information). I would be pressing first that they hadn't provided a copy of the agreement, no default notice in the prescribed form, possibility of excessive charges, potentially missold PPI...and of course the agreement with the prescribed terms, statements for the duration of the account. You seem to have found some inspiration already from other threads too. At the first sign of a dispute they should be withdrawing the demand....