in reply to Orange smarties,I find the majority of posters to these forums to be intelligent, honest people and often times have simply fallen on tough times not knowing which way to turn, ending up with a CCJ and a previous excellent credit rating now destroyed only to find that the tough times get tougher when a HCEO comes knocking and as in my case and many others lying through their teeth to increase fees. In order to fight back we investigate, only to find that we are not alone having been over charged and the good people on this forum such as TT and PT spend to me, what seems to be all of their waking hours helping folk to fight the injustice of the system The days for the bad HCEO have to be numbered the BBC programme is one sided clap trap I remember the words of an American evangalist Preacher hero of mine Robert Schuller Tough times never lst BUT TOUGH PEOPLE DO!! Onlyme again

Tony I am no expert but trust me others who are will be along to help. You are in the right place to gain the best of information Ihave been helped several times on this site just keep calm and your patience will be rewarded Onlyme

The problem is that a large number of people being chased by bailiffs are brain washed by the system and believe that the system takes care of them and so dont know any better and simply accept what a bailiff says as correct. I have a healthy disrespect for the banks,local government and authority in general so when I got into trouble early in the recession I was lucky to find Cag and started to develop limited skills in fighting back The young man and his family didn't know who to turn to and were petrified that the bailiff would take everything they own including xmas tree and beds, such is the fear that tv and media create The bailiff should have listened and gone back to check if all was in order, after all marsdens had added £300 in fees this would more than cover a checking of the facts. Oh shouts the bailiff I have heard it all before from you dirty rotten lying debtors, and so ignores the facts presented to him If as in this case it is only 1 in a hundred or even 500 that has been distrained wrongly then that one person and whole family should not be victims. Had the Wonga loan been fully taken up I doubt that YM or his sister could have repaid and so a vicious circle ensues 9 Until I intervened a short term solution to a problem that should not have been there was about to become a major catastrophe Onlymeagin

Sgt bush,I understand what you are saying but the system is broken with bailiffs acting in cavalier ways not listening to simple hard working people , yes YM made a mistake and was punsihed by the courts he was making amends and he is the hardest working lad ive come across he is also dyslexic and had no real understanding of his rights If the bailiff had listened to him and taken some action rather than trying to take his meagre belongings then I would have some trust in the system however the bailiff was only interested in his coin. When I spoke to YM it was clear something was wrong with the warrant, yes bailiffs hear this all the time but how many innocents pay unknowingly with all of their worldly goods that willbe sold for a pittance and leave the debtor still owing money Onlyme

Good to be back in the fight thanks guys for your kind words, it was you and this site that gave this family a bit of a boost Onlyme again

Hi to my old friends back here again to try and help some more. The story goes: a young man who works for me told me this morning that he had been visited by Marsdens with a warrant following him being late with a payment for a court fine balance £311 now gone upto £611 Young mans parents stressed and no money in the family to pay for anything YM asks sister to take on a wonga loan to help out , sister does but will cost £80 per month for £300 loan I told sister I would help and asked her to repay loan and I would loan to YM interest free I ring the bailiff posing as concerned dad asking for time to pay -No help there from bailiff (what a surprise) fees are set by the courts says he Pay up or else!!! I ring the court asking about the fees - nothing to do with us say court speak to the bailiffs I dont accept this and am given a 0845 number to ring costing £ loads per minute and told to speak to the court collection/payments section is there an alternative number I can call from my mobile-no is the reply I look up an alternative number and call free from my mobile!!! After 10 minutes hanging on to my free telephone number that woukd have cost £5 I speak to a lady who goes on to read YMs account and tells us he is upto date although he missed 1 payment this was made up the following month with a double payment! !! She goes on to say the warrant should not have been issued! ! RESULT!!!! Warrant cancelled! ! £400 saved by a family with little or no resources 10 days before Xmas stress gone fine paid in full as loan from me to YM I ring the bailiff to tell him. " not my fault only doing my job " says he After a few minutes of me winding him up I hang up on him High 5 with YM an afternoon of whistling and jovialty ensues Moral of the story 1/never believe anything a bailiff says or does 2/ challenge everything 3/ always ask for help on this site 4/ dont lose heart and never give in to them Onlymeagain

subbing onlymeagain

Result Cabot have withdrawn their claim and paid costs and I have had little or no stress onlyme

