Link claimform - re old GE Woodchester car finance - car repo'd - Caim for outstanding balance

[nicolee2931]

I was reading a Sticky in the Brighthouse Section regarding HP agreements and the return/collection of goods.

 

Now I ask on behalf of a Friend/Neighbour who lives 2 doors up my street, who is being hounded by Asset Link.

 

He purchased a Car from a local garage and finance was provided by GE Woodchester, cutting a long story short he had an accident at work and injured his back which was a pre-existing condition. His claim on the insurance provided by the finance company for his accident was refused as he had suffered from a back complaint before his accident.

 

He managed to get into arrears on the account and as a result his car was repossesed, he had paid less than a third and this was 3 years ago. Now the car was taken from his rear garden which must be accessed via a communial locked gate to which 14 residents/owners have keys and private land must be crossed before reaching his driveway situated on his back garden, this is what I and other residents deem as not being a public place as only the residents/owners have keys to access it, see where this is going but my friend doesn't.

 

Recently my friend has been contacted by a company called Asset Link demanding £7500 which is the amount GE failed to get upon auction of the car. Now my argument is after reading the sticky on the Brighthouse thread I believe my friends car was repossesed unlawfully as the car was not in a public place when taken and a return order still has to sought from a court. My friend believes he should just offer to pay Asset Link what they ask but I say he should fight them as of my discovery today.

 

Cheers

 

Nicola

[nicolee2931]

*bump*

 

Anyone any ideas?

[N.P]

Hi nicolee,

 

How are you? Welcome to CAG, your in the best place now for all your / friends money problems. I`m not expert by any means, but will offer all the support I can and hopefully some one with a more knowing mind will be along soon.

 

Just a couple of things first though -

 

1.) Are you saying it was GE Woodchester who provided him with car insurance as well as finance for the car? If so, did they know of his condition? Because if they did, and they took payments for the insurance and are now refusing payout, that sounds like a missold insurance product to me.

 

2.) How exactly was the car repossessed? I though they would have had to take him to court and win, and then have him default on payments. Then, they would have had to return back to court for a bailiffs order to take the car away. I`m sure that`s how it works.

 

3.) Who are Asset Link in all this?

 

4.) If the accident happened at work, he should be able to claim from work. If that accident has caused him other problems, he should be able to claim enough to cover all his costs for everything. As long as it was actually works fault and not his.

 

Hopefully this will bump up your thread into the attention of someone who can start helping you on your way.

 

Regards

 

 

N.P

 

 

 

If this helps, please click my scales

[nicolee2931]

Hi nicolee,

 

How are you? Welcome to CAG, your in the best place now for all your / friends money problems. I`m not expert by any means, but will offer all the support I can and hopefully some one with a more knowing mind will be along soon.

 

Just a couple of things first though -

 

1.) Are you saying it was GE Woodchester who provided him with car insurance as well as finance for the car? If so, did they know of his condition? Because if they did, and they took payments for the insurance and are now refusing payout, that sounds like a missold insurance product to me.

 

GE provided my friend with the finance and the Payment Protection Insurance, they were also made aware of my friends back complaint at the time of completing the sale.

 

2.) How exactly was the car repossessed? I though they would have had to take him to court and win, and then have him default on payments. Then, they would have had to return back to court for a bailiffs order to take the car away. I`m sure that`s how it works.

 

My friend got behind with his payments as a result of him not being able to work, he was sent a default notice with an intention to repossess the car unless the account was brought upto date. Although he had paid less than a third they were legally entitled to collect the car without a court order, the car was taken while parked on private land to which the general public have no right of way as a key to a gate is required to access this area. I was under the general idea was a Return Order must be sought from the court before taking it from a non public area.

 

3.) Who are Asset Link in all this?

 

Asset Link are the DCA who the debt was transfered to after the car was repossessed and sold at auction.

 

4.) If the accident happened at work, he should be able to claim from work. If that accident has caused him other problems, he should be able to claim enough to cover all his costs for everything. As long as it was actually works fault and not his.

 

He has since put in an accident claim for his accident and was awarded a sum for his injuries, however this has all come to late for him to clear his account and get back the car that was repossessed, I have managed to convince my friend that the car may have been taken illegally without a Return Order from the court and have no right chasing him for the debt owed

[N.P]

Hi again,

 

I`m not sure about how repossession works really, you say they HAD A RIGHT to take it. Maybe you should check this out to be 100%. Even if they had, I think there is a procedure for doing this, without just sneaking in under darkness and dragging it away.

