Statutory Demand from Capquest / Egg

[snlc]

I just received a Statutory Demand from Capquest for a £4000 egg Credit Card account I had. I sent a cca request and received a document which looks like a combined credit card application form and Agreement. It's got one of the 'moisten here' edges like the old airmail letters but it starts off at the top Credit Agreement Regulated by etc..but directly underneath states "Take Advantage and apply before 31st March 2001" There are no details just the statics of name address and personal details, income etc. and no mention of interest, credit card amount or the likes of that which could be described as 'prescribed terms'.

 

Also, like many others on here I tried to call the named individual Johanna O'Keefe and she was 'not available' and wont be I was told as she's very busy, but the lady I spoke to was in the same department and could help. I have read on one of these posts that the person named must be spoken to if not it makes the SD invalid - can anyone confirm that please?

 

I wa told that the SD would not be withdrawn despite the lack of a proper agreement, despite their being a dispute over the amount, despite they having not supplied all the statements etc so will I have to go through the whole process as stated by tomterm and others in this thread? http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/86067-getting-statutory-demand-set.html

 

Any thoughts This came in the post not sure if 1st or 2nd class as I chucked the envelope.

 

Thanks

 

Tom

[Guest Old_andrew2018]

Good Luck you will need to start the process asap, there are many people who will advise in case you get stuck somewhere along the way.

Edited August 31, 2008 by old_andrew2007
typo

[tendogs]

Evening,

Crapquest appear to be dolling these out like confetti at the moment. They’re easy and cheap (you don’t need a solicitor to send one) to produce and they make people panic and pay. They are, however expensive to proceed with and you have to be able to prove service so unless it was registered or given to you by a process server then I wouldn’t worry too much.

Don’t become complacent though, they are valid for 4 months, and so it might be wise to have it set aside. The process is quite easy and you have found the thread that need to follow already.

Dogs

[snlc]

In response to their Stat Demand I wrote disputing this debt and their agreement and I've just received a letter from Capquest saying they have put my account 'on hold' while they investigate - nothing about stopping or withdrawing the SD. 18days is up 2nd Sep which is Tuesday. Any ideas if this 'on hold letter' suffices sufficiently enough to stop this?

 

I phoned on Friday but only got the letter late p.m. and just got through to collections department in Scotland ' we are in another country' the girl told me - Scotland ?! - okay traditionalists, but come on ! even the Indians in the bank call centres try to make it sound like they are in Great Britain LOL ) - who had , would you believe, no access to the admin side where these SD eminate from in Fleet.

 

Instinct tells me I should get set aside in asap for Tuesday, or should I phone them again to clarify on Monday?

 

Isn't it a pity I just can't trust these people like one should be able to do?

 

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

Tom

 

 

Just as an aside, Something tells me if capquest are using this Stat demand and sending them out like confetti, the OFT ought to be advised - whilst this is a legitimate legal tool, unless they have absolute right ( and having no agreement is not absolute) to issue these is a complete abuse of process.

Edited August 31, 2008 by snlc

[saintly_1]

Have you applied for the stat demand to be set aside at court ?

[tendogs]

I would stop trying to reason with them, mainly because they only want the money. I don’t subscribe to the idea that the people at the DCAs are all the spawn of the devil but I still would not speak to them because all it does is frustrate you and, generally, gets you nowhere.

 

Get this thing set aside and then set about the task of making them prove the debt is enforceable, that’s much more satisfying.

 

Dogs

[tendogs]

Can you post up the alleged agreement?

Dogs

[andrew1]

Stat demands should not be used like this

[tendogs]

Of course they shouldn’t they’re terrifying when they drop through the door, the incidents of them being mentioned in posts on this forum seems to have escalated (not an objective view, just a feeling) and they seem to be coming mostly from Crapquest.

If the membership of this forum is representative of those in financial difficulty then goodness knows how many they’ve sent out. One can understand the attraction however, they don’t need a lawyer so their relatively cheap to send and they sc are the crap out of people. I don’t know if there is any redress regarding their misuse.