I dont know if you have filed your defence yet but I came across this and wished I had used some of it in mine. The position is simple their pleadings are poor and you therefore cannot defend this is an extarct from another thread from PT We have reviewed the particulars of the claim against our client and have reviewed your letter to our client dated 2011. Our client’s position is that the particulars of claim lack the depth and detail to be considered adequate. It is noted that the Claim was issued through the county court Bulk Centre, which has a character limit of 1024 characters. However the Bulk Centre rules clearly state that if the Claim cannot be particularised within this limit then it must be issued via the local court. Furthermore CPR 16 does not give a Claimant the right to avoid pleading his case adequately so that he can use the Bulk Centre to issue his claim. Your Clients pleaded case is some 300 characters including spaces which leaves 700 characters at your clients disposal and which remain unutilised, this in itself shows the lack of care on your clients part. The Claim could have contained a far greater depth of information than what has been included unless it is the case that you do not know the facts of the case against our client. We would like to draw your attention to the case of Nomura International Plc v Granada Group Ltd & Ors 2 All ER (Comm) 878 where the Claimants claim was struck out for failing to plead adequately the nature of the claim or to set out adequately even in a rudimentary fashion the facts of the claim against the Defendant. We believe this case would be relevant to our clients’ application. The pleaded claim is insufficient, there is no mention of a contract, nor is the mention of a breach of contract, what the breach was, what the degree of default was, whether or not a default notice was issued, whether or not the underlying contract was regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 or whether the debt relates to an unregulated agreement. Also there is no details as to the assignment, date of assignment date of notice of assignments, all of which are extremely important to this matter and ought to be pleaded within your clients claim. We note that your letter of the 28th March 2011 alludes to disclosure of documents occurring at the standard disclosure stage, however, we would point out that given the lack of detail within the pleaded case our client cannot plead a Defence. Furthermore, if our client were to file a Defence it would be nothing more than a bare denial of the Claim and would undoubtedly need amending once disclosure did occur. We consider placing our client in this position to be unreasonable and not in accordance with the overriding objective nor would it be in accordance with the requirements of CPR rule 16 given your client must know what it is its claim is based upon, and if based upon a written contract then it ought to be pleaded as such by mention of that document within the pleadings. Therefore our instructions are to apply for an order compelling your client to replead its claim and to disclose documents mentioned within the amended pleadings within 14 days thereof. We shall exhibit your letter of the 2011 to support our client’s application. We shall also seek costs on the indemnity basis. However, should you wish to avoid a contested application then we would be prepared to discuss terms on consent with costs in our clients favour. If we do not hear from you by 4pm on the 2011 we will file our clients application without further notice.

I replied to citi tellling them they were still in default of my s78 and they acknowledged this in September by telling me that they were still looking for the relevant paperwork to satisfy my request, they therefore should not have defaulted my agreement nor terminated it nor sold it to cabot

Very few details? assignment dated september 2010 bulk centre issued june 2011particulars of claim are usual cabot drivel no agreement number just a 8 digit refernce number not relating to anything Have you received a Notice of Assignment ? yes only from cabot not citi nor from peoples bank to citi I dont think assignment issues is a relevant route to take as this has been effected ok onlyme

