• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

Restons Solicitors/Capquest Investments vs ecalid

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Re: Restons Solicitors/Capquest Investments vs ecalid

    no never remind them as they may correct their errors, this action is nothing new with these and many of the reprobates

    Comment


    • #77
      Re: Restons Solicitors/Capquest Investments vs ecalid

      Ok. So legally does the claim become unenforaceable if they fail to provide the documents requested through CPR or am I getting this confused with the CCA. And in regards to the CPR request now a matter of making them look as bad as possible in order to sway the judge's favour.

      Comment


      • #78
        Re: Restons Solicitors/Capquest Investments vs ecalid

        they can supply later down the line, CCA 12+days if not unenforceable but they can produce later as well, it is a game with them hoping you cave in!
        a lot of these companies play it to the last post hoping you cave in or relent and pay up, it is a game with them they deal with thousands every week

        Comment


        • #79
          Re: Restons Solicitors/Capquest Investments vs ecalid

          Hi guys.

          It's been a while since there was any activity on this case but it seems Reston's have piped back up with again the same Transaction History with the addition of a screenshot of a Account Summary screen on an old matrix platform.

          They mention that they believe this information successfully proves of my knowledge of the account and the Default Notice that was issued.

          However the default notice on the Transaction History page is different. I appreciate that is minor and material but does this affect anything?.

          They still haven't managed to ascertain the agreement for now, which is the only thing stopping them at the minute. And the fact that the claim is stayed.

          I keep reading horrific threads that they pipe back up after about 8 months complete with agreement and basically apply for a summary judgement.

          Please find attached links to the letter:

          https://imgur.com/a/zcKYb
          https://imgur.com/9IZkxlJ
          https://imgur.com/nSaB8HE

          Thanks in advance for any input you provide.

          Comment


          • #80
            Re: Restons Solicitors/Capquest Investments vs ecalid

            Originally posted by ecalid View Post
            Please find attached links to the letter:
            There's a home phone number on the screenshot and Restons Solicitors' case reference number is on their letter.

            You need to remove those details to protect your identity.

            Di

            Comment


            • #81
              Re: Restons Solicitors/Capquest Investments vs ecalid

              Originally posted by Diana M View Post
              There's a home phone number on the screenshot and Restons Solicitors' case reference number is on their letter.

              You need to remove those details to protect your identity.

              Di
              Thanks Di. I will get them changed when I get to my pc.

              Comment


              • #82
                Re: Restons Solicitors/Capquest Investments vs ecalid

                Odd that they haven't sent you the agreement being as they were provided a copy of it by Littlewoods/ShopDirect back in July according to the screengrab.

                They also note receipt of your SAR ( with the fee ) on 4th Sept - they still haven't complied with that?

                Back in August also you mention
                They have also sent me transactions on the account from within 3 years, there is numerous payments and adjustments, the last payment they recieved was on the 04/04/14
                Is that the same list that Restons have again sent to you?
                #staysafestayhome

                Any support I provide is offered without liability, if you are unsure please seek professional legal guidance.

                Received a Court Claim? Read >>>>> First Steps

                Comment


                • #83
                  Re: Restons Solicitors/Capquest Investments vs ecalid

                  Originally posted by Amethyst View Post
                  Odd that they haven't sent you the agreement being as they were provided a copy of it by Littlewoods/ShopDirect back in July according to the screengrab.

                  They also note receipt of your SAR ( with the fee ) on 4th Sept - they still haven't complied with that?

                  Back in August also you mention

                  Is that the same list that Restons have again sent to you?
                  I know right?? Wierd.

                  The sar still hasnt turned up but I am going to chase that up I think.

                  Yes I am assuming it is. But will have another look when I get home.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    I assume you’ve heard nothing more from Restons and the claim remains stayed.

                    I note that you didn’t raise the issue of the Claimant (Capquest Investments) being unlicensed in your Defence.

                    Wait to see what Restons’s next move is.

                    Di

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Yes di you are correct. This being a fault on my behalf, it only just occurred to me to check the register.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Could somebody please ellaborate on this subject of FCA licensed companies using appointed representatives to collect debt??

                        http://legalbeagles.info/forums/foru...ghlight=pt2537

                        I have read this thread twice and I am getting a mixed consensus

                        Thanks in advance.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by ecalid View Post
                          Could somebody please ellaborate on this subject of FCA licensed companies using appointed representatives to collect debt??

                          http://legalbeagles.info/forums/foru...ghlight=pt2537

                          I have read this thread twice and I am getting a mixed consensus

                          Thanks in advance.
                          3. The Claimant Company appears on the register, however the company’s permissions to carry out regulated activities has lapsed and is no longer effective. The Claimant is therefore not authorised by the FCA for regulated activities. .

                          4. An activity is a regulated activity under the Financial Services & Markets Act 2000 (‘FSMA’) if it is an activity of a specified kind which is carried on by way of business and “it relates to an investment of a specified kind” (see section 22(1) FSMA).

