IND/Hagerty - ** Court Papers Issued MBNA card ** / ** WON WITH COSTS **

[PGH7447]

Hi Brig

 

No Notice of assignment ever

 

Robinson way - 7/12/08 - Our Client has authorised us to recover

Robinson way - 26/02/09 - contact Captial One re charges on the account - (sorry I thought that if you have bought it then you have also bought the liabilites)

Horwich Farrelly - 2/05/09 we have been instructed by the creditor

Robinson way - 19/01/10 - We are instructed by our client

Horwich Farrelly - 14/03/10 - we have been instructed by the creditor

Robinson way -28/03/10 - On behalf of the above company - Robinson Way headed letter

Robinson way - 7/10/10 - We are instructed by our client

Robinson way - 21/10/10 - This is a notice about your unpaid account hich is in our hands to collect

Robinson way - 11/02/11 - This is a notice about your unpaid account hich is in our hands to collect

Horwich Farrelly - 07/03/11 - we have been instructed by the creditor

Robinson way - 7/11/11 - this balance relates to your account with capital one

IND Ltd - 26/10/11 - the full amount owed by you under the agreement referred to above to Capital One bank was assigned to Robinson Way ltd with effect from 24/09/2009

 

From Capital One - today - as a result your account was sold to robinson way on 6 november 2008

 

--------

 

So how can I use this in the upcoming court case instigated by IND Ltd??

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I think the fact that RW have failed to state that they OWN

the debt and claim to be ''acting on behalf of'' a third party,

has been used to mislead you as to who you should be

communicating with regard to proof of the debt.

You have the written confirmation of the sale of the debt

by the OC IMHO this should all be part of your defence and

witness statement, it's very suspicious I think

Also this should be brought quickly to the notice of the OFT,

it breaches at least a couple of the Guidance notes quite significantly.

 

That's my take on it, if I saw this in court I know where my judgement

would be going.

[PGH7447]

its defo going in the defence, and will report these sorry idiots to the oft tomorrow, I was going to state that the last company to threaten court were IND but the POC states Robinson way and their last letter stated all future correspondence to go to IND Ltd, So who the hell am I supposed to deal with, I think they dont have a clue as to what they are doing. all good fun

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Double dealing, misleading unfair and incompetant:madgrin:

stick it to em:lol:

[PGH7447]

Update

 

Letter recieved from Hegarty's re CPR 31.14 request

 

They respond as follows:

 

This claim is likely to be allocated to the small claims track. As you are aware, CPR part 31 does not apply to small claims. In our view it would be illogical and contrary to the overiding objective for CPR Part 31 to apply between issue and allocation to the small claims track.

 

Notwithstanding the above your right todocuments under CPR31.14 (had that been applicable in this case) arises as soon as a document concerned is mentioned in either a staement of case, witness statement, witness summary or affidavit. The words "referred" to in the rule indicate that the right to inspect arises only once a specific reference to a document has been made. Where there is no more than an inference, as opposed to a specific reference to the existence of a document, we are not bound under CPR 31.14 to provide such a document.

 

Accordingley, we are not required to provide you with any of the documentation requested in your letter

 

The particulars set out in the claim form in this case provide you with sufficient information to respond to the claim. If you fail to do so within the time provided by the CPR, the claimant reserves the right to enter judgement by default without further notice.

 

Yours

 

blah blah blah.

 

So mention of the default notice and assignment in the POC is just an inference then - Unbelievable.

[sillygirl1]

Err, what is the point of CPR rules then, they DO apply to small claims track - Heggs now need a report to the court about their lack of legal knowledge and abuse of process and a complaint to the SRA and Ministry of Justice.

 

Even more outpourings of incompetence from a seemingly uneducated 'legal' entity, LLP in their case means (as one poor phone monkey once told me - Limited legal practice....