Let battle begin!! Just back from court, for allocation hearing and directions. for a very old peoples bank credit card -no original cca only recon provided Before going in young guy solicitor or trainee before bar trys it on with me( A bit of a smarmy get if he is reading lol) to tell me that carey is applicable and they dont have to provide the original documents, this was a bulk centre claim and he also told me that PD 16.7. does not apply because of this!!quoting some other rule about it going through the bulk centre He also trys to do a deal with me to capitulate and make an arrangement with him as my case is fatally flawed whilst at the same time admitting that the agreement is unenforcable which means in his opinion on mcguffick that they can get a CCJ but not enforce it.I told him I didnt want to talk but would listen and agreed to let the judge make her mind up. The lady judge was very pleasant although it seemed to me that she didnt know consumer law that well and the claimant kept prompting that the recon is acceptable.I had recently spotted that the default notice I had recieved was issued whilst the account was in dispute this is acknowledged by a letter that they had not provided my agreement and were still looking for it and dated 6 months after the default notice (dated6th march but only allowing til22 march to pay arrears) As the judge was taking more notice of the claimant than me she accepted his argument that a recon needs to be provided and a copy of the default notice despite my best efforts to point her to PD 16.7 I tried to tell her that this was not a section 78 issue but she was still using that as the basis hence the order to disclose only the recon They now have been ordered to disclose a recon of the agreement and the default notice and that a case management hearing is to follow The other side asked for a particular judge from the court to reside over the hearing, I thought that was unfair as it is probably pushing things their way but didnt argue the point As we were leaving the court room the judge asked the other side to hang back and had a 10-15 minute chat in private,I felt this was abit unusual and challenged young upstart on his way out but he simply implied it was a private conversation and nothing to do with the case Where do I go from here?? onlyme

Hi Molly I have similar issues to you it might be worth you following my thread I am not fully upto speed with them yet but getting there!! http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?309327-Cabot-etc-and-Reconstituted-agreements&p=3593046#post3593046 Have just posted Let battle begin!! Just back from court,for allocation hearing and directions. for a very old peoples bank credit card -no original cca only recon provided Before going in young guy solicitor or trainee before bar trys it on with me( A bit of a smarmy get if he is reading lol) to tell me that carey is applicable and they dont have to provide the original documents, this was a bulk centre claim and he also told me that PD 16.7. does not apply because of this!!quoting some other rule about it going through the bulk centre He also trys to do a deal with me to capitulate and make an arrangement with him as my case is fatally flawed whilst at the same time admitting that the agreement is unenforcable which means in his opinion on mcguffick that they can get a CCJ but not enforce it.I told him I didnt want to talk but would listen and agreed to let the judge make her mind up. The lady judge was very pleasant although it seemed to me that she didnt know consumer law that well and the claimant kept prompting that the recon is acceptable.I had recently spotted that the default notice I had recieved was issued whilst the account was in dispute this is acknowledged by a letter that they had not provided my agreement and were still looking for it and dated 6 months after the default notice (dated6th march but only allowing til22 march to pay arrears) As the judge was taking more notice of the claimant than me she accepted his argument that a recon needs to be provided and a copy of the default notice despite my best efforts to point her to PD 16.7 I tried to tell her that this was not a section 78 issue but she was still using that as the basis hence the order to disclose only the recon They now have been ordered to disclose a recon of the agreement and the default notice and that a case management hearing is to follow The other side asked for a particular judge from the court to reside over the hearing, I thought that was unfair as it is probably pushing things their way but didnt argue the point As we were leaving the court room the judge asked the other side to hang back and had a 10-15 minute chat in private,I felt this was abit unusual and challenged young upstart on his way out but he simply implied it was a private conversation and nothing to do with the case Where do I go from here?? onlyme

