The whole idea is to make them work for this - even if it appears you have no chance. They don't necessarily need to prove anything - it's for you to defend the claim by challenging their right to any monies. If you read the example defence that DX posted below, you'll see that it challenges the fundamental components necessary before the claimant has a legal right to be awarded anything. Forget about whether the the amount has been received as part of a loan or whatever, or that payments have been made - instead focus on whether the claimant is compliant with the laws/legislation under which they can seek judgement. If nothing else, defending costs them and will most likely create scope to negotiate favourable terms on paying it back over a period of time (likely to be a lesser amount than what they're claiming too). I've only skimmed over the thread, but I'd be inclined to pay heed to DX's suggestion that there is unlikely to be an original agreement or paperwork in existence. That's a bit of a stumbling block. Stick in there and concentrate on creating a suitable defence. There will be a lot of hoops that you can make the claimant jump through if they are to see this through - you probably just don't know it yet, but you will if you read up and keep posting here.

Thanks Both! I'll leave it until Monday and then phone the court to see if anything has changed. Will write to them after that. FWIW - this bunch don't use solicitors for the hearing - they generally send an employee of the company, or the MD does it.

Quick update on this. Hearing is set for two weeks time, give or take. The court ordered that witness statements should be exchanged mid-August. Hearing fee was to be paid end of August. I sent my WS off to the court and claimant, but am still waiting on the claimant's WS - they're over 4 weeks late. I emailed the court recently to enquire whether the claimant's WS had been filed and whether they've paid the hearing fee. The answer to both was NO. Any thoughts? In the meantime, I know of a case which originated from the same date and location, which was dismissed at a different court a few weeks ago. The circumstances were different, in that the defendant admitted to being the driver (leased vehicle), and had also parked on a pavement, just a foot from one of the signs (claimant tried to take the high moral ground over parking on the pavement). The judge dismissed it based mainly on the inadequate signage, and the road appearing to be a public highway. I probably ought to introduce this within a supplemental WS - thoughts?

You have nothing to worry about with not taking part in any mediation.

Great news Betty! Hearing news of anyone getting one over on PRA/Aktiv Kapital gives me a bit of a thrill!

Hi Betty, just posting to say I'm looking in, should you need any help. Sham

This may be of help. The following thread was started here, but not finished. It was finished on a different forum, so I've posted the summary below for you. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?440822-Directors-guarantee-I-was-not-told-about The bottom line for me is that they would need to prove that you entered into a valid agreement in support of their case, plus you were advised that it was a "Trade Account Application", with no references made to such an important clause within the agreement. I went to court today and the judge said (not just to me, but to everyone) sometimes its better to try and solve things outside the court as sometimes it works in favour of both parties. I thought about this and spoke with their solicitor and offered half the money in installments over 24 months. He phoned them and they rejected it straight away saying the minimum they would take would be 75% to be paid within 1 month. refused this and said I couldn`t afford it and said it would have to be over 2 years... Again he got on the phone to them and they said they would go for 75% over one year... I thought this was a bit much informed him I would let the judge decide as I didn`t feel a personal guarantee existed, as I was not made aware of it, nor was the form legible enough to read if it actually existed.. When the judge dealt with the case as me I explained that I opened a credit account in screwfix unaware it had a personal guarantee had been included in the application forms. I remember filling the form out at the time of opening the account and it was a photocopy of what seemed like an application form, it was mostly illegible. The Judge agreed that it the section that included information about a personal guarantee was illegible, as was the copy she had received and the same with the copy their solicitor was try to use against me in court. She asked was there an original copy and their solicitor produced and clear application with no details on it. Judge agreed that it was clear and included a section about a personal guarantee but also said that it was a blank form and not the one I have filled in and signed. She then asked their solicitor if he had a legible copy of the form I had filled in to which he replied they had not been able to locate it. She then asked me if I had an original copy and I explained to her that it was the same as the copy she had received as it was a poorly photocopied application form I had filled out in the shop. She then explained to their solicitor that she cannot hold me responsible for a personal guarantee that was not legible and said if they wished to proceed they would need to provide a legible copy with my signature, and that they had 4 weeks to get it otherwise it would be ruled in my favour. As stated already I know from the time of filling in the original application form that no legible version exists (or at least im 99% sure, there is just a slight element of doubt in my mind) The form I filled in looked as if it had been photocopied a few thousand times... I just hope they don`t come back with something within the next four weeks.

