Hi, Me_too I have exactly the same scenario as you - a storecard application which was signed in 1988 which First Credit supplied in January this year. Since then I have had about two letters a week, but I haven't replied. Like you I was making token payments until a couple of years ago. I can't find any recent cases either, but will keep you in the loop about their next move.

Hi, thanks for the reply. I didn't make clear what my problem is. I am not concerned about the insurers accusing us of withholding information, I am more concerned about the fact that someone has been able to make a claim on my partner's policy without his knowledge and whether the insurers should have notified us that this claim had been made and given us an opportunity to fight it. What I now want is for them to remove this ridiculous claim from our records as it was fraudulent and made without our knowledge and I believe that the insurance company have not followed the correct procedure. My view is that if they decided to pay out £7.5k on a fraudulent claim that is their problem and should not be ours! Thanks

Hi, over two years ago I had an extremely MINOR scrape in the back lane doing approx 5mph, the sort that most reasonable people would disregard. I had four people in my car and no-one even felt my car scrape the other party's bumper. However he made a song and dance and started harassing my to put it through the insurance because his wife wanted a courtesy car. I told him not to be so stupid - his car wasn't worth more than £50 - however the harassment got worse, I was plagued with phone calls from people wanting me to authorise a courtesy car and people banging on the door, so I took advice and rang my partner's insurance company, stating that I did not want to claim but I was sick of the hassle. They told me they would speak to him. I heard nothing more until two weeks ago we received a snotty letter from our insurers saying we had failed to disclose a claim. I rang them to discover that they had paid out £7500 for whiplash injuries etc etc. We didn't received any notification at all that this claim had been made and I need to know how I can sort this situation out. There is no way on this earth he suffered a whiplash injury but the insurers say if they have a doctor's note to that effect they have to pay out.

Finally we will have our day in court..... Watch this space and wish us luck.

Hi, we have received the standard letter saying that the charges cannot be assessed for fairness under the UTCCRs giving us until the 9th of March to respond before our file is closed. We have not issued a court claim but do have past correspondence with LLoyds in which they state that the charges represent a "fair charge for a banking service that is valued by our customers" and in another letter they state "Like any business, we do have to make a charge for some of our extra services. When customers don't have enough in their accounts to cover a payment, this always means extra work - and it has to happen very quickly. We have to agree to make the payment by setting up or increasing an overdraft, or tell customers we can't agree it. We feel it's fair to charge for this service...... These are not default charges because you haven't broken your agreement. These are our prices for the service we provide in these situations." So they have more or less said that the charges represent the cost of the admin involved and I shall be writing back to say we don't want them to close the file thanks! Any thoughts before I do respond?

Think you have done all you can - just the very best of luck - and do let us know. Fingers, toes and everything crossed for you. In my case they just didn't show up - hopefully it will be the same for you.

After I stopped answering the phone to MBNA because they were so nasty they then rang my neighbours and asked them to put me on the phone...... My OH gave them such a blasting they didn't try again but I would be willing to give a statement if it would help.

I have just had another look through the thread. I am still not sure if the application form is an acceptable agreement - it is partially illegible but I suspect it contains all the prescribed terms. When do you have to get the defence in by? And if there is a chance of them getting a judgment, how much are they claiming?

Do we have an application form/agreement here ddd? With ours it was debatable whether it was compliant or not but I have thrown everything I can think of at them. They seem to be very good at waiting in the wings until you think the dust has settled.

Hi, no I don' t think you are jumping the gun with the draft order. I did that with one of mine and was amazed when the court did send it to the claimants. But then if they won't supply you with any information how the heck are you supposed to defend it? Looks fine to me - go for it.

Hi, well you have confirmed my thoughts on it, which then makes me wonder why on earth they have served the SD? I can see that if a third party had served a SD and there was a case ongoing with someone else that may not help, but if the proceedings are between the two parties then surely no judge would allow the BR to proceed. Thanks

I think the court went for judgment without any input from Coward Hohens due to a mix up. Anyway it is set aside now and ten page defence going in tomorrow.

Just watch out cos the sneaky bergers got a judgment against my OH when we had heard nothing for over a year. Is now set aside and we are back in action again - defence due in tomorrow.

Hi, need some urgent help with a matter I am involved with. Friend of mine is involved in very complex case and the other side are trying to bankrupt him. We have been told that if they succeed with the BR (which obviously we are fighting - set aside of SD already drafted) he cannot continue with the court proceedings. He stands to gain a large amount of damages, far in excess of the amount they are trying to BR him for, and it seems that is why they are trying this. We have been told by someone that if he does go BR the trustee will not allow him to continue with the case. He is a litigant in person and therefore is not incurring costs, apart from the other side's of course:). Does anyone have any knowledge of such things? Thanks Goldlady

Well, didn't think I would be posting on this thread again, but last month Coward Hohens managed to get a default judgment against the OH on this one. Last we had heard from the court was in March 08 when we had again said we were still waiting for information and asked the court to issue an unless order. As we heard nothing more we assumed they had crawled back under their stone. Seems as if the court had somehow issued the judgment without any action on CH's behalf as we managed to get the CCJ set aside - application went in next day after judgment received. Judge said in order that nothing had been received from claimants before the judgment was issued. The cheeky b*stds even sent a pretend bailiff round and OH took great delight in telling her we had put in a set aside application. She had never heard of anyone doing that?????? So we are now back to the stage of submitting a defence which is due by tomorrow. The judge at the set aside hearing told us to go for everything we could think of - so of course we have! Will let you know how we get on.

