MKDP/barclaycard claimform - will need some help please!

[Dotty50]

I'll double check the DN and dates etc but I think it was issued prior to the sale/assignment.

[vint1954]

Be strange for an account to be sold before a default notice was issued though so chances are ..

 

 

M1

 

Well they can sell the account at any time, without a DN, but the new owner would be in a bit of a spot.

[bradfordlad]

Just to throw another puzzle into the mix, my CRA file has never had a Default registered by BC, but MKDP registered one in December 2011 - despite the fact I've never received a DN from MKDP.

 

Got to be worth pursuing a correction if we "win"?

 

BL

[vint1954]

Just to throw another puzzle into the mix, my CRA file has never had a Default registered by BC, but MKDP registered one in December 2011 - despite the fact I've never received a DN from MKDP.

 

Got to be worth pursuing a correction if we "win"?

 

BL

 

If you were defaulted by Barclays, they cannot post another DN post assignment.

[Dotty50]

My BC was never registered on any CRA until after the assignment and that's when the default appeared.

[vint1954]

My BC was never registered on any CRA until after the assignment and that's when the default appeared.

 

Hi Dotty,

 

If Barclays issued you with a DN, which I presume that they did, the new owner cannot Default you again. They can only update that notice.

 

When they purchase a debt, they take on the liabilities and responsabilities of the OC, in an absolute assignment.

 

Where are you with that one Dotty?

[vint1954]

My BC was never registered on any CRA until after the assignment and that's when the default appeared.

 

Have you heard back from the court as to the stayed status?

 

If not, it may be worth a call to Northanmpton.

[vint1954]

Dotty,

 

A point for your DN defence

 

The Default notice is a bad notice. I refer the Court to the recent

ruling of HHJ Chambers QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court in Keith Harrison vs Link Financial Limited EWHC 2011 B3 where at paragraph 75 when addressing a default notice he stated………

 

The notice of enforcement

 

75. The notice of enforcement was a statutory pre-condition of enforcement. It was a bad notice and enforcement CANNOT be attempted in dependence upon it. ……………………….

 

Accordingly the Claimant cannot enforce the agreement due to the fact the notice is indeed bad for the reasons stated above.

 

It is also noted that the provisions of s78, s87 & s88, are for application to live accounts only. Having terminated the agreement, the Claimant is no longer in a position to rectify these defects in the statutory documents issued.

[Dotty50]

My laptop just packed up as I was halfway through posting! I'm doing this from my phone which isn't ideal and I don't know how it will work.

 

Thanks for that info Vint, I was putting the link to the case you referred to but I don't know how to from my phone!

I've heard nothlng from MK or the court so I'm guessing it's stayed.

[vint1954]

Here you go Dotty,

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Mercantile/2011/B3.html

 

Hae you tried more coal in the Laptop! Usually works for me.

[bradfordlad]

My BC was never registered on any CRA until after the assignment and that's when the default appeared.

 

Exactly!

[Dotty50]

hello guys laptop now in for repair so now limited but hopefully not for too long!

 

As soon as I'm up and running again I'll be resuming a BC thread for my OH as we had another N1 yesterday from MK!

 

I'm posting this from my phone and I find it very slow and not user friendly!

[bradfordlad]

Dotty,

 

A point for your DN defence

 

The Default notice is a bad notice. I refer the Court to the recent

ruling of HHJ Chambers QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court in Keith Harrison vs Link Financial Limited EWHC 2011 B3 where at paragraph 75 when addressing a default notice he stated………

 

The notice of enforcement

 

75. The notice of enforcement was a statutory pre-condition of enforcement. It was a bad notice and enforcement CANNOT be attempted in dependence upon it. ……………………….

 

Accordingly the Claimant cannot enforce the agreement due to the fact the notice is indeed bad for the reasons stated above.

 

It is also noted that the provisions of s78, s87 & s88, are for application to live accounts only. Having terminated the agreement, the Claimant is no longer in a position to rectify these defects in the statutory documents issued.

 

Is this in relation to your MK/BC claim Dotty? Just wondering if you're preparing a defence in preparation of a court hearing?

 

BL

[bradfordlad]

Is his story similar to ours Dotty?

 

At least you'll know what to expect from these muppets!!

 

BL

[Happyhippy1959]

subbing

[Noshovel]

Subbing. I bumped into some of your post yesterday and it lead me to a helpful place. Good luck with everything.

[Dotty50]

Is this in relation to your MK/BC claim Dotty? Just wondering if you're preparing a defence in preparation of a court hearing?

 

BL

 

Hi BL, now got laptop sorted, the post that Vint added referred to another case, not mine.

 

Hi happyhippy and noshovel, welcome to my thread.

[bradfordlad]

Glad you got the tech sorted out Dotty

 

Are you bothering to do anything with MK, or just going to leave it? I'm half tempted to forget about it, but at the same time, I'd like to haul them in front of a judge to show how they've abused the court process in attempting to sneak a case through the bulk claims centre when they've not got a sniff of a case....but I don't know if I can be ars*d!!

 

BL

[Dotty50]

Hi BL I agree, they need to be taken to task and stopped, but I really wouldn't know where to start and really have to many other things to cope with at the moment!

 

Have you spoken to anyone at Northampton?

[Dotty50]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?358394-Dotty-s-OH-another-claim!

 

Here's my OH's thread, nothing to add to it at the moment!

[bradfordlad]

Hi BL I agree, they need to be taken to task and stopped, but I really wouldn't know where to start and really have to many other things to cope with at the moment!

 

Have you spoken to anyone at Northampton?

 

I have now!!So - in the words of the guy at Northampton CC, the claim is now "blocked". As its been over 33 days and MK haven't responded to my defence, they've efectively closed the file. If MK want to re-open the case, they'll have to make an application and explain to a DJ why they didn't respond to my defence within the required timescales. Worth a call Dotty, but I expect yours will be the same story - happy days!do we put our files back into storage, or go for the jugular (but risk re-opening the can of worms?)BL

[i hate banks]

Thats excellent news Bl . I have not contacted Northampton court but i have had nothing in the post either .

[Dotty50]

I have now!!So - in the words of the guy at Northampton CC, the claim is now "blocked". As its been over 33 days and MK haven't responded to my defence, they've efectively closed the file. If MK want to re-open the case, they'll have to make an application and explain to a DJ why they didn't respond to my defence within the required timescales. Worth a call Dotty, but I expect yours will be the same story - happy days!do we put our files back into storage, or go for the jugular (but risk re-opening the can of worms?)BL

 

Thanks for letting us know BL, I will get round to giving them a call when I can.

 

Once I know, I wouldn't take it any further.

[go for it]

Hi Dotty

 

Read your thread with interest ,trying to sort out same problem for o/h , have u heard anymore ?

[Dotty50]

Hi, go for it

 

Sorry for not responding sooner, I've been away on holiday.

 

No nothing heard since and I guess none of the others in similar situations have heard anything more either as I have not had any notifications from their threads!