Safeloans issued Court Summons - please help

[sillygirl1]

I can do a short defence for you what are their particulars of claim, this is the starting point. A Defence can be as short as

 

On xxx date I borrowed xxx from xxx company who are a payday loan company who charge xxx interest per month

 

On xxx date I realised I could not repay this loan in its entirety and contacted them, correspondence trail is below

 

At no point did this company respond other than to send this inflated, vexatious and litigatious claim.

 

I can afford to repay the original loan and interest at XXX rate, any more than this would put my other creditors at risk this includes priority creditors such as rent/mortgage, council tax and electricity/gas.

 

This is statement of truth by xxx

 

Half the time these are issued to scare you and as soon as you acknowledge the claim online (do that TODAY) you have a few weeks to do the defence, and they will either discontinue or let it go to court.

 

You can also ask for mediation and they will have to explain their additional costs to the court - which they will not want to do.

 

If you are on JSA or any other income related benefit, ie pension credit, housing benefit then £1 a month is the MOST you should pay towards a low priority unsecured loan such as this.

[sillygirl1]

Asking for a CCA with a Payday Loan is a waste of time and effort, it is a short term loan and you can print the terms and conditions from their websites. It is a red herring that some people like but it is not needed.

 

You have tried to come to an arrangement, they don't want to know and are unjustly using the courts to force a higher payment than they are entitled to - end of.

[sillygirl1]

I would defend as follows you should just use the bits in red numbered as appropriate

 

The claimant provided the defendant an agreed credit limit under a running account agreement dated 05 December 2011 (short term lending), to the sum of £175.00.

 

The claimant is a payday loan company and provided a short term loan of X for the period of X. Therefore there was no running account agreement in force. The claimant needs to provide evidence of this running account agreement and the terms and conditions thereof.

 

The account has no fixed duration, enabling approved sums to be drawn down up to the credit limit. Each drawdown amount plus interest will be repayable within 30 days from draw downdate, the repayment date was 30.12.11 the Defendant has not given any notice to pay the Claimant early or in part and the account is still outstanding to the sum of £582.25.

 

The above statement contradicts the first statement, the amount of x was borrowed at an interest rate of x for x days, not as stated above.

 

The defendant shows below the correspondence trail they began when they informed the claimant they would be unable to repay the loan, therefore this claim is both vexatious and litigatious and needs to be struck out due to the claimants abuse of process.

The Claimant is also entitled to interest at the rate stated in the terms of the agreement. The Defendant has failed to repay the account... The Claimant claims...1. The amount £175.00 loan amount.... 2. Loan Charges/Interest 407.25.... 3. The Claimant total claim is 582.25... 4. The Claimant claims statutory interest at 8% up until the date of judgment or settlement, under Section 69 of the county court Act 1984.... Date 21 March 2012.

 

The claimant cannot claim interest as stated amounting to £407.25 plus statutory interest as the agreement is not a regulated agreeement and the amount borrowed is under £500.

Amount Claimed £582.25

Court Fee £ 55.00

Solicitors Costs £ 0.00

Total Amount £637.25

The defendant would like to draw the courts attention to the fact that the claimants company has been sanctioned by the Office of Fair Trading in the past (I can provide the link for you tomorrow) and that this company is still under scrutiny by the OFT for breaching the guidelines on debt collecting.

 

That lot should help your defence, this claim is totally out of proportion to the length of time you have owed them money and the amount they are claiming cannot really be justified.

 

If you could draft up the defence and let us see it others will chip in with the necessary 'legal' stuff. I don't believe in blinding a judge with legalities when it is plain the company are taking the proverbial.

[sillygirl1]

Yes, check this as it is most unusual, and again would display a complete contempt for the rules. It is against the OFT Guidelines to send out documentation which looks like court documentation, in fact I think it may be one of the few areas they can actually dive straight in and suspend a company's licence.

 

Was there a claim number and have you gone online to Northampton Court to acknowledge the claim yet? The sooner you do that the worse they will be as they will then have to appear in court.

 

At least you have a skeleton defence to put in.

 

I would also recommend getting in touch with MP Stella Creasy who is actively campaining against Payday loans.

