nunkychunky
-
Posts
75 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Post article
CAGMag
Blogs
Keywords
Everything posted by nunkychunky
-
Hi folks Just before Christmas I had a MCOL claim from Cabot via Restons Solicitors (for an old credit card - claim value approximately £1600 formerly with Cap 1). I filed an acknowledgement of service and sent the appropriate s78 CCA and CPR 31.14 notices. I had a smiliar claim against me from another creditor about 2 years ago and was able to submit the defence in good time. The s78 and CPR letters were sent by me unsigned. Yesterday Restons returned my letter saying that whilst it purportedly came from me, without a signature they are not able to do anything further. Any advice much appreciated. Cheers NC
-
Hi folks, Quick update.... Letter received from local court giving a hearing date towards end of September and DJ considers case suitable for mediation. WH / AK need to pay over £300 if they want case to go to a hearing. I&E account sent to WH nearly 4 weeks ago and no response received yet. Still no notice of assignment. NC
-
Folks, A bit of movement since my last post, again a bit of guidance appreciated. I can raise approximately 33% of the sum being claimed which I have offered to them on a without prejudice basis subject to consent order, full and final settlement, default removed from credit file etc. I have also told them that if they do not find the lump sum offer acceptable they can have instalments instead over a number of years. The view I have taken is that the CPR request has been complied with, so has the SAR request, so I am going to have to concede defeat. However I have told them about unlawful charges and interest being potentially reclaimable (there was no PPI). They have still not provided a copy of the assignment document so no proof yet AK is an assignee of the debt. Today a letter dropped in saying "we feel that in order our client can consider your offers we need more details as to your circumstances. Please complete the enclosed income and expenditure statement". No word from the Court / mediators yet. I can get the lump sum within 7 days, does it represent a fair offer? If I don't complete the I&E (am I obliged to do so?) will it reflect badly on me if it does proceed to formal mediation? Thanks folks NC
-
Andy, No it was November 2007. Other than the issue of the default notice not being served on me by recorded delivery and the fact no notice of assignment (from Varde to AK) was served on me (both in accordance with the LPA 1925) and arguing these points it seems I am pretty well snookered. Push come to shove I am prepared to up my offer as a CCJ is no option for me but all depends upon how greedy they want to be. NC
-
Folks, Update. Bundle of stuff received from WH today. 1) Reconstituted copy of application and terms and conditions 2) Copy of default notice 3) Reconstituted template of a document providing notification of the matter to Varde 4) Copy statements Reference is made to the HSBC v Carey case. Still no notice of assignment from Varde to AK though. I made an offer to settle at roughly 15% (£650) which was refused. They are pursuing £3851.96. Not sure now what to do. Help! NC
-
Folks, Bit of advice / guidance needed. Form N180 sent to Court and copy served on WH. Response from WH received back stating AK are prepared to enter into mediation. Still no supporting docs / evidence received other than the stuff received from MBNA. Was wondering how best to play this now, is it worthwhile offering instalments or a nuisance payment to make this go away - say 10% of the balance on the condition credit file marked as satisfied and default removed? NC
-
Form N180 will be sent RDSF tomorrow (deadline for submission 3 June) - also will be requesting mediation.