 

As for GE, do you have it in writing that they were aware of your friends condition at the time of the insurance and PPI sale? If so, this definately looks like a case of misold PPI, and if that is the case, you should be able to claim back ALL of your costs, possibly even a new car or the value of it. If that is case, then have will also have illegally set a DCA onto you, who have inaffect it looks like they have stolen the car.

 

Can anyone help out in this? It`s getting complicated now I think.

 

Lets see who comes up with what!

 

Regards

 

 

N.P

[nicolee2931]

Under a HP agreement the finance company can take back the goods if less than a third has been paid which was the case in this instance, however they can only do this so I was reading on another thread if the goods are accessable from a public place, normally most cars would be parked in a public place such as a road or car park and could be repossessed without any problem. In this case the car was taken from private land to which no-one other than key holders have access to, so a Return Order should have been sought from a court.

 

It states under a HP agreement that if goods are taken without a court order all monies under the agreement can be claimed back, thus in this case no debt or liability to my friend.

[N.P]

I understand what your saying, but what if another key holder let them in?

 

Then they haven`t really broken in, shall we say.

 

I think you should also check out the insurance and PPI, that definately looks like a missold product. If they had paid out then everything would have been sorted out then, but as such, that has actually started all your other problems, so you need to check it out.

 

I`ll leave this with you know, as I`m not sure how to help you from now on, sorry. But I`ll keep watching and offer any support where I can.

 

Hope you get this sorted out quickly.

 

Regards

 

 

N.P

[nicolee2931]

Another keyholder almost certainly did let them in, but to repossess the car they has to cross private land to get at the rear of my friends garden open his rear gates and remove the car. I'm almost certain that if GE or Asset Link come up with a valid CCA then this is probably the best mode of attack.

[N.P]

Another keyholder almost certainly did let them in, but to repossess the car they has to cross private land to get at the rear of my friends garden open his rear gates and remove the car. I'm almost certain that if GE or Asset Link come up with a valid CCA then this is probably the best mode of attack.

 

 

Mmmm, they may have an arguement for that. They must have had permission fro the other key holder to cross private land otherwise he / she wouldn`t have let them in. As for entering your friends garden, does the Postman not use this route or another route? It`s a case of proving they actually did tresspass.

 

I`d definately go for the missold insurance and PPI, that looks a better option than the private land arguement, but then that`s me.

 

Lets see who else looks in on this, later this evening, you should get some expert advice.

 

Right, off to nursey now to pick the little un` up. I`ll look in later.

 

Regards

 

 

N.P

[nicolee2931]

Hi people I a bit of a pickle really. Been having loads of issues with link financial over the past 2 months and have been ignoring them, don't know why but the general feeling I get with DCAs is to ignore them.

However today I get 2 items of mail, 1 from link stating a litigation charge has been added to my outstanding account of £130.00. And a CCJ from Northampton CCBC in relation to the letter from Link.

Keeping this all short the whole matter relates to finance provided for a vehicle which was provided by GE Woodchester in January 2004. The vehicle on finance was repossessed in November 2004 due to ill heath so a third of the balance had not been reached and was repossessed without the need for a court order.

I did try to prevent the repossession at the time by entering into an agreement but GE was having non of it.

what are my options

should I enter on the court forms I admit to the lot and sell my soul to the devil.

Or shall I deny it all, & request for a set aside while I get link to provide me with all the paperwork as so I can find a flaw and get them on a technicality.

Something tells me to fight them as they are looking for an easy judgement so they can come after my home when it suits them.

I will scan the court order up and letter on what to do next.

[Deb T]

The legal side I'm sure somebody will be along shortly to advise but you'd be right to fight, particularly where Link Financial are concerned, take a look on the forum there are multitudes of posts concerning them and their somewhat underhanded tactics. They tend to rely on an action going undefended so that they can get a judgement by default.

 

Fight the claim (assuming they have a valid one.have you send them a request for a credit agreement etc?) as you may find that the amount you have to pay them back each month is substantially less than what they may be currently requesting etc....(and that's if it gets to court)

[PGH7447]

when was you last payment in 2004? or your last payment ever?