 

As promised yesterday, here is the thread to the OFT's sanctions on this company

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?287653-OFT-takes-further-action-against-unfair-direct-debit-clauses-in-payday-loan-contracts

[sillygirl1]

Eboy either way you should report them to the OFT and Trading Standards as this is most definately NOT allowed. If you don't complain you are doing other people in the same boat a dis-service, particularly as both the OFT and Trading Standards are dealing in depth with this murky market.

[sillygirl1]

andyorch, it is NOT a regulated agreement in any way, it is a payday loan - this company love to confuse the issue. I've already given a basic defence which should suffice.

 

All this CCAing of a payday loan is useless if it is a recent loan, fair enough if a year or so has passed but you do not normally need to CCA, it will not stop them issuing court paperwork and will not stop them adding costs and interest, in fact it seems to make them worse.

 

Remember you can print off the terms and conditions from their websites.

 

Each PDL agreement differs in the amount of interest charged, whether or not the person has had a previous loan and whether or not the loan is a reloan to pay off an old loan.

 

Payday loans are for one month and therefore do not come under the same regulations as a bank overdraft - I cannot state this strongly enough.

 

I've done enough defences on this without CCAs (and won and lost according to the way the op has dealt with the paperwork) and so far no judge has bothered about a CCA or lack thereof, the lack of default notice or the way they incorrectly issue them is more of an issue.

[sillygirl1]

I hate to say 'I told you so' but I knew this ages ago, it cropped up with the 'original loan and one months interest' endless debtates....

 

These loans are NOT regulated and therefore a CCA request is useless. Plenty of other ways to flatten them should they go to court, as my skeleton defence above shows.

 

It is far far easier and simpler to destroy their particulars of claim and cast doubt on their ability to use the courts as a first line of collection than use the CCA route.

 

I've added the legislation to my list of useful legal stuff should anyone else ask. Might come in handy if somebody does quote CCA rules in their POCs....

[sillygirl1]

It makes no difference to your defence, they are using court as a first line method of debt collecting, as they are not regulated they are not allowed to do this.

 

The defence above should be written out, and post it here and others will add what is necessary. I just do a basic one as you would be stuck if you went to court and they started arguing Carey v HSBC or one of the Rankine cases.... this is pure exploitation and needs to be stopped.

[sillygirl1]

renegadeimp is right, so get complaining and help get this lot stopped.

 

It is very very much against the OFT guidelines on debt collecting to send out paperwork which looks like a court document.

 

Keep the documentation they have sent as the OFT may need it for evidence. You might be asked to give a witness statement and this is perfectly normal for the OFT.

[sillygirl1]

I would say you need to file the defence first and THEN say you want the court to mediate, that is the best way, otherwise you could end up with a judgement by default 'by accident'. This lot play a close game so make sure you cover your bases.

 

Once the defence is filed then an allocation questionnaire is sent to you, it costs you nothing to file this and it costs them £80.00... something I think they forget when they choose court as the first line option.

 

I am about this weekend if you want help but I have already suggested the defence you should file, do not fall into the trap of putting in 'legal stuff' as you will not be able to counter argue should it come to court if the other side start throwing in 'Rankine' or 'McGuffick' cases. Stick to the facts and it might get dismissed by the court as having no merit. Once it gets to AQ stage then you can ask the court for mediation with a proper mediator who will go into this case in detail - it will show them up and be a black mark against them.

 

I would write a short note to Ms Tucker stating that you are filing a defence and want to mediate via the court with a properly trained mediator, rather than be bullied by them.

[sillygirl1]

The court will not be a ful court, it will be held in a room with you, the judge and the other sides representative, that is it, please do not be terrified of the prospect, this is YOUR chance to state your case and show this lot up for the moneygrabbing opportunists they are.

[sillygirl1]

Nope, that is fine, leave it at that, don't put a link in a defence as they will not be able to read it.

 

The shorter you keep the defence the less 'legal stuff' they will be able to argue back and the judge will probably look more favourably on you for not 'padding' the defence with bits of legislation which may be irrelevant to the primary facts of the claim.