Dogs

[Guest Old_andrew2018]

In response to their Stat Demand I wrote disputing this debt and their agreement and I've just received a letter from Capquest saying they have put my account 'on hold' while they investigate - nothing about stopping or withdrawing the SD. 18days is up 2nd Sep which is Tuesday. Any ideas if this 'on hold letter' suffices sufficiently enough to stop this?

 

I phoned on Friday but only got the letter late p.m. and just got through to collections department in Scotland ' we are in another country' the girl told me - Scotland ?! - okay traditionalists, but come on ! even the Indians in the bank call centres try to make it sound like they are in Great Britain LOL ) - who had , would you believe, no access to the admin side where these SD eminate from in Fleet.

 

Instinct tells me I should get set aside in asap for Tuesday, or should I phone them again to clarify on Monday? Your instinct is most probably correct IMHO they will continue, you must get the SD set aside DON'T TRUST THEM.

 

Isn't it a pity I just can't trust these people like one should be able to do?

 

 

Any thoughts?

 

 

Tom

 

 

Just as an aside, Something tells me if capquest are using this Stat demand and sending them out like confetti, the OFT ought to be advised - whilst this is a legitimate legal tool, unless they have absolute right ( and having no agreement is not absolute) to issue these is a complete abuse of process.

 

good luck

[MARTIN3030]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/158682-capquest-dont-let-them.html

[Having_A_Knightmare]

Form 6.5

 

Affidavit in Support of Application to Set Aside Statutory Demand

 

 

 

Section 2 ©

 

 

 

(1) Do not admit the debt because the existence/enforceability of the alleged debt is in dispute.

I apply for the statutory demand to be set aside as the creditor is aware the debt is in dispute, the creditor has failed to comply with its obligations under the Consumer Credit Act, and I believe that the creditor issued this statutory demand as an abuse of process intended to pressure me into paying the full amount of a disputed debt contrary to the OFT Debt Collection Guidelines.

 

The creditor has defaulted under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for failing to provide a copy of the alleged agreement on request within the prescribed period. Under the provisions of s78 (6), the creditor is not entitled to enforce the alleged agreement while this default continues. My request under s78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 was sent to Connaught Collections, the debt collection agency who claims to be dealing with the alleged agreement and have raised the statutory demand. This request was received and by them on the xxxxxx. (Attached exhibit marked 'B')

 

Further, I believe that the amount of xxxxx referred to in the statutory demand would no doubt include a substantial sum of unlawful penalty charges. Connaught Collections have not provided further information regarding the account, and still have not provided a statement of account (as requested under s78 CCA 1974).

 

In summary:

a) 1st Credit/ Connaught Collections have not provided a notice or document of assignment (no proof they indeed own the debt)

(b) 1st Credit/ Connaught Collections have not provided a consumer credit agreement (no proof the debt is enforceable)

© 1st Credit/ Connaught Collections have not proved the amount of the debt stated;

(d) It is likely that illegal charges would be placed on the alleged debt, which would comprise a substantial amount of the alleged debt, and so the statutory demand would be for a disputed debt.

(e) 1st Credit/ Connaught Collections have not provided any copies of any default notices, which potentially could lead to a counterclaim. - Settled law regarding failure of a Default Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but allow the Defendant to submit a counterclaim for damages (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119)

 

The respondent has chosen to serve a statutory demand by ‘regular’ post (attached exhibit marked 'C') in full knowledge of the fact that the debt is disputed. In view of this, and of the matters pleaded above, the applicant avers that the service of the statutory demand is demonstrably frivolous, intimidatory and an abuse of process. (Connaught Collection passed the case back to 1st Credit on the 16th May 2007 attached exhibit marked 'D').

 

I will also quote from the Office of Fair Trading, guidelines on debt collection which clearly state:

Deceptive and Unfair Methods

2.8(k). Not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt.

Examples of unfair practises

2.6(h). Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment.

Accordingly, the applicant respectfully requests that the statutory demand be struck out or set-aside. Further, the applicant invites the court to make an order of costs in favour of the applicant in respect of the reasonable cost of preparing this application and of attending any hearings in respect thereof.

 

I make this statement with the sworn belief that all facts stated are true.

 

 

 

Use something like this and alter to suit