Judge & Priestly (old MBNA debt) reconstituted agreement provided for court case

[AndyOrch]

Yes I think its 7 days notice for refunds.

[AndyOrch]

Its important to use telephone......the reason I state this is that on most occasions they are unprepared and unscripted... by letter /email you give them time to consider and regroup.

 

I know its a daunting thought to talk to Solicitors...but they are only human (mostly)

[mowbli]

Thanks for the clarification. I don't have a problem talking to solicitors but I know my friend will find it difficult, do you think they will talk to me? I know I may as well ask you for the lottery numbers whilst I'm at it!

[AndyOrch]

If she gives permission first ...cant see a problem...state you are her McKenzie friend

[mowbli]

One more question (sorry!)... what costs can the claimant add to the claim if successful? For example, they are currently claiming court costs of £410 and solicitors costs of £100... it would be helpful for me to know when negotiating in case they try it on...

[AndyOrch]

Only their hearing fee to add to that plus the cost of the Tomlin £50.

[mowbli]

I may be clutching at straws here but...

 

The inital POC states that the agreement was entered into on the 10/03/2006 but the date on the agreement is 25/02/2006 in their court pack, could it therefore be argued that the agreement they have provided is not the agreement referred to in their POC?

 

Given that this agreement was actually a Virgin Money card (probably owned by MBNA) should that have been anywhere on the agreement?

 

Further, the default date on the POC is different to the default date in the WS and on the DN

 

Finally - the account was assigend to PRA Group from Aktiv on 30th Dec, during the claim process. Should PRA Group still be entitled to the 8% interest that Aktiv were claiming back to 2012 when it was first assigned to them?

 

Sorry for all the questions!

Edited April 16, 2015 by mowbli
Posted to early!

[mowbli]

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? Two key questions I'm after input on are:

 

 

If the agreement provided in the claimants court bundle is dated differently to the agreement they have referred to on their POC and the DN they have provided in the court bundle is also dated differently to the default date on the POC, does anyone think these are grounds worth fighting in court for?

 

 

Alternatively, we're about to try and negotiate a Tomlin Order but before we do that, I want to satisfy myself that we are likely to lose if we go to a hearing...

 

 

Thanks

mowbli

[dx100uk]

do they state a 16 digit account number in the poc?

does that match

[mowbli]

There is no agreement number on the CCA but the one on the DN matches the POC.

It's a typical MBNA DN that referes to a non existent 'Paragraph 8' in the agreements terms.

 

 

I'm hoping to be able to argue that the CCA they have provided isn't the agreement related to this account as the date is different and the 'Paragraph 8' referred to in the DN doesn't exist in the CCA that they have provided.

 

 

mowbli

[dx100uk]

ah theres someone else with that too I think

it refers to 8.2 and that does not exist.

 

 

dx

[mowbli]

Do you think that will invalidate the DN?

 

 

According to the transaction list they sent in their court bundle, the account appears to have been closed on the 16th July even though the DN gave until the 29th? I've attached the transaction list, do you think this is worth adding into the pot?

[mowbli]

Any advice appreciated...!