Cab1ne-Lombard-Shoosmiths **Claim Recieved** - ***WON***

[cab1ne]

I thought you said that the recent default notice was valid "No i did'nt, i said" (this latest default notice is correct and not dodgy),

 

Why write chapter and verse about the validity of the default notice"No i have'nt", (after 2 dodgy Dodgy Default Notices + 2 Terminations and 2 years later, my creditors have decided to send me another Default Notice).

 

when your point is that they've already terminated the agreement and therefore can't default it? (so i called them to seek their intentions).

 

they intend to default me (again) which they have done.

terminate me (again), which they will do.

and then attempt to repossess the vehicle (again). which they will do.

 

their latest default notice is as you say "they've already terminated the agreement and therefore can't default it? "but they have". so iam looking at a way i could put the blockers on the situation and force their hand in taking me to court. with this in mind i have decided to reply with a letter on one of the issues concerning my agreement with them, which is the first default and termination notices.

 

appologies for any confusion.

cab

[cab1ne]

just recieved this from creditors any suggestions on how to respond please

 

 

cab

Edited October 25, 2009 by cab1ne

[cab1ne]

"bump"

[heliosfa]

just recieved this from creditors any suggestions on how to respond please

 

 

cab

 

I commented on the Finance U thread that you posted on earlier, but I thought I should find your thread and pop the reponse here aswell!

 

Erm, i'd say that letter is borderline on Fraud right there. I'd write back to them pointing out that it was changed in the Consumer Credit Act 2006 and came into force on the 1st October 2006.

 

Then, if they stick by 7 days, complaints away! inc. the Police for Fraud. Let them wriggle out of that one.

 

H

[cab1ne]

Thanx Heliosfa

i think they make their own laws up!!!!!!!!!!!!! and they still think they have done nothing wrong!!!!!!

 

cab

[cab1ne]

could anybody steer me in the direction of the amendments about changing 7 days to 14 on default notices

 

cb

[heliosfa]

could anybody steer me in the direction of the amendments about changing 7 days to 14 on default notices

 

cb

 

Yup, it is Section 14 - Default Notices of the Consumer Credit Act 2006

 

14 Default notices

(1)

In subsections (2) and (3) of section 88 of the 1974 Act (contents and effect of default notice) for “seven” wherever occurring substitute "14".

 

And it was brought into effect by the The Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Commencement No. 1) Order 2006 on the 1st of October 2006.

(2) The provisions of the Act specified in Schedule 2 shall come into force on 1st October 2006.

 

SCHEDULE 2Article 3(2)

PROVISIONS COMING INTO FORCE ON 1ST OCTOBER 2006

ProvisionsSubject Matter of ProvisionsSection 14(1)Substitution of 14 days for seven days where it occurs in section 88 of the 1974 Act (contents and effect of default notice)

 

Ta,

H

[cab1ne]

thankyou H

 

now my next question might be a bit confusing.

 

my agreement was taken out in august 2006 (not subject to the new 2006 act). so me being a lay person would assume that i would only be allowed 7 days on the default, but reading the threads "maybe not". the default was not issued until july 2007, so does the amendment apply to me.

 

cab

[heliosfa]

thankyou H

 

now my next question might be a bit confusing.

 

my agreement was taken out in august 2006 (not subject to the new 2006 act). so me being a lay person would assume that i would only be allowed 7 days on the default, but reading the threads "maybe not". the default was not issued until july 2007, so does the amendment apply to me.

 

cab

Yes, the amendment does apply as the Default Notice was issued after the legislation was ammended.

 

H

[cab1ne]

Yes, the amendment does apply as the Default Notice was issued after the legislation was ammended.

 

H

 

Phewwwwww "nice one"

 

cab

[cab1ne]

any suggestions please "edit or add"

 

I acknowledge your letter dated 21st October 2009, and the contents which are duly noted; at the end of my letter dated 17th October 2009 I suggested the following.

 

If you are having problems in understanding any of the above letter, may I suggest that you seek further advice from your legal team or representatives before attempting any further actions or any further discussions with me.

 

As you have chosen not to seek any legal advice, I feel I should bring to your attention the following, regarding the Consumer Credit Act (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561)

 

In your first paragraph you have stated that you cannot agree with the assertion that the Notice of Default, dated 12th July 2007 was served in a way which deems the Notice, and thus the Agreement unenforceable. This has absolutely nothing to do with the enforceability or unenforceability of an agreement.

My last letter dated 17th October 2009, pointed out the innacuracies of the Default Notice and the Termination Notice.

