unknown Welcome Finance CCJ? - now IND own it? help

[AndyOrch]

Put us out of suspense then Andy ?

[Andy111]

Ah well, not long back,

 

 

they won doing me for over 6k in total!.

Good luck with that IND

 

 

as I pointed out on more than one occasion

the last 2 months I earned a little under £200 each month

and just £300 the month before that with next month looking poor 2!.

 

 

Will take about 2 years just to get their court costs awarded back at an affordable rate

so a bitter sweet victory seeing as I couldn't give a dam about a credit rating!.

 

So, what went wrong?

 

 

well the judge refused my witness statement and evidence citing they were filed too late despite the fact that the physical order stating this wasn't issued until 3 days after the time to file evidence and witness statement expired!!!.

 

 

The judge also said as part justification for this

that when the first hearing was listed that notice was then given to exchange witness statements and evidence.

 

 

Totally ignoring that until the claimant disclosed the case particulars, details of their claim and evidence

 

 

I simply had nothing to respond to in the way of evidence and witness statement as I never really knew what I was responding to or the details except a claim for monies that I disputed in the court defence in 2013!.

 

Ignored that I never received their original witness statement the first time for first hearing and even if I did, it was filed so late I'd still been out of time to file anything for the first hearing anyway!.

I wasn't even allowed to mention or refer to my witness statement or evidence,

the judge tied my hands against presenting my evidence and witness statement!.

 

 

Maybe still a set aside application as if heard my evidence and witness statement maybe a different outcome?. As pretty much never had chance to refer to the false witness statement IND submitted as evidence.

 

Even tried referring to the claim from 2013 and that IND refused to comply with the CPR 31.14 request in the required timeframe, judge said doesn't matter as they eventually disclosed, but 4 years later!!!!!.

 

 

Ignored my claim that the signature on the signed agreement was only similar to my real signature, completely different towards the end by saying signatures change over time, which ignores the evidence I had that shows both my current passport and bank card to have pretty much the exact same signature that my old passport does!.

 

 

never got the chance to dispute anything as the judge wouldn't let me based on an order that wasn't issued until after the time limit expired citing verbal notification is all that's required despite that I'd called the court to verify the order from the first hearing as I wanted to know the new directions and time limits etc.

 

Not to sure where I go from here,

if set aside is an option or accept judgement and hit IND for the PPI, which would then deny any appeal options by default as it's an effective admitance if I go down that route I'm told!.

[AndyOrch]

Not a case of looking too deep...more of a case of small claims court...15 mins...DJ is not really concerned and wants the case sorted and out of his court.

 

Sorry to hear it didn't go your way Andy but as advise at the beginning of the month...Civil Claims/Courts are not afforded the time/resources or expense to go into the nitty gritty details of a claim...if you have failed to convince the Judge in the first 10 mins and lay out your best points of dispute...you lose.

 

You cant set a side the judgment...and I doubt you would have been given leave of appeal...

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Andy111]

Thanks Andyorch,

don't feel as bad about the result as I expected to be honest,

because an inability to pay is an inability to pay.

 

 

At my current income rate they could be taking 10-15 years or more to get their award paid at an affordable rate.

 

 

As no matter how quickly they want the money or how much per month they think they can claim the CAB within the court (always good to research what happens if I lost before hand) said they can do an affordability breakdown claiming money out of my income for living expenses etc to take what's left down to what will be near zero,

 

 

slap that in and the court could force the claimant to accept it even if just token monthly payments of several quid!.

 

 

So as said,

will be a bitter sweet victory for them in the end with the only other option to make me bankrupt which would cost them far more and never get a penny back at all.

 

 

Though the court wasn't happy that they issued the claim in 2013 and it took them 4 years to bring it to hearing!.

 

So if I can't take this any further,

which from what you say Andyorch I can't (or not worth my while)

 

 

I guess getting onto the PPI issue to knock the amount down as much as I can.

 

 

Not to sure on how much it can knock off the total.

Except the loan agreement was £3000 with £997 PPI on top making the loaned amount total £3997 with a stated interest of 48% back in 2007.

 

 

No payments were ever made,

and the actual amount claimed\awarded at court for the claim side of things was £5300 odd.

 

 

How this impacts on the claimable PPI I'm unsure,

but would I be right in assuming the PPI could be claimed back as roughly the 25% of the claim awarded seeing as that is approximately the original agreements amount that would have been PPI or do I have other options with regards to the PPI claim?.

[dx100uk]

there should be a total cost for insurances on the agreement.