Cruz... what you don't mention is that the charges were applied while the loan account was owned by Welcome Finance, but they now have (I assume) immunity from being claimed against due to an order of the High Court. The bizarre thing, is that the deadline to claim against them was 2011, yet some of your charges were applied after this. The question is - what are the prospects of success, should the assignee (current owner) of a regulated consumer credit debt, be taken to court by the debtor to seek redress for unlawful penalty charges that were applied to the debt by the assignor (previous owner)? The charges, in this case, making up a considerable portion of the debt balance. I also wouldn't bother mentioning the repossession claim, as it's not relevant any more and is just a distraction. It only made a determination on one single point - that being the sum of arrears being claimed by the Claimant. It decided nothing else in respect of the loan balance. Also, the starting point is really 2006, as that particular loan wasn't a rewrite. Any charges incurred prior to that are pretty much a lost cause in my view.

So, where are you in terms of engagement with the creditor company? Have you voiced your concerns about having not knowingly signed as a personal guarantor?

"By signing this application form you accept that: G: If the organisation in whose name the Trade UK Account will be held is (a) a company and you are a director of the company, or (b) a partnership and you are a partner in that partnership, you will personally guarantee performance of all of that organisation’s current and future financial obligations to Trade UK (including any subsequent increase(s) in the credit facility extended to that organisation)." Were you a director?

Well, the way I see it, there must be a provision for consumers to seek redress where they've been ripped off by a 'protected' creditor that moves the debt elsewhere and the consumer is still obliged to service the debt. What could that provision be?

So, does that leave the door open to claim against Alpha?

Given that the crux of the claim will be unfair terms, which will challenge the creditor to demonstrate the real cost incurred by the action that led to the charges. With it being Welcome Finance who applied the charges, how does that impact a prospective claim such as this?

Definitely the same debt?

DX, can any future claim in respect of the unlawful charges be issued against Alpha (assignee)? There is also currently PPI remaining within the loan balance. Cruz found out that the policy term was for 60 months, thus has expired. I know very little about PPI - but what's going on with that arrangement?

The judge didn't want to know about that. He made his ruling on the arrears only, which is kind of what I expected. I created an argument that the monthly payments should be the agreed sums, net of interest but he wasn't having that either. I reckon he just wanted to get the claim done and out the door with the least amount of controversy. That's the crux of what Cruz sent me on email. EDIT: Sorry, you beat me to it.

They received the PPI money in the January and issued the claim in March, so had no grounds to ever issue a claim. The incompetence from the Claimant throughout was different level - even the skeleton written by the barrister at the end was amateurish, more so because some of their assertions were completely contradicted by the conduct of Welcome Finance in administering the account - it was all on the statements if they'd only taken a look. Claiming £8k arrears when the statement disclosed in evidence says £6k isn't very smart at all, and claiming that any excess PPI money cannot be used as payment in advance "because no such provision exists", when WF were making debits in excess of the agreed monthly sums and adding the excess as arrears in credit was just a little beauty.

Great result. Delighted for you Cruz...justice well and truly served. Now for a little bit of tidying up.

Thanks Andy!

Am I correct in saying that a bailiff can't be used when the debt is regulated under the CCA?

The debt is insignificant compared to what some have to deal with on here, so don't let it dominate your every thought. You're just one of many, many cases Lowell will be dealing with - don't see it as personal. It's all just a bit of a game, and all you need to do is play it as best you can. If the worst came to the worst, I'm sure they'd take £10 or £20 a month, but we're a long way off that yet...so just chill and keep to the deadlines.

Take a step back and look at it from a neutral point of view. I know nothing of your situation really, and nor does the court. Lowell have just said you owe them money. They haven't provided any proof that you owe money, nor have they provided proof that they have any legal right to take legal action in pursuit of the money. Your defence will basically say "I'm not quite sure what this is about, so how about you provide proof of the balance, that there is a valid agreement to enforce and that you actually own the debt." It's not worded like that, but it's along the lines of what the defences you'll see on here are saying. Even if you don't have much of a defence, challenging the claim will definitely give you a degree of control and you can easily come away with owing a lower amount (paid in manageable installments, if necessary). In saying that, I have a deep dislike for Lowell, so would string them along for as long as possible and make them jump through every hoop I can find or create. Just relax a little about it all and do a bit of reading through other threads. Don't pressure yourself to take it all in - some stuff will stick and some won't. You'll get all the help you need if you're seen to be doing a bit to help yourself too.

This one: https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?472295-Arrow-Moorcroft-Capquest-and-HSBC-Credit-Card Yes - try to post some details about it on the thread and we can discuss from there.

All the advice you'll ever need is right here. Don't over-complicate things. The process is very straight forward, albeit you probably can't see that right now.

Have you started a thread about the credit card debt in the HSBC forum? Each case will be defended on it's own merit, but if you can post up details you can get advice on how best to deal with it. It's easier to get a handle on things if you start before ever receiving a claim. Regards the settlement offer, you could always play hardball and make a counter offer for £2k (for example) paid by installments of £xx p/m. Is there anything you feel needs to be disputed with the balance on the account?