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

[PGH7447]

8%

[PGH7447]

letter from capital one today, saying they are looking into my LBA and will respond in 4 weeks, should be interesting I think they wll get the POC from Northampton tomorrow - LOL

[PGH7447]

Letter from court today, defence in and sent to the claimant (Iwould name the claimant but I dont know who it is) the court summons says Roberway and Hegarty are the sols but as far as I am aware IND brought the court case - also recieved a letter from roberway about this matter and they said contact IND (hell will freeze over first) so they are playing smoke and mirrors, hope the Judge notices this, although I will of course be duty bound to inform him that these 2 "companies" are playing games with this debt and who has the right to bring a court case - because I am sure that the name on the summons is the one I should be dealing with

[gezwee]

because I am sure that the name on the summons is the one I should be dealing with

 

Me too

 

You can only defend the case as pleaded

 

Just be wary of sighting any undertaking/joining between the 2 if they progress this beyond aq....... would seem to bring into question the assignment [if there ever was one] along with CCL for the period in question.

 

Gez

[AndyOrch]

Name in the Claimants box is the Claimant PGH any other names are only for the use of forwarding any docs.

 

Andy

[Sidewinder]

Craft devils they are. Mine said Hegarty as the solicitor, Varde as the claimant, but it was IND who answered the phone number given on the claim form despite not being named anywhere on the docs.

[gezwee]

Craft devils they are. Mine said Hegarty as the solicitor, Varde as the claimant, but it was IND who answered the phone number given on the claim form despite not being named anywhere on the docs.

 

Evening SW

 

Have you got a thread for this or was it pre-cag?

 

Interested to know which direction the assignment and ccl issue took

 

Thanks

 

Gez

[Sidewinder]

Hi Gez

 

No - no thread. In a nutshell - defaulted 2009, dca merry go round, CCA sent - no reply. CCBC claim received with Varde as claimant, Hegarty acting solicitor. CPR request for documents sent, no response, phoned Hegarty and IND answered. Received letter from IND disputing need to provide docs, argued they did and finally received compliant CCA, NOA and LBA (from IND) on final day open to submit defence. Emailed IND to admit claim and offer repayment. Completely ignored and obtained forthwith judgement then immediately went for AoE. Cost me the fee for redetermination and court ordered repayments of twice what I offered!

 

Absolute sharks! Lightning fast in going for CCJ and played every trick in the book to get it and enforce it.Hegarty and the Claimants are bit part players - IND are the ones to watch.

[gezwee]

Hmmmmmmm......... do you ever feel like you've been mugged?

 

Me thinks IND are the fly in the ointment, not recognised by the court as claimant or counsel but apparently running the show from behind the scenes.......... in hindsight IND would/should have been ignored, Varde were the party to case, Hegarty for service...... bugs the s*** out of me that DCA's get away with this so often.

 

Gez

[PGH7447]

Agreed, no mention of this motley crew anywhere in the POC, however I will raise this with the judge if I get the chance, and I will be seeing hom many complaints i can raise with the various bodies regarding these sly practices

[fred12345]

I too have received this letter from this bunch... Is this just another case of old debt being sold off from one dca to another, or does this scummy outfit mean business?

[Sidewinder]

They are open to being challenged but are VERY litigious and can be extremely underhand. Impossible to say based on your post, so suggest you start your own thread and you will receive good advice.

[PGH7447]

well capital one are going to defend all and are offering me to discontinue, need to think this through, I can ill afford to pay their costs

[PGH7447]

Hows this sound for a response??

 

In response to your defence submitted to me and received 16 January 2012, I respond as such:

1. Default sums: The sums applied to the account have been deemed to be unlawful and unfair by the Office of Fair Trading and as such were deemed to be penalties applied to this account, in excess of what is deemed reasonable as stated in the OFTs Statement of Position dated April 2006, which states:

“Where credit card default charges are set at more than £12, the OFT will presume that they are unfair, and is likely to challenge the charge unless there are limited, exceptional business factors in play. A default charge is not fair simply because it is below £12”

During the life of this account the charges applied were both excessive and unreasonable, being as follows

· Overlimit Fee - £20

· Late Payment fee - £20

2. Schedule of Charges: The claimant is claiming six years from February 2009 when a claim for unfair charges was made to the defendants account representative RobinsonWay Debt Collection Agency, who contacted the defendant in December 2008 claiming to be acting for their client Capital One (Europe) ltd.