 

 

did you ever get all the statements off welcome?

 

 

there could also be £100's of various penalty charges?

 

 

they are reclaimable too.

[dx100uk]

zipping back to post 3 we find the below...

 

we see the balance is £6157

 

from what the agreement stated...

36*193.55= £6967.80

 

so they've taken something off.

 

and then they take a further £542.69 int off making £5614.77

 

and the claim was for £5300 ish...

 

interesting...

[Andy111]

Ah,

thanks very much for relinking that letter DX,

totally forgot about that letter,

just wish I knew where my original copy was!.

 

 

Funny how that was never in their witness statement to the court as that could be indicative that they reactivated a closed account that was assuming defaulted on (as no payments were ever made) yet no default was ever issued,

just for the purpose of restarting legal action?.

 

as far as the account statement goes what it is, is very basic with very little information covering rather odd periods.

This is the only account statement they provided by the way, just half an a4 page!.

 

When I asked about these capitalisation charges and the claimants agent could not explain them either,

the agent pointed out that either way they would be of equal to what the interest would have been anyway.

The judge I thought made a big error in agreeing with the claimants agents reasoning!.

 

.welsta.pdf

[dx100uk]

capitalisation is welcomes word for interest

let me looks at the statements hang file.

 

so anything ending in FEE bar the migration fee

can be reclaimed at their int rate

 

 

id say the PPI can be reclaimed as a lump sum plus stat int from the day they levied it

use the statint sheet for the PPI

 

 

use the CISHEET for the fees

[enter each fee sep]

use welcomes INT rate in D15

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?330996-Latest-Spreadsheets-PPI-Claims-and-Charges-Claims-Dec-2011

[Andy111]

Thanks DX,

looking at the capitalisation amounts,

there looks to be 2 types,

some are lower fixed amounts similar in value to what is marked as fee, which makes no sense.

 

 

With the other possibly being as you suspect, interest charges!.

 

 

the fixed smaller amounts can't possibly be interested in any form as they are fixed rounded up amounts?.

 

 

to confirm,

the PPI is stated on the signed agreement page as £997 under the loaned total of £3997 at a 47% Apr.

 

Also, and going slightly off issue,

if no payments were made as indicated,

well isn't the account supposed to be defaulted after what, 6 months of non payments,

yet welcome seemed to keep the account active for the duration of at least the entire period covered in that statement.

And there is also an unexplained 4 year gap in the statement?.

 

And in looking,

the default thought after 6 months of non payments is kind of indicative in that the statement dates goes cold after January 2008?.

 

 

Nothing then showing on the statement for well over 4 years!.

And it only picks up again just about the time, slightly after they originally tried to start a claim in 2013 which seems very suspicious?.

 

 

And a gap again until about the time welcome sent the letter you linked to before DX?.

 

And I note whilst some charges are stated,

that it's sometimes not been added to the total amount which is also looks strange to me?.

[dx100uk]

its just the way welcome do their statements

they always put the penalty fee and cap next to each other for the same amount

but the KRY is the running total going up.

that's the penalty fee

simply IGNORE to cap duplicate by each penalty charge.

 

 

as for the PPI simple put 997 in the state int sheet on the date it was charged on the statement.

I wold suggest their int at 47% they have removed it hence all the drops in the total when you paid nowt.

 

 

on the statement front/default

well between those periods there were no account transactions, but were prior to court and prior to sale

the court claim was within 6yrs and held the sb date then

and ofcourse it matters not when they defaulted the account, nothing to do with anything sadly.

[Andy111]

Will get to work tomorrow on the spreadsheet thing and trying to work out what could be claimed back, well come off the total anyway, but guessing somewhere around £1400 with the PPI & fee charges?

[dx100uk]

already listed what you can reclaim earlier.

[Andy111]

just fired up the desktop (always used my old tablet before now) to try and look at sorting the spreadsheet thing as you suggest dx, though i've not used spreadsheets since my school days back in the 90's!.

 

 

the first thing I've noticed that on the agreement page is that 2 different interest rates are mentioned, APR (variable) at 48.98% & lower down rate of interest per annum (variable by giving you 14 days notice) at 46.79%!.

 

 

not to sure which to use seeing as they have stated 2 different amounts?,

but will go with the lowest for now I guess.

[dx100uk]

i'd use the highest, but you need to be aware I doubt you'll get the charges back anyway as they will invoke their waiver.

