barclaycard default removal

[Guest willowb]

This is for my benefit so bear with me:D

 

Link to a thread I started in the bear garden 'when's a judgement a judgement?'

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bear-garden/76499-whens-judgement-judgement.html

 

Copy of the order received to day....

 

[removed for address to be removed from scan]

 

logical steps for letter and references....

 

* 12th Sept 1st letter sent to B'card asking them to desist in processing Ohs data.

* Received response letter dated 25th sept with a copy of the default notice. The notice was dated 19th Dec 2002. The default had been processed on OHs file since 15th Feb 2003. Barclaycard state that the default started on 15th Feb 2006. They enclose a letter which was sent along with the notice to our (at the time) DMC.....we NEVER saw it.

* Stat notice was sent dated 28th Sept giving them 21 days to respond.

* Response to stat notice received 4th Oct.

* LBA sent (with response to arguments in above letter from B'card) 11th Oct.

* Claim filed 27th Oct.

* Acknowledged by the Defendant 9th November and Defence received dated 29th Nov.

* AQs were due by the 28th Dec 2006.

* An order was made for the Defendant to submitt their AQ on or before the 8th Feb.

* As far as I can remember the clerk told me that they submitted their defence around the 6th March.

* In total they were (by my calculations) 68 days late!!!!!

* After speaking to the Court a few times about this, OH was finally given the 'go ahead' to submitt the notice of issue requesting Judgement on or about the 15th March. Apparently the AQ had been submitted but not logged on the system.

 

I've gotta put all that in a letter and try and 'win' the Judge over....Oh Lord!

 

Wxxx

[Guest willowb]

Karne, I can't thank you enough!!!

 

Wxxx

[bill-k]

I've gotta put all that in a letter and try and 'win' the Judge over....Oh Lord!

Damn - Old BB's missed another chance of sending you a Valentine card !! I'll getcha getcha getcha getcha one way - or another !!

 

That Order suggests that they didn't state an intention to defend, as they did not reply to the Claim form. Just a thought, in case it's worth mentioning.

 

 

FWIW, this would be my suggestion for a layout. If you can put the letter into short, one or two-sentence paragraphs, that might help with the Judge's thought processing, perhaps. Don't use the para. headers, though. If you need to use two pages, try and put the Prelim and subsequent para's all on the second page.

 

Preamble

Salutations and much grovelling, plus outline of what you want and why

Prelim

* 12th Sept 1st letter sent to B'card asking them to desist in processing Ohs data.

* Received response letter dated 25th sept with a copy of the default notice. The notice was dated 19th Dec 2002. The default had been processed on OHs file since 15th Feb 2003. Barclaycard state that the default started on 15th Feb 2006. They enclose a letter which was sent along with the notice to our (at the time) DMC.....we NEVER saw it.

Stat Notice

* Stat notice was sent dated 28th Sept giving them 21 days to respond.

* Response to stat notice received 4th Oct.

 

LBA

* LBA sent (with response to arguments in above letter from B'card) 11th Oct.

* Claim filed 27th Oct.

* Acknowledged by the Defendant 9th November and Defence received dated 29th Nov.

 

AQ

* AQs were due by the 28th Dec 2006.

* An order was made for the Defendant to submitt their AQ on or before the 8th Feb.

* As far as I can remember the clerk told me that they submitted their defence around the 6th March.

* In total they were (by my calculations) 68 days late!!!!!

Issue of Judgment

* After speaking to the Court a few times about this, OH was finally given the 'go ahead' to submitt the notice of issue requesting Judgement on or about the 15th March. Apparently the AQ had been submitted but not logged on the system.

Summary/Conclusion

Grovelling submission of logicalk reasons why full Judgment should be upheld

[Guest willowb]

Thank you Bill:D Here is the draft letter, I would appreciate someone having a look for me??? any spelling mistakes, something I've missed??? perleeeease....

 

For the attention of District Judge Bryce,

 

With reference to the above claim, I would like to appeal to the Court to uphold the order of Judgement made against the Defendant.

 

I am enclosing all the relevant correspondance between myself and the Defendant for your deliberation, the correspondance will be cross referenced in this letter [].

 

At the time the Court made an order for the Defendant to submit their Allocation Questionnaire by the 8th Februrary 2007, they were already 42 days late in doing so. Even then, the Defendant took another 26 days (as far as I am aware the Defendant submitted their AQ on the 6th March 2007) to comply with the Court's order. In the mean time I had been in contact with the Court clerks to try and decifer what my next action should be. On or around the 15th of March I spoke to a Court clerk who advised me to send in the 'Issue of Notice' and request that a Judgement be ordered. Soon after I received a 'General Form of Judgement' regarding the allocation of the case and directions for the hearing to be set at a later date.

 

As I had already sent a request for Judgement, I was quite distraught as rightly or wrongly I assumed that a hearing would not go ahead. A telephone call was made to the Court and the clerk informed me that the Defendant's Allocation Questionnaire had infact been submitted but not logged on the system in time. Though, when the clerk realised how late the Defendant was in submitting the forms she informed me that she would put the issue before yourself again for review.