Let battle begin!! Just back from court,for allocation hearing and directions. for a very old peoples bank credit card -no original cca only recon provided Before going in young guy solicitor or trainee before bar trys it on with me ( A bit of a smarmy get if he is reading lol) to tell me that carey is applicable and they dont have to provide the original documents, this was a bulk centre claim and he also told me that PD 16.7. does not apply because of this!! quoting some other rule about it going through the bulk centre He also trys to do a deal with me to capitulate and make an arrangement with him as my case is fatally flawed whilst at the same time admitting that the agreement is unenforcable which means in his opinion on mcguffick that they can get a CCJ but not enforce it. I told him I didnt want to talk but would listen and agreed to let the judge make her mind up. The lady judge was very pleasant although it seemed to me that she didnt know consumer law that well and the claimant kept prompting that the recon is acceptable. I had recently spotted that the default notice I had recieved was issued whilst the account was in dispute this is acknowledged by a letter that they had not provided my agreement and were still looking for it and dated 6 months after the default notice (dated6th march but only allowing til22 march to pay arrears) As the judge was taking more notice of the claimant than me she accepted his argument that a recon needs to be provided and a copy of the default notice despite my best efforts to point her to PD 16.7 I tried to tell her that this was not a section 78 issue but she was still using that as the basis hence the order to disclose only the recon They now have been ordered to disclose a recon of the agreement and the default notice and that a case management hearing is to follow The other side asked for a particular judge from the court to reside over the hearing, I thought that was unfair as it is probably pushing things their way but didnt argue the point As we were leaving the court room the judge asked the other side to hang back and had a 10-15 minute chat in private,I felt this was abit unusual and challenged young upstart on his way out but he simply implied it was a private conversation and nothing to do with the case Where do I go from here?? onlyme Just remembered something else the judge totally ignored my request for proof of assignment so nothing is in the order The original agreement was with peoples bank of connecticut not citi and I have never recieved a Notice of assignment from peoples to citi onlyme

This has been very helpful, so back to my original questions I suppose assigning a poLicy with no surrender value to my wife is not such a big deal given that it would only realise £50 in BR ONLYME

It seems to me that sherforce have cycles of overcharging that get highlighted on this forum. They get a bloody nose off some one that has gained help here and then hide for a few months before starting the process all over again We really need to get a grip of these people they are destroying lives by continually overcharging Surely someone at the High court has noticed this if not it really is time they did onlyme

Do not let them get away with this You are in the right place for help read as much as you can on this forum and request the SAR and then apply for a cost assessment hearing onlyme and many more

Well Done Bobity!!! It wasnt as scary as people think was it ?? onlyme

Whoop Whoop lets hope capquest send me another stat demand!!! What rules should be quoted for the correct information on costs as most judges wont have a clue!! Keep up the good work Andy

This is not an endowment policy with any value but a simple whole life policy that coughs up if / when I croak it (not imminent)(I hope) It therfore has no current value I am not as yet insolvent just fighting folks off and want to help my other half should I go sooner rather than later as she would not be capable of fighting my cause following my untimely demise so I was considering transferring it to her ownership rather than mine especially as she pays the premiums onlyme

Can any one tell me 1/ what happens to the proceeds of an insurance policy owned by a debtor upon his/her demise or bankruptcy then death 2/ can a debtors policy be assigned to a spouse prior to death or bankruptcy then death to avoid any potential problems please dont worry I am not poorly!!! onlyme

Can any one tell me 1/ what happens to the proceeds of an insurance policy owned by a debtor upon his/her demise or bankruptcy then death 2/ can a debtors policy be assigned to a spouse prior to death or bankruptcy then death to avoid any potential problems please dont worry I am not poorly!!! onlyme

Do not only focus on the poor service of the demand as after all you have admitted that you have received it!! IMHO Better to focus on the fact that you put the account into serious dispute as you had not received the agreement and that you believe the agreement is unenforceable and has unfair charges and interest added to it this is exactly what I did and they didnt even turn up They sent me a similar letter to yours which I ignored and went on to gain my costs only me

Send it to the court a couple of days before the hearing and to CQ to arrive the day before the hearing this wont give them any time to react to it. Take a couple of copies to the hearing and make sure that you ask the judge for costs once he has dismissed the stat demand, my judge hadnt seen the copy of the costs statement until I gave him my spare copy. Often the admin side of the courts is a week or so behind paperwork onlyme

subbing