 

and of course you will defend

[Deb T]

Just read your final line 'come after your home' You're a homeowner? in which case you must defend the action or else you run the risk of them applying for a charge on your property (only usually done when you miss a payment of a ccj) (in the event that they actually get a judgement)

 

In my opinion Link Financial tend to go for ccjs and then possibly a charging order for a number of reasons....

 

1/ To turn an unsecured debt into a secured one

2/ To increase their portfolio so as possibly be able to be able to increase their own credibility when purchasing debt/looking to sell things on.

[Hardupnotfedup]

When was your last payment made? If sometime in 2004 we are nearing statued barred time.

[nicolee2931]

I will fight them all the way if need be, they ain't going to get an easy Judgement out of me.

It must have been August 2004 as that was when I broke my leg and could not work, I know for definite the debt is not statute barred as we made contact with GE in November 2004 just before the repossession to try and come to some arrangement.

I know I am going to have to go down the route now of issuing Link with a CCA and SAR to get this information off them as so I can defend the claim, but not sure how to buy more time with the court while I await the documentation to arrive from link.

[cerberusalert]

Does the litigation charge they have added to the a/c match what the the court claim states? I have a feeling they might be trying to sneak extra charges in, i.e., have they listed the sums owed including the litigation charges and then added solicitors and costs for the summons again?

[PGH7447]

no need for a sar and cca just send them a cpr31.14 now and demand all docs they are going to rely on incourt

[nicolee2931]

I have uploaded the Letter from Link and the court to photobucket.

 

http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i59/zoltr0n/CCJClaim.jpg

 

http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i59/zoltr0n/LinkLetter.jpg

 

What actually will a CPR31.14 do and will I get copies of the stuff they wish to use. As I may wish to check if the credit agreement is valid and if default notices have been correctly issued.

 

What should I do with these court papers as no doubt I will have to acknowledge service, and what should I put in the acknowledgement of service. As I will have to state to the court my intentions and request transfer to my local court.

[cerberusalert]

Yes they've charged you twice; £130 litigation costs & then again £190 on the court papers.

 

Talk about two bites of the apple.

[nicolee2931]

Okay so this is looking good so far... Been scouting around on a few threads this one seems interesting as to buy more time...

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/192837-help-please-court-papers-3.html

 

post #42

 

anyone any ideas on that method of approach while i get the maximum amount of information from Link and the good advice from folks on here.

 

So going forward the claim was issued on the 12th April 2010, I have to file Acknowledgment of service by the 26th April? after this I have to file an embarrased defence by 10th May 2010, and await transfer to my local court while submitting a CPR31.14?

 

Does that sound like a plan anyone?

[nicolee2931]

does that sound like an abuse of process? to obtain more by some form of deception?

And are they allowed to do this or are they beginning to dig a deep hole for themselves.

As my view to this is I have to fight with a view to winning as I have felt all along since the repossession things have not been handled right or legally, or possibly losing but worst case scenario to this is they get paid a very small amount which I can afford agreed by the courts.

[Jasper1965]

Looks speculative to me,

Link know this will shortly be SB'ed so it's worth punting a couple of hundred quid in the hope you ignore or fail to put them to proof.

It might be more beneficial if you were to SAR the OC and use CPR disclosure powers to force Link to reveal the documents.

They've already mentioned

the agreement and

the deed of assignment 

force them to produce the originals plus of course

the terms and conditions and

then statements of account to justify the amount claimed,

the notice of default which must have been issued prior to termination,

proof of proceeds from the vehicle, etc. etc.

there's a large list of things you will in time be wholly entitled to demand from Link and there's a likelihood that they wont have it all or some/all of it's incorrect.

First things first though acknowledge the claim and then file a defence.

There's an excellent thread on this site somewhere hopefully somebody can link to it.

[nicolee2931]

When completing the AS online I know I will be defending all of the claim but do I have to tick the 'I intend to contest jurisdiction' box as well.

 

Thought I might as well get the AS out of the way as so I can file the embarrassed defence near the end of the expiry of the 28 day limit, and get the CPR31.14 request in in the mean time.

[harrassed senior]

Just wondering if a change of heading may be beneficial as it reads as though you already have a CCJ? Just press the red triangle if you think you would like to change to Summons Received etc.

[cerberusalert]

Moved to legal forum.