 

I respect whatever decision is made but I do feel that the Defendant is blatantly floundering Court procedure and has been given more than enough time to comply with the orders. The situation is distressing enough for myself and my wife with the prospect of a hearing, without the added stress of not knowing what will happen.

 

I hope that from the correspondance I have enclosed, you will note that I have made every endeavour to settle this issue with the Defendant out of Court as pre-action protocols advise, I was left with no choice but to issue a claim.

 

In the intial correspondance with the Defendant over the default marker on my file [1], it became apparent that the Defendant had been processing inaccurate data from 28th February 2003 until 15th februrary 2006 as they state in their correspondance [2] that the data was only being processed from the latter date though I have evidence in my credit file [3] which states clearly when the default started, 28th Februrary 2003. The Default Notice [4] which was supplied to me is dated 19th December 2002. The Defendant goes on to state that the Default will remain for 6 years from the latter date, which will mean that the default has been on my file for 4 years already and will remain for a further 5, a total of nine years.

 

 

 

This account was settled in March 2006, I have written to the Defendant to instruct them to close my account [5] and have a letter stating that the account is settled and that a full and final settlement was accepted [6] although on my credit file it indicates a 'partial settlement'. My contention is that this is an unfair reflection of the account status.

 

I sent a Statutory Notice on the 28th september 2006 [7] to which I received an unsatisfactory response, the Defendant did not give me valid reasons for continuing to process the adverse data on my file. I then sent a Letter Before Action [8] to the Defendant allowing them a further 2 weeks to reconsider. I did not receive a response and therefore I issued a claim. Please refer to my Particulars of Claim for a more detailed explanation.

 

I did not want the situation to come to this, I believe that the Defendant has not acted fairly or complied with their duties under the Data Protection Act 1998 and continues to make a mockery of the court system which is there to protect us all.

 

Wxxx

[Guest willowb]

Thank you for checking that for me hun, I really appreciate it:)

 

Right, off to post office I go!!!!

 

Just for the record, here is the amended version.....

 

For the attention of District Judge Bryce,

 

With reference to the above claim, I would like to appeal to the Court to uphold the order of Judgement made against the Defendant.

I am enclosing all the relevant correspondance between myself and the Defendant for your deliberation, the correspondance will be cross referenced in this letter [ ].

On the 25th January 2007 the Court made an order for the Defendant to submit their Allocation Questionnaire by the 8th Februrary 2007. The original date for return of the Allocation Questionnaire was 28th December 2006. The Defendant took a further 26 days (as far as I am aware the Defendant submitted their AQ on the 6th March 2007) to comply with the Court's order. In the mean time I had been in contact with the Court clerks to try and decifer what my next action should be.

 

On or around the 15th of March 2007 I spoke to a Court clerk who advised me to send in the 'Issue of Notice' and request that a Judgement be ordered.

 

A telephone call was made to the Court on 29th March 2007 and the clerk informed me that the Defendant's Allocation Questionnaire had infact been submitted but not logged on the system in time. Though, when the clerk realised how late the Defendant was in submitting the forms she informed me that she would put the issue before yourself again for review.

I respect whatever decision is made but I do feel that the Defendant is blatantly floundering Court procedure and has been given more than enough time to comply with the orders.

 

I hope that from the correspondance I have enclosed, you will note that I have made every endeavour to settle this issue with the Defendant out of Court as pre-action protocols advise, I was left with no choice but to issue a claim.

 

In the intial correspondance with the Defendant over the default marker on my file [1] it became apparent that the Defendant had been processing inaccurate data from 28th February 2003 until 15th februrary 2006 as they state in their correspondance [2] that the data was only being processed from the latter date though I have evidence in my credit file [3] which states clearly when the default started, 28th Februrary 2003. The Default Notice [4] which was supplied to me is dated 19th December 2002. The Defendant goes on to state that the Default will remain for 6 years from the latter date, which will mean that the default has been on my file for 4 years already and will remain for a further 5, a total of nine years.

 

 

 

This account was settled in March 2006, I have written to the Defendant on two occations to instruct them to close my account [5] and have a letter stating that the account is settled and that a full and final settlement was accepted [6] although on my credit file it indicates a 'partial settlement'. My contention is that this is an unfair reflection of the account status.

 

I sent a Statutory Notice (included with letter) to the Defendant on the 28th september 2006 [7] to which I received an unsatisfactory response [8], the Defendant did not give me valid reasons for continuing to process the adverse data on my file. I then sent a Letter Before Action [9] to the Defendant allowing them a further 2 weeks to reconsider. I received a negative response [10] and therefore proceeded to issue a claim. Please refer to my Particulars of Claim for a more detailed explanation [11].

I did not want the situation to come to this, I believe that the Defendant has not acted fairly or complied with their duties under the Data Protection Act 1998 and continues to make a mockery of the court system which is there to protect us all.

 

Yours Sincerely

 

 

Wxxx

[joesoap]

willow,

 

Has anything happened on this yet. Just reading through while I take the next step (LBA?) on "default hell". Shop Direct have not replied to my initial request regarding default removal on my wife's credit file.

 

Ian