3. A claim was made for these charges through RobinsonWay Ltd instead of to the defendant due to the failure of either RobinsonWay Ltd or the defendant issuing the claimant with a Notice of Assignment, a state of affairs that has lasted until the claimant wrote to the defendant on 13 November 2011 to verify the ownership of this alleged debt.

4. On this basis the charges applied for are not statute barred but are in fact within the six years limitation period.

Statement of Truth

The Claimant believe that the facts stated in the response to the Claimant Defence are true.

[gezwee]

Evening PGH

 

What's the value of your claim?

 

Gez

[PGH7447]

approx 1200

[gezwee]

Should stay sct unless they argue complexity issues [which they always try]........ did you include any reference to anything that's not already backed up with solid caselaw ie; any mention of testing S.140?

 

Surprised they even want to argue this one at 1200 squid, they just don't want a decision in court do they

 

Gez

[GAVBU28]

Best of luck PGH7447

[PGH7447]

found this snippet of info - is it correct?A. If your claim is less than £5000 then it will most likely be conducted within the Smalls Claims procedure of the County Court. Costs are not awarded either to the loser or to the winner unless the case is highly exceptional. The only costs you might lose are the court fee for issuing your claim form and the reasonable travel expenses of the defendant. If you win, the only costs you will receive will be your summons fee and your reasonable travel expenses.

[gezwee]

Evening PGH

 

CPR 26 & 27 will apply when allocating to track

 

They'll be aiming to find an argument for application of 26.8 to push for ft

 

Gez

 

26.8

(1) When deciding the track for a claim, the matters to which the court shall have regard include –

(a) the financial value, if any, of the claim;

 

(b) the nature of the remedy sought;

 

© the likely complexity of the facts, law or evidence;

 

(d) the number of parties or likely parties;

 

(e) the value of any counterclaim or other Part 20 claim and the complexity of any matters relating to it;

 

(f) the amount of oral evidence which may be required;

 

(g) the importance of the claim to persons who are not parties to the proceedings;

 

(h) the views expressed by the parties; and

 

(i) the circumstances of the parties.

 

 

(2) It is for the court to assess the financial value of a claim and in doing so it will disregard –

(a) any amount not in dispute;

 

(b) any claim for interest;

 

© costs; and

 

(d) any contributory negligence.

 

 

(3) Where –

(a) two or more claimants have started a claim against the same defendant using the same claim form; and

 

(b) each claimant has a claim against the defendant separate from the other claimants,

 

the court will consider the claim of each claimant separately when it assesses financial value under paragraph (1).

[Guest]

found this snippet of info - is it correct?A. If your claim is less than £5000 then it will most likely be conducted within the Smalls Claims procedure of the County Court. Costs are not awarded either to the loser or to the winner unless the case is highly exceptional. The only costs you might lose are the court fee for issuing your claim form and the reasonable travel expenses of the defendant. If you win, the only costs you will receive will be your summons fee and your reasonable travel expenses.

 

yes, if it is small claims then any costs will be restricted as per cpr 27.14 etc.

Edited January 18, 2012 by Ford

[PGH7447]

many thanks gezwee and ford - will ponder a while

[gezwee]

You'll find out how they want to play it at aq stage, pretty much all use templates for N149 'C'

 

'Pursuant to CPR 26.8, the defendant considers that whilst the value of this claim is small, the nature of the remedy sought is not appropriate for the small claims ...... blah, blah

 

Accordingly, the complexity and volume of evidence to be put forward does not align....... more blah, blah and bowlarks'

 

Gez

[PGH7447]

try to baffle with legaleese then - will study cpr 26 and 27 today then make a decision, although had a letter from cap one yesterday and they upped their offer to £20 wow refund

[PGH7447]

so if I understand the follwoing correctly --------- 7.1 Attention is drawn to Rule 27.14 which contains provisions about the costs which may beordered to be paid by one party to another.7.2 The amount which a party may be ordered to pay under rule 27.14(2)(b) (for legal advice andassistance in claims including an injunction or specific performance) is a sum not exceeding£260.7.3 The amounts which a party may be ordered to pay under rule 27.14(3)© (loss of earnings)and (d) (experts’ fees) are:(1) for the loss of earnings or loss of leave of each party or witness due to attending a hearing orstaying away from home for the purpose of attending a hearing, a sum not exceeding £90 perday for each person, and(2) for expert’s fees, a sum not exceeding £200 for each expert. ------------ ----------- I am looking at possible costs of around £300 if I lose