 

 

 

 

https://www.fscs.org.uk/what-we-cover/questions-and-answers/qas-for-welcome-financial-hn0qripj/#question2

[Andy111]

But wont everything work on the basis that both the fees & PPI would have been paid in the first place by the customer for the purpose of the spreadsheet calculations, which in this case it was'nt?

[dx100uk]

carry on and do it

but don't expect the charges back.

[Andy111]

Well if I've done it right based on the date of agreement start date being 31st May 2007 to the final hearing date of 31st May 2017 (coincidentally exactly 10 years to the day) when judgement was made the PPI of £997.39 calculates as £1798.25. But the PPI sum was a total initial amount added to the loan agreements £3000 from day 1 under the APR of 48.90% than a separate monthly payment in its own right. And the fee charges based on your suggested higher rate of 48.98 come in at £7914.30 based on total fee charges of £420, without the migrated acceptance fee and that cant be right at all?.

 

But the migrated acceptance fee of £75, I guess in theory that could also be claimed back as looking at the acceptance fee purpose, it seems to be to manage the applicants finance, income\expenses including any current indebtedness and other outgoings, basically a credit counselling fee looking at the detail they have provided!. Adding that to the above spread sheet for fees comes in at a crazy £11.961.18 based on what with the £75 acceptance fees be a total of £495!.

 

So I'm somewhat confused by a lot of this with the spreadsheets thing etc. But if as IND have claimed the account was never defaulted on or a default issued (they cant have it both ways) then in theory based on what we know to date the account was strictly speaking active until the hearing date 31st May 2017?. By the way, if IND was substituted\assigned as the claimant to become effective owners of the claim\account\debt then in theory do they then not become liable for all conditions and charges under the original agreement seeing as they have already said they have been managing the account for a number of years?.

[dx100uk]

i really do wish

and ive said this before

you STICK to what you are supposed to do ONLY

not the drift off to other things

 

 

it gets really annoying!!!!

 

 

the PPI claim to date should be left alone

simply do as I said above.

one lump sum on the day the levied it from the statement.

 

 

as for the charges

you cant charge their int rate from a date forward when they didn't charge it.

claim to date would be that date.

 

 

back later.

[Andy111]

Sorry DX, I'll happily accept (as best as I can feel happy right now) that I do have a habit of drifting off and over analysing things. Which probably confuses me and everyone else!. But as annoyed as you might get with me I'm at least very greatfull for your input.

 

But I guess things are not exactly straight forwards on the welcome finance statements due to the gaps in dates and lack of provided statement detail etc. But I'm somewhat understanding the situation in basic terms that the baseline PPI and fee charges is all that's likely to ever likely to ever be claimed to come off the awarded cost which at best would be £997 for the PPI with perhaps £495 extra with the fees?. I'm more confused with the interest aspects of both the PPI reclaim and the fees than anything?.

[dx100uk]

no you' get interest on the PPI

 

 

put it in the statint sheet

the whole 997 on the date it states it on the statement. one lump sum on that date

 

 

do that and that's one done simple!

[Andy111]

Based on the 8% default interest rate in the spreadsheet that comes in at £1792.25. That's of cause based on the original £997 being put onto the loan as a lump sum on 31st May 2007 until 31st May 2017 when the final hearing took place.

 

Assuming the PPI calculation is correct, how does the fee charges work then?.

[dx100uk]

each charge - we know the date it was levied.

[Andy111]

Well yes, the fees as we know cover various amounts for various periods from May 31st 2007 upto 20 March 2013. But just not to sure how to work that out on the spreadsheet or with regards to any applicable interest as it's unclear on what interest what charged from the statement info upto the last statement info?. But would they need doing individually or all on the same page?.

 

The fee amounts are as said a total of £420 without the acceptance fee or £495 with the acceptance fee.

[dx100uk]

why not simply use the statint sheet too?

acceptance fee is not reclaimable.

[Andy111]

using the same spreadsheet as for the PPI, the £420 comes in at £619.74.

 

 

I used the starting date as that of the first fee (after the acceptance fee) up to the hearing date of 31/05/2017.

 

 

But that is of Course based on the same 8% interest as per the PPI side of things,

dont know if or what interest could be claimed against that anyway?.

 

Not to sure on regardless of what interest welcome finance charged in the end makes any difference

(as things seem somewhat unclear) to what or any applicable rate can be used back

 

 

as they tried to claim an interest rate at the hearing for the period of 4 years that they had the case stayed

for which the judge seemed to reject in part?.

 

 

But that then brings the total of both to £2417.99.