-
Signed up in November 2007. Notification received from Court today that case to be allocated to SCT (as expected) and the deadline for submission is 3 June. Based on the SAR response but no evidence relating to the assignment to AK, would it be better to go for mediation and try and agree a deal? NC
-
Evening folks, Nothing further from AK or WH BUT large envelope received today from MBNA - the response to the SAR. In brief, the contents are: 1. Covering letter containing statement "please note that only information relating to you held on our files will be disclosed to you". 2. Credit card agreement (appears reproduced as my name is in lower case, but my address is in upper case). My signature is a tick in a box as the card was taken out online. The reference number is not the same as the card number and there is no credit limit. I have no way of telling if these were the actual terms and conditions or if they were put together on a Word document 3. Glossary. 4. Document - "Your personal information and how MBNA uses it". 5. 3 sheets of screen dumps - last one states sold to Experto Credite 19 Feb 2010. 6. 2 sheets - Autoscore SM Card Application details 7. 14 pages of screen dumps (customer information system) 8. 6 pages - Additional Comms Log 7. 7 pages of transactions (not copy statements) 8. 2 pages - memos of account There was no PPI and overlimit charges and interest from a quick scan amounts to about £400. There was no notice of default by the way. Not sure where this now leaves me, particularly if AK or WH get their hands on the papers, any guidance on what to do next much appreciated. If I am now pretty much snookered, any thoughts how I can persuade WH to stop the court proceedings. NC
-
Andy, Having said all of the above and with me being not too conversant with Court procedure, and obviously WH appear hell bent on getting it to the SC track, if the claim does get allocated to SC (and a number of the CPRs will cease to apply) does that actually tip matters in WH's favour? Truth be told I do have a very slight nagging doubt they will sneak this through, although I will put up a fight, a CCJ is something I don't want and can ill afford, my credit file has been impaired since 2009 and it will add another 6 years to it. NC
-
Folks, I simply denied the claim in full, Andyorch made a very pertinent comment about including charges / overlimit fees in that there is a danger the court may ask why the charges were not challenged sooner (hence why I did not raise it in my original defence). There was always a risk the court may have seen it as part-admission and gone on to enter judgment if I threw charges into the mix at that time. WH did say that I had not disputed the amount of the claim and will proceed to judgment "when" the docs are produced (so why, therefore, did I deny the whole claim?). D'oh!!!!! NC
-
Yes - the dregs might well include further "crap" I intend to throw at them, or the proverbial spanner that has been thrown into the works. I am hoping that I can defeat this claim, and the message I want people to know about is not to be intimidated or frightened by these bullies. My belief was the attitude of "issue the writ now, see you in Court" was frowned upon by the judges but there are always those who proceed differently.
-
I did a bit of research on WH by the way, and I suppose the purpose having a pop at people like me is to recover some funds for a large costs order made against them for ballsing up an administration whilst acting for an insolvency practitioner, who knows? The signature on the letter could well suggest the "defended team" is one person, or perhaps a trainee, of a semi-literate disposition (i.e. it contains a mixture of lower case and capital letters). NC
-
Bill, Thanks for the clarification, especially the last one. I wholeheartedly agree with the inadequacies of the MCOL system where anyone can issue a claim in a "hit and hope manner". In my case, AK and WH have picked on someone prepared to fight them to the bitter end. I will be sending them one further letter asking them to specifically answer the question put to them. NC
-
Bill, Excuse my ignorance, but what do the acronyms mean (especially the last one)? Are you referring to Howard Cohen of West Yorkshire? NC
-
Folks, good morning. Quick update.... Letter sent to WH on 30 April asking under what statute / authority they are seeking to rely on regarding the assignment notice (i.e. under the LPA and the manner it was (allegedly) served). Letter received yesterday from WH..... Dear Me We write further to your letter dated 30 April 2014 and refer you to our previous letter dated 2 May 2014 stipulating that we have requested documents from Our Client and will forward them to you upon receipt. We reiterate the content in our previous letter that the process of documents may take a number of weeks given that Our Client is an assignee of the debt. YF WH LLP Do I sense that they are on the back foot? NC
-