[PGH7447]

 

Even more outpourings of incompetence from a seemingly uneducated 'legal' entity, LLP in their case means (as one poor phone monkey once told me - Limited legal practice....

 

Love it

[gezwee]

Nope the claim is in the name of Robinson way

 

Neither possible nor lawful........ t**ds........... there's slip and there's contempt - I'm sure you can work out which side of the fence I'm sitting on

 

Assume you reminded them of 31.21 & 31.23 with copy to CC?

 

Gez

[PGH7447]

Thinking of sending a CPR31.15 to hegarty's

 

Thoughts anyone

[gezwee]

Thinking of sending a CPR31.15 to hegarty's

 

Thoughts anyone

 

Won't do any harm and will put them under notice, I'd also be inclined to request extension by tel and e-mail/letter[under seperate cover]...... other than the obvious there's no logical reason to deny sight of docs.

 

At least if you follow usual protocol it offers the opportunity to apply for disclosure/extension/unless straight after Crimbo

 

Gez

[Guest]

Update

 

Letter recieved from Hegarty's re CPR 31.14 request

 

They respond as follows:

 

..............The words "referred" to in the rule indicate that the right to inspect arises only once a specific reference to a document has been made. ........

 

they are incorrect. the term re 'referred to' in cpr 31.14 only relates to 'instructions' in an experts report ie '..instructions referred to in an expert's report' re 35.10(4)!

Edited December 20, 2011 by Ford

[PGH7447]

OK, on further advice I have now compiled a Letter before action to Capital One for all charges etc, and will submit a court claim if they do not comply, this will then be included in the defence I am putting in for the court action being taken against me by IND/Robinsonway.

[PGH7447]

well another reply from Hegarty's, this time with what the call the notice of assignment included, although this is just a copy of a letter that IND send me so what it has to do with Capital one and Robinson way I dont know, apparently they did not send it the first time because I asked for "The Assignment Document" not "the Notice of Assignment" how petty can you get.

 

Also no default notice so I must assument hat they do not have nor did they have it when they started the court proceedings, which I understand is if it is mentioned they must have a copy, but may be wrong on that score!!

 

So now time to put a defence together.

[GAVBU28]

Following with interest, you're in exactly the same boat as me, but clearly with more idea about how to deal with things!

 

Just wondering if I should send a letter before action to capital one, I know I had a few charges, nothing major, probably not even £100, what do you think PGH7447

 

Good luck.

[PGH7447]

Hi GavBU28 - have you a thread I can look at?

[MW2]

Subbing.

[GAVBU28]

Hi GavBU28 - have you a thread I can look at?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?331995-Robinson-Way-capital-one-card-Court-papers%281-Viewing%29-nbsp

 

Sorry for the dealy in getting back to you.

 

I've noticed that Robinson way have basically ignored your request under CPR 31.14 - I'm just compiling mine, whats the next step if they refuse to provide the doc/docs?

Edited January 2, 2012 by GAVBU28

[PGH7447]

send a cpr31.15 and make sure you spell all things correclty. I asked for an assignment document, it was not until i said Notice of assignment that they complied, will look at your thread tonite

[GAVBU28]

Would you suggest still sending CPR 31.14? of just jump straight to the cpr31.15?

[PGH7447]

follow the rules let them show how petty they are

sorry not making myself clear send a cpr 31.14 then when they state they dont have to comply due to small claims track etc send a cpr 31.15

[GAVBU28]

Thank you

[PGH7447]

Well claim submitted against Capital One and defence submitted

[GAVBU28]

Do you mind me asking what are the particulars of your defence? I maybe doing the same in a week or so.

 

No problem if you want to keep it under wraps, I fully understand that.

[PGH7447]

Do you mind me asking what are the particulars of your defence? I maybe doing the same in a week or so.

 

No problem if you want to keep it under wraps, I fully understand that.

 

sent you a PM and also updated your thread

[havinastella]

PGH, did you go for compound interest?

 

Jogs