Hi dun wi debtin, It does all hinge on the enforceability of the alleged agreement. If you shout at them loudly enough they might just back off, but make sure you comply with all the court deadlines and keep the court informed about your requests for information. This dodgy shower got a default judgment against my OH a couple of weeks ago - I haven't updated my own thread yet as have not been around for a while - but that was after twelve months had passed since we made our final request for information and we assumed it had been well and truly put to bed. We managed to get a set aside and now working on the defence. A week after the judgment they sent some woman purporting to be a bailiff to the house:eek: OH sent her packing - she didn't even know what a set aside application was. Keep us posted about progress, and make sure you do everything by the book. If you are sure the agreement is unenforceable then keep battling.

No news for ages. My friends are still paying their monthly payments but I have had no reply from the IP about their supposed research into the creditors' claims. And as far as I know they have still withheld the dividend as I asked them to. Just not sure what to do next. I think the credit crunch has been a big help as their house will now be worth far less and they will not have to remortgage in year 4 as the agreement says.

My 16 year old daughter is getting hassle from this lot on her mobile and she owes nothing to anyone. They refuse to believe she is not the person they are chasing and her sim card was brand new when we got the phone. I have given her some lessons in how to deal with DCAs, particularly when you don't owe a penny:eek: She has told them twice already that they have the wrong number, but they don't seem to be listening.

Hi GD, firstly I have come across two judges so far who think the notice of assignment can come from the assignee - which is not my interpretation of the LPA 1925 however that seems to be the current thinking. As I am sure you know from my threads on CL they actually backed out of all three of our cases. We were very strong on their breaches of the CPR and actually I am pretty sure they would have had a strong case if they had actually bothered to come to court (but don't tell them that!). We also had an issue with missing statements which I would have emphasised in court. The one with quite a lot of statements missing also had mis-sold PPI on it which I think helped our argument as well. I have only speed-read the last three pages of your thread and wondered if they had actually produced a CCA that is compliant or not? I was somewhat unsure with ours but was very forceful in telling them they had not complied with our CCA requests. Will help further if I can.

How much of the loan had you paid? Was it a Hire Purchase agreement?

Hi, got your PM. As you have read we were in a similar situation but the landlord did not touch our property. I know you say you can't afford a solicitor but I would suggest you involve one, even if it's just to start things off for you. It sounds as if you have a good case, but it would be a matter of studying the terms of the lease as well. When it happened to us we used a solicitor to get us back into the building, we then paid for a barrister to draft up the claim but then we started the court proceedings and did a lot of the other work ourselves. It cost us a few hundred for the solicitor's initial involvement and £500 for the barrister. The biggest costs came when it went to court but as we won the other side had to pay that. Have you got any sort of insurance or memberships that give you legal expenses cover? We were members of the Chamber of Commerce at the time (not that they helped as they got out of it on a technicality) and I know the FSB offer a similar scheme. Will help all I can, whatever you decide to do.

Hi, it possibly isn't made clear on the thread as the agreement BigAl scanned on here actually did have a title, but somehow the one the other side supplied to the court and in a second mailout to BigAl had the whole heading missing. As it turns out it was not really relevant when the second judge looked at it, but the first judge was adamant that the fact that the copy agreement did not have the correct heading was enough to make it unenforceable. So it was not to do with the wording - simply that none of that wording was there at all.

Well it was the third and final hearing yesterday..... Different judge with different views on the case. At the last hearing the judge pulled them up as the scan of the agreement did not have the heading on it. They produced someone else's agreement (details removed) to show that it was a bad scan and that the header was actually there. This was accepted by the judge, although we wanted to argue about 'true copies', but we kept quiet. We were there for two hours... We had a defence which used everything and he went through each one. Charges which had been added while they were in default of CCA request were kicked out. Some of them were so ridiculous - 2 x £50 in a month, then a random £102 etc etc. That was about £400. Then we got into the multiple agreements discussion. The solicitor for the other side was totally unprepared for this - I think he thought he was walking in to get a judgement against Big Al - end of story! Anyway BigAl told the judge all about the saleswoman who had told him the roof stuff would cost £525 but the minimum they could get a loan for was £1000. She then said that they would get a cheque for the balance which they could use to part pay the loan (or not). The other side said that Big Al was lying (!!!!) and also said he had committed fraud by signing a loan agreement that showed the full amount was for the roof stuff. The judge pointed out that the original creditor was equally fraudulent and made it quite clear that he believed Big Al's account of how the loan was arranged. The other side's submission about multiple agreements was somewhat confusing and the judge concluded that it was indeed a multiple agreement covering three different types of credit as discussed earlier in this thread. He decided that the multiple agreement failure meant that the £475 cash top up was not covered by the agreement and therefore the original loan amount was £525 (plus the PPI which he agreed was dodgy but we weren't too worried about that). He then did a quick calculation of how much BigAl would have to repay if the loan was halved and concluded that he had overpaid by around £500. As we had not put in a counterclaim properly he wouldn't award it back to BigAl. So this is a WIN! The other side's solicitor was furious. In the defence I had quoted all the legislation we referred to and the judge made the comment that this had helped him a lot as it was difficult to get hold of consumer law books at the county court. He had obviously had a look around the web and made comments about these 'consumer websites' - not all bad but he was saying he had read quite a lot of bad advice being given to people. He also said that the claim relating to the assignment of the debt was wrong and that the Law of Property Act does NOT say the assignment has to come from the assignor. It certainly reads that way to me, but he was adamant that the assignee has the legal right to notify the debtor once the debt has been sold.

Just checking that all is going according to plan. I will be there - I am the dark haired one with the blonde streaks and the white bits on the top, unless I have time to put that right tomorrow. 7pm it is. Looking forward to seeing you all. Are there only the four of us?

I will be there too.