Hfo CCJ/CO now sold to LInk

[DonkeyB]

Here! Will read tomorrow. Can't wait... this will be easy.

[DonkeyB]

Ha ha ha ha!

[DonkeyB]

HFOC did not even have any contracts with Barclaycard before 2006. Oops.

[DonkeyB]

When did HFO first make contact with you about this account? They can only claim interest from the date you were informed of the assignment. Obviously they could not possibly have sent that NoA contemporaneously with the assignment.

 

If they are claiming that NoA is truthful, they will be getting rather close to contempt of court. HFO and Mr Turnbull are sailing rather close to the wind with these nonsensical NoA – one they made up earlier cost them £17k, I seem to recall...

[DonkeyB]

According to HFO, it is the OC( Barclaycard) who have sent the customer the Notice Assignment. What he is saying is, Barclaycard don't send NOA's. If HFO are "Creating" documents( and it is obvious from just doing a quick search that this is not an isolated case), and using this "Forged" document to substantiate the claim & get judgement. Then this is Fraud.

 

Allegedly.

[DonkeyB]

riolto10, are you also riolto20?

[DonkeyB]

Yes allegedly.

 

However, I did find another link when I did a google search. Somebody writing to the Ministry of Justice, making them aware that HFO are buying accounts that are Statute Barred & litigating on them. He is seeking disclosure of how many cases have been filed by HFO.

I am interested because I also have a Barclaycard which has been in dispute for over 2 years. It is obvious that they buy debts cheaply that are either almost or are statute barred. So my time will come.

 

That letter was a bit inaccurate on some points, unfortunately – there’s nothing wrong with buying and selling accounts at any time, even SB ones – it’s legal. Most of the HFO accounts were not anywhere near SB when they were bought – it’s just that they have sat on them for years.

 

In fact, an account is only SB if the debtor claims it to be and it is – and ignorant debtor could still be taken to court and may lose if they do not know about the statute of limitation. The debt does not disappear.

[DonkeyB]

I don’t believe they are breaking any laws.

[DonkeyB]

That figures.

 

But if you know the law, it’s easy to defend or see off. That’s where CAG comes in.

[DonkeyB]

Looks like more HFO ‘here’s one we made earlier’ and ‘honest, your honour, we sent it all in the post’ – yes, you should have received the WS. Call the court and make it clear you have not received this, and write to HFO recorded demanding a copy by return.

 

If they put that forged NoA into court, they are in big, big trouble.

 

I’m concerned about these accounts apparently having being sold by Barclaycard to HFO in 2005. I think these were probably sold to Rox, and there may be some creative ownership issues here. That’s why it’s vital to demand sight of the Deed of Assignment or Sale Agreement in this instance. Never heard of debts from 2005. What they can’t do is come up with a document from 2006!

[DonkeyB]

Blimey, Mr Shah has demoted himself. He was signing himself as a solicitor before. Naught boy.

[DonkeyB]

They are sailing remarkably close to the wind. Dangerously close, I would aver. I feel a capsize coming on...

[DonkeyB]

Crap advice there from the Daily Mail. They haven’t realised that HFO is NOT a debt collector, but a debt buyer.

 

Also, HFO’s licence expired in September 2009. They are only trading by the grace – or stupidity – of the OFT. Their licence has still not been renewed.

[DonkeyB]

It’s pants, just an application form, but no doubt HFO will claim Carey/Rankine et al means its a proper agreement. Can’t see much in the way of APR, etc.

 

It can be ripped to shreds.

[DonkeyB]

Time to use CPR to demand sight of the Deed of Assignment or sale agreement. This is lovely!

[DonkeyB]

The NoA was a forgery, pure and simple. You have a right to see the deed - you can demand to inspect it and they must comply within seven days.

[DonkeyB]

Repeat your CPR request and threaten a court order if they do not comply. Also demand sight of tha deed - will have to check which bit of CPR to quote when back at base.

[DonkeyB]

..and of course the company is run by one A Turnbull...

[DonkeyB]

On it. What fun...

[DonkeyB]

riolto, do you live in Scotland?

[DonkeyB]

Can I ask why you sent HFO an SB letter?

[DonkeyB]

Wonder why it’s mentioned in the WS then? Weird...

[DonkeyB]

Their exhibits are definitely required for your WS.

[DonkeyB]

So where are we at-

 

• HFO Capital (Ireland) started court proceedings
  
• You defended the claim
  
• They have applied to strike out your defence
  
• Their evidence includes a NoA, to prove the account was sold to HFO Capital (Ireland)
  
• You have contacted the OC, who have informed you in writing it was sold to Roxburghe
  
• Your letter is proof that HFO Capital (Ireland) have no legal standing in the matter
  
• They claim in their WS the NoA came from Barclaycard under a statement of thruth
  
• You have contacted Barclaycard who deny this
  
• You have evidence the NoA must have come from them
  
• Furthermore the NoA is defective even if the claimant is HFO Capital (Ireland), as the date of assignment is incorrect
  
• The NoA states the account was sold to HFO Capital (Ireland) 2 years before the company existed
  
• The WS contradicts this, stating the account was sold to HFO Capital (Cayman) a legally separate company
  
• Their WS states your account was then transferred under an Intra group agreement to HFO Capital (Ireland) in 2008
  
• This would be impossible, because HFO Capital (Cayman) had an agreement with HFO Services to assign, all existing and future debts to HFO Services, therefore HFO Capital could not have transferred your account to HFO Capital (Ireland) as it would have already been transferred to HFO Services
  

 

Couldn’t have put it better myself!

[DonkeyB]

BUT... all this being good depends on you receiving their exhibits. Their exhibits will be the nail in the coffin of Mr T.

 

So chase those exhibits – get onto TR asap, and make sure they’re on the way, otherwise much of your defence will be speculation. It’s better to hang them by their own evidence.