Don't forget all you need do is establish that there is a triable issue. Have you served a Notice to Prove?

If it wasn't signed a s a deed then it is unlikely to be valid

Both

Case isn't allocated to track yet so they have to comply with CPR 31.14 request. If they don't issue application for unless order

What reason did the DJ give for accepting that MBNA had given you 14 days after deemed service? There must have been a specific argument used. As for costs you are in small claims. Unless you have acted unreasonably in defending the application for SJ you would only be liable for issue and hearing fee costs together with any witness expenses. The fact the DJ has adjourned the hearing for MBNA to provide further evidence shows you did not act unresonably.

Was the Guarantee you signed a Deed? Was your signature witnessed?

They would need your consent.

SSu

Make payments to the Council online

Hows it going Goldlady?

Well done

If the old account was in joint names then the account they have just frozen must be in joint names too for the funds to be offset. Similarly if the old account was just in your name then they cannot lawfully offset funds from a joint account

interesting thread

congratulations :)

Thought this may be of interest from the Dodgy Default thread courtesy of SX 20 I follow you too. It is a great shame that after stating in the Act that before becoming entitled to any of the things set out in section 87 there must be service of an effective DN, parliament did not then see fit to state what the consequences would be if the entitlements were demanded where there wasn't an effecive DN. Back in 1974 We had a wealth of judge made contract law but precious little case law governing situations so heavily regulated as consumer credit agreements Since then we have had cases like Woodchester v Swayne help us consider what the law might be where a creditor seeks to claim section 87 entitlements without complying with the requirements for an effective DN. In Woodchester, where the creditor issued a DN claiming in excess of the actual arrears, the DN was ruled ineffective and the creditor was denied all of the claim to include the claim for early payment of instalments ordinarily due in the future, apart from the precise arrears of instalments owing at the time of the issue of the DN. Had the Court of Appeal deciding Woodchester been as kwayward as the Judge who decided Blue Thunder's case, the Court of Appeal would have adjourned the appeal to enable Woodchester to issue a correct DN re-convened when that had occurred and then found for Woodchester. We know this didn't happen. It's probably worth repeating again what section 87(1) says Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a “default notice ”) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,— (a) to terminate the agreement, or (b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or © to recover possession of any goods or land, or (d) to treat any right conferred on the debtor or hirer by the agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or (e) to enforce any security. In the context of Blue Thunder's case, yesterday was the adjourned hearing of the creditor's application for summary judgment. At such a hearing it behoves the applicant to establish to the satisfaction of the court that the defence is such that the defendant has no real prospect of successfully defending the claim or issue (CPR 24.2). At the first hearing an issue was raised that the creditor's default notice was ineffective because it allowed just 12 or certainly less days than the minimum 14 days prescribed by the Act. With this revelation the court adjourned the hearing as I say, and the new hearing took place yesterday. In my view the decision at the first hearing was plain wrong and had I known of the case earlier than I did, my advice to Blue Thunder would have been to submit his own application for summary judgment against the creditor. Section 87 speaks of a time when a creditor can become entitled and refers to the time when that might happen by reference to a pre-condition that there has been service of a default notice in accordance with section 88. When the first hearing took place the judge ruled that the DN relied upon by the creditor was ineffective. At that point therefore it ought to have been clear to the Judge that contrary to the creditor's argument, Blue Thunder did indeed have reasonable prospects of success. Further more of course, had Blue Thunder put in his own application for summary judgment the court ought to have ruled that the creditor had no prospect of success on its claim (save for any arrears still owing at the time of service of the DN) because the pre-condition giving rise to when the creditor becomes entitled to the things under section 87 had not been fulfilled. In short, the creditor had no reasonable prospect of success. Or put strictly speaking : the creditor had no reasonable prospect of success as things stood at the date of that hearing. So for that reason the hearing was adjourned and an effective DN was then served during the interval so that by when the court reconvened, the court could pretend there had never been an obstacle to awarding the creditor summary judgment. All this sticks in my throat. And there's more. Evidently (I will be corrected if I am wrong) the Judge allowed the application for judgment without first requiring the creditor to amend the Particulars of Claim by reciting its reliance upon the matter of the second DN. The judge decided the case on evidence and submissions which formed no part of the creditor's pleaded case! Worse, the judge decided in the creditor's favour in a claim commenced before the right advanced in the evidence and submissions had crystalised. By that I mean a claimant must have a cause of action, a legally recognised right to sue if you like, readily avialable at the time the proceedings are begun. Put another way, I would not expect to succeed on a case issued by me today for the price of the fee I propose to charge for conducting a case I might be instructed to deal with in 3 months time. You've got to get your horse before your cart. If the creditor in Blue Thunder's case based its case upon the second DN delivered during the interval between the first and second hearings of its application for summary judgemnt and thus had no right to any of the section 87 entitlements until then, what was it doing issuing proceedings last year? Evidently the creditor and judge were alert to that difficulty. I have seen the skeleton argument put in by the creditor by which they endeavoured to get around that difficulty. In it they contend that the right to sue for everything crystalised on Blue Thunder's missing an instalment payment. Again and in my opinion, utter nonsense. Such an argument entirely ignores the pre-condition element of section 87. I suppose this ought to be added to Blue Thunder's thread which I found earlier today. In my opinion the decision is quite clearly appealable and what I understand of the the judge's handling of the case and reasoning is shocking.

Did you make any payments to the creditors or the debt collectors after receiving the original DN & termination notice ?

You did well:)

Suggest you read the tale of a dodgy default notice thread

Your advicde re LOPA is correct

All accounts will come under the same sar request - just specify all numbers

They will have difficulty getting permission of the court read a dodgy default notice thread

A creditor can issue one default notice for all accounts.

I would not advise writing ' telling creditor they have cocked up default notice as they may try reissuing a new one. Reac the thread a dodgy default notice

No you have to acknowledge within 14 days of service. That will give you a furrther 14 days to file defence. Service is 5 days from issue date. If need be file an interim defence to stop cl getting default judgment. Only after that if claimant wants to proceed does it get transferred to local court

They have to supply the original signed agreement if they have it