[sillygirl1]

I would send it to the court with a covering letter stating your case number and ask for a judge to strike out the case on the grounds they are clearly using court as a first resort collection method.

 

Then I would get the message to the OFT, Trading Standards and the Ministry of Justice (for what it is worth) who would be very interested in that effusion.

 

I am in Croydon tomorrow and can take a picture of their offices, it is not far from where I will be having a knitting breakfast!

[sillygirl1]

Off to Croydon now, will get a pic of their offices, think I know exactly where they are anyway!

[sillygirl1]

Haven't really got any except keep hold of that letter.

 

BTW this lot are also known as N Bolton Personal Finance Ltd and have a number and another address posted in local shops..

 

Here is their office door

[sillygirl1]

Just keep that for reference....

 

I will upload pic of their office tomorrow... having minor IT problems tonight.

[sillygirl1]

As promised, pics of their offices, on the corner of Church Street and North End, Croydon.

 

N Bolton operate from same offices, will get a pic of their card later on - had dealings with them a long time ago and they were reasonable. No dealings for about 5-6 years though.

 

Right, for some reason I can't upload the pics, they don't seem to show ANYTHING... however I am in Croydon again on Saturday and can get some more taken.... my phone has been a bit iffy lately.

[sillygirl1]

Sorry, my phone is on the blink, I get it changed tomorrow so should get another pic on Saturday.

 

I actually did that bit of crochet myself watching Coraline on tv, it was quite straightforward for me!

[sillygirl1]

Get that message to the OFT pronto, they are going completely bananas and are misrepresenting what can happpen if they get a judgement if you do not defend.

 

Please please please report this as it is a complete abuse of the system.

[sillygirl1]

I agree, this lot seem to like using court as a means of debt collecting, and they need to know that the OFT will take their licence away if they abuse the court processes.

 

I would sumbit their offer to the court as part of a harrassment claim against them.

 

As renegadeimp says they were hoping for judgement by default (which IMHO should be scrapped) and now you have filed the simple defence they have to do some work in return... this is more costly to them because they now have to pay £80 for the AQ questionnaire (this costs you nothing).

 

I wouldn't mind betting that they next send a Notice of Discontinuance.

[sillygirl1]

Don't accept the out of court settlement, this is positive proof they are using the court system as a primary objective of collecting debts.

 

You must report them to the OFT and Trading Standards, if you do not do that you are wasting time posting on here.

 

This is one of the few lines of attack which can produce results. The OFT will say they cannot do anything as it has gone to court but insist they record the fact that they do not want to negotiate until they have 'strengthened' their case by issuing unnecessary court paperwork.

 

Remember both the OFT and Trading Standards are doing an indepth investigation into this murky market.

[sillygirl1]

As I said they need reporting for using court to unjustly enrich themselves....

 

Isn't it better that we have entered the 'simple' defence which has again proved its worth against a predatory PDL company with a dubious claim... otherwise it would have been judgement by default (IMHO this should be scrapped).

[sillygirl1]

I would get onto Trading Standards about the 2009 loan, especially if it has been repaid.

 

Clearly their administration systems are not up to standard.

 

This lot need stopping, £72 in interest on a £100 loan - they have to be stopped fleecing people left, right and centre.

 

I would also keep a close check on your CRA record as goodness knows what is being recorded on there.

 

Trading Standards in Croydon do not like 'flyboys' on their patch so complain complain complain.

 

Also complain to the OFT.

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk for the OFT

http://www.tradingstandards.gov.uk for Trading Standards

[sillygirl1]

Get all their messages together and send them to the court for your file, clearly Safeloans are not up to keeping correct paperwork on your account - and you must add this lot to the claim for the OFT.

 

I wouldn't bother responding until you get the Allocation Questionnaire from the court - don't think you have got to that stage yet. I think we did the defence didn't we? I am getting confused here too!

[sillygirl1]

I hope you sent the defence to the court and not direcly to Safeloans, send everything to date to the court as additional evidence, label each item in chronological order. Don't send copies to Safeloans as they have sent them to you.

 

This lot need a serious shake up.