 

The Default Notice dated 12th July 2007 was issued after that piece of legislation was amended as follows:

The Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2006

The Secretary of State makes the following Regulations in exercise of the powers conferred on him by sections 88(1) and 182(2) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

Citation, commencement and interpretation

1. This Order may be cited as the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2006 and shall come into force on 19th December 2006.

 

Amendment of the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983

2. The Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 shall be amended as follows.

 

3. In Schedule 2 in paragraphs 3©, 3(d) and 6 for the words "not less than seven days" substitute "not less than fourteen days".

 

 

Ian McCartney

Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs Department of Trade and Industry

 

18th November 2006

 

EXPLANATORY NOTE

These Regulations amend the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983. They provide that default notices served under section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 shall specify—

(a)that where action is required to be taken by the debtor or hirer to remedy the breach or pay compensation, this action shall be taken within not more than 14 days after the service of the notice; and

 

(b) where no such action is required to be taken, the date on or after which the creditor or owner intends to take action, must not be less than 14 days from the date of the notice.

 

As for the Termination Notice, that speaks for its self “Terminated”

ter·mi·nate

v. ter·mi·nat·ed, ter·mi·nat·ing, ter·mi·nates

 

terminated - (of e.g. a contract or term of office) having come to an end

 

May I also suggest that due to the postal strikes, it would be acceptable to correspond via email as it would be easier. My email is xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

cheers cab

Edited October 25, 2009 by cab1ne
insert

[citizenB]

any suggestions please "edit or add"

 

I acknowledge your letter dated 21st October 2009, and the contents which are duly noted; at the end of my letter dated 17th October 2009 I suggested the following.

 

"If you are having problems in understanding any of the above letter, may I suggest that you seek further advice from your legal team or representatives before attempting any further actions or any further discussions with me."

 

As you have chosen not to seek any legal advice, I feel I should bring to your attention the following, regarding the Consumer Credit Act (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561)

 

In your first paragraph you have stated that you cannot agree with the assertion that the Notice of Default, dated 12th July 2007 was served in a way which deems the Notice, and thus the Agreement unenforceable. This has absolutely nothing to do with the enforceability or unenforceability of an agreement.

My last letter dated 17th October 2009, pointed out the innacuracies of the Default Notice and the Termination Notice.

 

The Default Notice dated 12th July 2007 was issued after that piece of legislation was amended as follows:

The Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2006

 

The Secretary of State makes the following Regulations in exercise of the powers conferred on him by sections 88(1) and 182(2) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

Citation, commencement and interpretation

1. This Order may be cited as the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2006 and shall come into force on 19th December 2006.

 

Amendment of the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983

2. The Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 shall be amended as follows.

 

 

3. In Schedule 2 in paragraphs 3©, 3(d) and 6 for the words "not less than seven days" substitute "not less than fourteen days".

 

 

Ian McCartney

Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs Department of Trade and Industry

 

18th November 2006

 

 

 

EXPLANATORY NOTE

 

 

These Regulations amend the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983. They provide that default notices served under section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 shall specify—

(a)that where action is required to be taken by the debtor or hirer to remedy the breach or pay compensation, this action shall be taken within not more than 14 days after the service of the notice; and

 

(b) where no such action is required to be taken, the date on or after which the creditor or owner intends to take action, must not be less than 14 days from the date of the notice.

 

As for the Termination Notice, that speaks for its self “Terminated”

ter·mi·nate

v. ter·mi·nat·ed, ter·mi·nat·ing, ter·mi·nates

 

terminated - (of e.g. a contract or term of office) having come to an end

 

May I also suggest that due to the postal strikes, it would be acceptable to correspond via email as it would be easier. My email is xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

 

cheers cab

 

Couple of tweaks in blue. Other than that, it sets out your position accurately and invites them to fully update the legal requirements in their organisation:D

[cab1ne]

thankyou citizenb

 

valued advice as usual

 

cab

[cab1ne]

is it good to go:cool:

 

I acknowledge your letter dated 21st October 2009, and the contents which are duly noted; at the end of my letter dated 17th October 2009 I suggested the following.

"If you are having problems in understanding any of the above letter, may I suggest that you seek further advice from your legal team or representatives before attempting any further actions or any further discussions with me."

As you have chosen not to seek any legal advice, I feel I should bring to your attention the following, regarding the Consumer Credit Act (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561)

In your first paragraph you have stated that you cannot agree with the assertion that the Notice of Default, dated 12th July 2007 was served in a way which deems the Notice, and thus the Agreement unenforceable. This has absolutely nothing to do with the enforceability or unenforceability of an agreement. My last letter dated 17th October 2009, pointed out the inaccuracies of the Default Notice

And the Termination Notice.