Hi folks, Quick update... Defence was filed on 23 April (after further tweaking as suggested by andyorch) and this was filed online. Confirmation received from Court via seemingly standard response - in that after 30 days the claim will be stayed. Letter sent two days ago to WH asking for further information about the assignment notice (i.e. under what statute do they intend to rely upon it being "given to the Defendant in writing" as per their POC". Two letters received today from WH. Envelope 1 - Letter 1 (addressed to me) - "We write further to the above matter and enclose a copy of correspondence sent to Court for your attention" Envelope 1 - Letter 2 (addressed to Northampton County Court Bulk Centre) - "We write further to the letter of the Court dated 25 April 2014 and confirm that our Client is not in agreement with the Defence and seeks to proceed with the claim. On that basis, we await to hear from you further as to the next steps". Envelope 2 - Letter 1 (addressed to me) - "We confirm receipt of your defence of which the content is noted. In reply to your Defence, we have requested documents from our client and will forward them to you upon receipt. Given that our client is an assignee of the debt, the process of obtaining the documents may take a number of weeks. We note that your Defence is based solely upon documents not being provided and not in relation to the amount claimed. On that basis, upon documentation being provided by our client we will be lodging an application to the Court for your Defence to be struck out and Judgment to be granted". Envelope 2 - Letter 2 (addressed to me) - "Without prejudice save as to costs, under CPR 1.1, our Client is offering a 10% discount on the sum claimed" Any comments or thoughts anybody? NC
-
Afternoon folks, I will be submitting the defence to Court tomorrow (draft wording appears below) and keeping it short and sweet. Any observations or suggestions appreciated before I get the papers off. NC The Defendant disputes the claim in its entirety. The Claimant has not provided any documentation or evidence to substantiate the claim. A request for further information pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act has been made (which has been acknowledged by the solicitors acting for the Claimant stating that it could take a number of weeks to obtain the information necessary). Until such documentation has been provided in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act the alleged claim is deemed unenforceable at law. The claimant has chosen to issue Court proceedings without proving the debt or providing evidence when a proper investigation is required beforehand. The alleged sum claimed is also disputed in that it may include interest / penalty charges and PPI which is potentially recoverable.
-
Citizen, Having researched CPR Part 18 a bit more, whilst it would appear very pertinent, the danger is that if WH get the matter to the SC track then CPR part 18 will not stand. However there is nothing wrong with raising questions as suggested (which I will tailor to my specific circumstances) and I think the whole thing now boils down to the issue of timing when to hit them with the CPR 18 request. From what I have seen about CPR 18 there would appear nothing wrong with raising the request for more info and documents before the court allocates the case to the SC track, i.e. sending the questions now and then issue the CPR 18 request at the time they issue their defence (correct me if I am wrong but also at the same time they have to submit an allocation questionnaire). For now the proposed strategy is: 1. For the defence (i.e. to be filed in Court before 4 May 2014) to simply state that no evidence of the debt has been produced and a request under the CCA for documents has been made (which has been acknowledged) which has not been complied with and whilst the breach remains the alleged sum is unenforceable at law. Just one thought though, if I state all the above does it sound contradictory? This will at least put the ball back in their court. 2. Send a series of pertinent questions to WH - can this be done by email? 3. My CPR 18 request will ask for the same documents as set out in the CCA (not the SAR) request - in this way it is keeping with established law and not seen as a fishing trip. Any thoughts, anybody? Laters, NC
-
Evening folks, Bit of advice needed. Response from WH which reads as follows. We continue to act for the Claimant in the matter referred to above and write in response to your CPR Part 31.14 request dated 7 April 2014. We would draw your attention to the fact that as this matter has a value of less than £10,000.00 it is very likely to be allocated to the small claims track. We would also like to draw your attention to the fact that under CPR Part 27.2, the rules in CPR Part 31 do not apply to small claims and therefore you have no basis to make your request under CPR Part 31.14. In addition to the above, in relation to the latter two documents you have requested, namely the Default Notice and termination Notice we would make the following points. Firstly a request made under CPR Part 31.14 is limited to documents referred to in a Statement of Case. We have not referred to either a Default Notice or a Termination Notice in our Particulars of Claim and therefore have no obligation to provide you with said documents. Secondly we are not claiming for the amount in default but simply the amount outstanding on the account and so the Default Notice is not pertinent to our claim. Nevertheless we are keen to deal this (sic) matter amicably and as such we repeat our assurances to you in our letter of 8 April 2014 namely that we will endeavour to provide you with supporting documentation relating to this claim once we receive it from our client. YF WH LLP I would like to start drafting my defence next week to get into Court in good time so any advice / guidance much appreciated. NC