                          5. “Specified” means specified by an order made by the Treasury (see section 22(5)). Activities and investments are specified for the purposes of FSMA by the Financial Services & Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 (‘RAO’) (see article 4(1)).

                          6. Rights under a credit agreement are an investment of a specified kind for the purposes of section 22 of FSMA (see articles 73 and 88D of the RAO).

                          7. Article 60B(3) of the RAO defines credit agreement and regulated credit agreement:
                          ‘credit agreement’ means an agreement between an individual or relevant recipient of credit (‘A’) and any other person (‘B’) under which B provides A with credit of any amount;

                          ‘exempt agreement’ means a credit agreement which is an exempt agreement under articles 60C and 60H;

                          ‘regulated credit agreement’ means any credit agreement which is not an exempt agreement.

                          8. Section 19 of FSMA prohibits a person from carrying on a regulated activity in the United Kingdom unless he is an authorised person or an exempt person (‘the general prohibition’). Carrying on a regulated activity without authorisation or exemption under FSMA is an offence (see sections 19 and 23 of FSMA).

                          9. Section 19 FSMA states: -
                          “19 The general prohibition

                          (1) No person may carry on a regulated activity in the United Kingdom, or purport to do so, unless he is –
                          (a) an authorised person; or
                          (b) an exempt person.

                          (2) The prohibition is referred to in this Act as the general prohibition.”

                          10. Section 23 FSMA states: -
                          “23 Contravention of the general prohibition

                          (1) A person who contravenes the general prohibition is guilty of an offence and liable –
                          (a) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or both;
                          (b) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or a fine, or both.”

                          11. The regulated activity of debt collecting is specified by article 39F of the RAO which provides in relation to debts under credit agreements: -
                          “Debt collecting

                          39F. (1) Taking steps to procure the payment of a debt due under a credit
                          agreement or a relevant article 36H agreement is a specified kind of activity.
                          (2) Taking steps to procure the payment of a debt due under a consumer hire agreement is a specified kind of activity.
                          (3) Paragraph 1 does not apply insofar as the activity is an activity of the kind specified by article 36H (operating an electronic system in relation to lending).
                          (4) In this article, “relevant article 36H agreement” means an article 36H agreement (within the meaning of article 36H) which has been entered into with the facilitation of an authorised person with permission to carry on a regulated activity of the kind specified by that article.”
                          {Emphasis added}

                          12. It is clear that the Claimant has been and is continuing to seek to procure payment from the Defendant under a regulated consumer credit agreement contrary to the prohibition as set out in the FSMA 2000.

                          13. The Claimant cannot rely on an appointed representative to carry out regulated work which requires authorisation under the FSMA as the Claimant as principal must be authorised. The Claimant clearly is not authorised under the FSMA and therefore cannot undertake regulated activities in its own name. Even if the Claimant were to rely on a third party, to undertake debt collection activities, the Claimant must be authorised as a principal.
                          That basically outlines the law on the authorisation issue
                          I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.

                          If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .

                          I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.

                          You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Although my firm approaches it from a different legal angle.

                            Di

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by Diana M View Post
                              Although my firm approaches it from a different legal angle.

                              Di
                              If you are going to Scotland, does it matter if you drive, fly or take the train? In my view what matters is that you get there, not how you do it.

                              How you approach it matters not one jot, getting the right result is all that matters, and what should be focused on, rather than keeping our cards close to our chests. To quote Rix LJ
                              The general ethos of the CPR is for a more cards on the table approach to litigation.
                              I take the same approach when someone asks for help, my cards are on the table.
                              I work for Roach Pittis Solicitors. I give my free time available to helping other on the forum and would be happy to try and assist informally where needed. Any posts I make on LegalBeagles are for information and discussion purposes only and shouldn't be seen as legal advice. Any advice I provide is without liability.

                              If you need to contact me please email me on Pt@roachpittis.co.uk .

                              I have been involved in leading consumer credit and data protection cases including Harrison v Link Financial Limited (High Court), Grace v Blackhorse (Court of Appeal) and also Kotecha v Phoenix Recoveries (Court of Appeal) along with a number of other reported cases and often blog about all things consumer law orientated.

                              You can also follow my blog on consumer credit here.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Thank you PT this makes much more sense to me.

                                What approach are you reffering to Di?

                                Comment

                                View our Terms and Conditions

                                LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                                If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                                If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.

                                Announcement

                                Collapse

                                Support LegalBeagles


                                Donate with PayPal button

                                LegalBeagles is a free forum, founded in May 2007, providing legal guidance and support to consumers and SME's across a range of legal areas.

                                See more
                                See less

                                Court Claim ?

                                Guides and Letters
                                Loading...



                                Search and Compare fixed fee legal services and find a solicitor near you.

                                Find a Law Firm


                                Working...
                                X