You then go on to “quote”

“A date specified under subsection (1) must not be less than seven days after the date of service of the default notice, and the creditor or owner shall not take action such as is mentioned in section 87(1) before the date so specified or (if no requirement is made under subsection (1) before those seven days have elapsed.

You also say that my claim that a default notice should provide fourteen “clear days” in which to remedy a breach is not accepted. I beg to differ as the default notice dated 12th July 2007 was issued after that piece of legislation was amended as follows:

The Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2006

The Secretary of State makes the following Regulations in exercise of the powers conferred on him by sections 88(1) and 182(2) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

Citation, commencement and interpretation

1. This Order may be cited as the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2006 and shall come into force on 19th December 2006.

Amendment of the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983

2. The Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 shall be amended as follows.

3. In Schedule 2 in paragraphs 3©, 3(d) and 6 for the words "not less than seven days" substitute "not less than fourteen days"

These Regulations amend the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983. They provide that default notices served under section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 shall specify

(a) That where action is required to be taken by the debtor or hirer to remedy the breach or pay compensation, this action shall be taken within not more than “fourteen days” after the service of the notice; and

(b) Where no such action is required to be taken, the date on or after which the creditor or owner intends to take action must not be less than “fourteen days” from the date of the notice

 

Ian McCartney

Minister of State for Trade, Investment and Foreign Affairs Department of Trade and Industry 18th November 2006

Therefore it is obvious that the Default Notice dated 12th July 2007, falls well within that amendment and subject to “fourteen days” and not “seven days” as you specify.

As for the Termination Notice, that speaks for its self “Terminated” ter·mi·nate v. ter·mi·nat·ed, ter·mi·nat·ing, ter·mi·nates (of e.g a contract or term of office) having come to an end.

It is by your own actions that any Agreement that we may have had, no longer exists. Any Default or Termination Notices served after the 15th August 2007 are purely based on the fiction that an agreement “exists”.

 

 

cheers cab

[cab1ne]

could someone please help me with these figures.

vat as been added to things that should not have vat added & things have been added to the invoice when they should not be there in the first place.?????????????????

 

 

on the invoice where it states "gap taxi 60 month" £537.60 it has a tax code of Z meaning it is a none vatable accessory.

 

on the invoice where it states "delivery" £290.43 + vat @ 17.5%

the dealer clearly states "FREE" delivery anywhere within the U.K

 

on the invoice where it states "road fund license" £145.25 (but the customer registration details shows a fee of £107.25)

 

 

the dealer clearly states all vehicles comes with a minimum of 6 months road fund license

 

so is there a mish mash in figures that throws the agreement into a bit of a frenzy!!!!!!

the figures being.

vat @ 17.5% on the gap insurance

£290.43 + vat @17.5% on delivery

£145.25 on the road fund license

 

cab

Edited November 15, 2009 by cab1ne

[cab1ne]

"Bump" page 12 post#240

Edited November 15, 2009 by cab1ne

[cab1ne]

"bump"

[cab1ne]

could any fellow caggers please advise on the forceability on this agreement. this agreement is also subject to distance marketing directive "DMD"

 

 

 

 

 

 

cab

Edited November 17, 2009 by cab1ne

[citizenB]

I am not able to advise on this one, cabine. However, I will bring both this and post 240 to the attention of the site team for you. Meanwhile you could try and track down someone like postggi, pedross they may be able to help.

[cab1ne]

thanks citizenb

 

will do,

[cab1ne]

i am aware that the agreement does have a problem but

 

"IMPROPERLY EXECUTED OR UNENFORCEABLE":eek:

 

cab

[citizenB]

i am aware that the agreement does have a problem but

 

"IMPROPERLY EXECUTED OR UNENFORCEABLE":eek:

 

cab

 

I simply dont know the answer. Hopefully someone will be along soon but everyone seems to be quite busy today so it might be a little while yet.

[steven4064]

I think it is both properly executed and enforceable - what problem do you think it has?

 

(I havent checked the sums but they look in the right ball-park)

[steven4064]

You need to take this up with the suppler

[cab1ne]

I think it is both properly executed and enforceable - what problem do you think it has?

 

(I havent checked the sums but they look in the right ball-park)

 

thanks steven.

 

so looking at the agreement page one,

1. when would one be responsible for making the first payment of £633.08

2. when would one be responsible for making 59 payment of £433.08

 

i am aware that payment dates come under requireed terms and or prescribed terms. its just that my agreement dont have any payment dates nor does the agreement express any payment dates in any way, shape, or form.

 

i am very confused

 

cab

Edited November 17, 2009 by cab1ne