-
Evening all, Letter from Wright Hassall in the post today. They note my request for various documents and have "passed on your request to our client"....."as an assignee of the debt it can take a number of weeks for it to obtain certain documents from the original vendor". It goes on to say "WP save as to costs... to avoid further time and expense being incurred on this matter our client will accept £3,750 in full and final settlement of its claim, payable as a lump sum or affordable monthly instalments". They then say it is a 15% reduction and a saving of over £500. If I do not accept in 14 days the offer will expire. Is this a typical type of response from these people? My defence has to be in Court by 4 May 2014, and I was thinking of filing it around 23 or 24 April. In the meantime (a bit of guidance will be most appreciated) do I go back to the "defended team" at WH inviting them to withdraw the proceedings and enter into a consent order to do that "save as to costs" and that to do nothing is not an option for me and I have to defend the claim? Is it safe / appropriate for me to correspond by email to them? Alternatively should I just press on and file the defence (will post a draft up) and await a response from MBNA / WH or directions from the Court. Any guidance much appreciated. Laters NC
-
CPR has gone today NC
-
Acknowledgement of service has been filed online setting out I will be defending the whole claim. SAR and CCA letters sent by signed for delivery service. NC
-
Hi folks, Today I received an N1 CPC from Northampton County Court Bulk Centre in relation to an MBNA card I took out around 2007. I stopped paying them in around April 2009 and whilst not sure of the default date, it was either late 2009 or early 2010. I have not yet sent an SAR request and truth be told have received hardly any paperwork, the last was a statement from AK yesterday "reminding" me as to the balance. I do not recollect receiving a letter before action and that the statement that come yesterday contained no mention of court proceedings. The claim form states the following information. Issue date 1 April 2014. Claimant - Aktiv Kapital Portfolio AS, Zug Branch, Zueghausgasse 3, 6300 Zug, Switzerland (Reg No: CH-400.9.032.183-7) Address for sending payments and documents - Wright Hassall LLP, Olympus Avenue, Leamington Spa, Warwickshire, CV34 6BF Defendant - Me POC - "The Claimant is an Assignee of the following debts, notice of assignment having been given to the Defendant in writing: MBNA Platinum 5 4,331.72 Account No: (16 digit number) Despite demands for payment, the above sums remain due. The claimant claims the sum of 4,331.72, interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 and costs. Sum claimed £4331.72, court fee £85, Solicitor's costs £80, total amount £4496.72 Proposed course of action is that I intend to fight this as I do not want a CCJ. Acknowledgement of service to be filed online over the weekend. SAR request to go to Wright Hassall (do I need to send documents to Switzerland as well or the UK address of AK which I think might be in Chester) and then CPR request to follow in about 7-10 days. Assuming they fail to comply with the CCA request then the "failed" CCA request letter to go after 12 + 2 days. Obviously my proposed defence is that I dispute the whole claim, but for the purposes of the defence form should I set out the relevant clause in the CCA that unless proper copies of the documents that the claimant is seeking to rely on are delivered up, the claim stands as unenforceable at law whilst the CCA default continues. Any thoughts or suggestions at this stage most appreciated before I get to work. Laters NC
-
Hi folks, After the episode I recently had with Lowells (got the SD set aside) a smaller, but equally niggling issue has come about which I would appreciate some guidance. It relates to a car insurance policy I had for a project. The policy was with Lancaster Insurance and the annual premium was for around £85, the premiums were around £7 a month. Earlier in the year I sold the car due to a lack of time, and there were around 3 instalments left on the policy (around £25 in total). Perhaps very foolishly on my part, I cancelled the direct debit but Lancaster came back trying to hit me with a £50 cancellation fee. The matter went quiet for a while whilst I furnished proof of the date of sale, and Lancaster (very generously) have reduced the final balance by around £4. The problem is that Capita are now trying to extract nearly £130 out of me. I have asked them for a breakdown and told them that the sum is disputed and amounts to nothing more than exploitation. Now having the benefit of hindsight I should have just left the policy to run its course and simply not renewed but is there any way of fighting this? Thanks NC
