• 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.

Discussion - entities ?

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

  • Discussion - entities ?

    Lowell are debt purchasers.

    Past debt is not consideration.

    Your defence is as good as any defence to these types of claim imo.

    If they have issued the claim and you have a claim number, then, you should bolster your defence by sending the court and Lowell a CPR 7 Notice and a Request for information under CPR 18

    A CPR 7 Notice is simple, on A4 paper, and can be as simple as this:


    In the XYZ Court Claim No: ABCD1276

    BETWEEN

    LOWELL BLAH DE BLAH
    CLAIMANT
    -AND-

    YOUR NAME HERE

    DEFENDANT


    NOTICE PURSUANT TO
    CPR 7, PD 7B, PARAGRAPH 10
    DEFENDANT



    1 i HEREBY GIVE NOTICE of my intent that these proceedings follow the Consumer Credit Act Procedure.

    2 THIS NOTICE is hereby duly served on the Claimant and all and any parties concerned with these proceedings.


    The Defendant attaches a Request for further information hereto, where a response is required within 14 days of this notice.

    Dated this: [insert date]


    sign it here

    [print name here]
    input your address here


    THE CPR 18 REQUEST WILL ALSO BE ON A4 PAPER and will include content shown below


    In the XYZ Court Claim No: ABCD1276

    BETWEEN

    LOWELL BLAH DE BLAH
    CLAIMANT
    -AND-

    YOUR NAME HERE

    DEFENDANT


    REQUEST FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
    PURSUANT TO CPR 18
    DEFENDANT


    1 In requesting this information I refer you to your particulars of claim dated XYZ

    Requests

    2. Please forward a copy of the original agreement under account number xyz ("the Agreement"), the pre-requisite fee of £1.00 is enclosed pursuant to s.78(1) of the CCA 1974;

    3 Please forward a copy of the Default Notice mentioned in your particulars of claim at paragraph ABD therein and evidence in support;

    4 Please forward a copy of a modified agreement that relates to account number XYZ dated on or before ABD

    5 Please forward a copy of the deed of assignment referred to therein dated CDE

    6 Please forward a copy of the Notice of assignment referred to in your particulars of claim

    7 Please forward a copy of the Default notice relating to the modified agreement

    8 Please explain where the sum of £FGH came from and how you obtained my personal data and confirm whether you have entered a default on y credit file

    If you are unable to provide any of the information requested above, please provide a full explanation as to your reasons.

    The Defendant requires a response to these Requests by no later than 4pm on XYX ['XYZ needs to show a date 14 days hence]

    Dated this [enter a date 14 days prior to the date above and shown in the CPR 7 Notice]


    sign it here

    Print your name here

    enter your full address including your post code


    Your request for information must always relate to the claim they are making, which is shown in the 'particulars of claim', do not be tempted to ask irrelevant questions.

    Once done and complete, you send a copy to the claimant and a copy to the court and keep a copy for your own records, along with a copy of the letter they sent you dated March 2018 and as and when they send you any other letters, whatsoever they are, keep a copy for your record and MAKE SURE to send a copy to the court WITHOUT FAIL.



    Last edited by Brandy1234; 7th April 2018, 11:14:AM.
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Do not be tempted to send them any money and do not be tempted to enter into any negotiations with them to make any payments - if the matter is in court - it will be dealt with by the court - not them.

    Comment


    • #3
      If they have not taken the matter to court as yet, simply send the notice and request for information in letter form. and you could remove any reference to 'particulars of claim' from the 'request' to adapt it to suit.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Brandy1234 View Post
        you send a copy to the claimant and a copy to the court and keep a copy for your own records, along with a copy of the letter they sent you dated March 2018 and as and when they send you any other letters, whatsoever they are, keep a copy for your record and MAKE SURE to send a copy to the court WITHOUT FAIL.

        Correspondence between the parties is not sent to the court unless it’s disclosed as evidence (Exhibits) with a Witness Statement or in the Trial Bundle at a later stage in the proceedings.

        Di

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi Di

          I am speaking from a consumers point of view not the claimants point of view. I am a consumer, a natural person, not an entity and I do not work for an entity, and I know what I did to beat firms like this.

          Have you beaten any of these firms Di?, Have you had a claim like this brought against you? and if so, how did you win the claim brought against you??

          Comment


          • #6
            Brandy

            I am confused by your tactics

            The defence has already been entered solely on the grounds the debt is SB which apparently it is not

            Your suggested Part 18 request is for a mobile phone contract which is almost certainly ( as it is not O2) makes a S78 request pretty useless

            In any event, as far as i am aware, a part 18 request is not the place to make a S78 request

            At this point you are saying let the court deal with it - well from what I can see, and unless the defence is amended , the claimant will probably win

            You also say under no circumstances make any offers

            If offers are made they should be headed 'Without Prejudice save as to costs' in which case they can not be brought to the notice of the court

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Brandy1234 View Post
              Have you beaten any of these firms Di?, Have you had a claim like this brought against you? and if so, how did you win the claim brought against you??

              Yes I have had a claim brought against me and I sensibly instructed myself/my firm.

              Here is the winning result >


              Originally posted by Joanna C View Post
              PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW – WIN

              ‘“RECONSTITUTED AGREEMENT” – IRREDEEMABLY UNENFORCEABLE”
              “UNREDACTED DEEDS OF ASSIGNMENT – NO ASSIGMENT PROVED”


              So, held Recorder Bellamy in PRA Group (UK) Limited v Mayhew at Central London County Court on 22nd March 2017, at the end of a 3 day multi track trial, when dismissing PRA’s claim against our client.

              Stale debts sued for on the back of 2 ‘reconstituted’ MBNA credit card agreements (May 1999 and October 2000) were held irredeemably unenforceable under CCA 1974. The evidence of an honest witness was preferred to that of so called “reconstituted agreements”.


              After 3 days of close forensic examination of, and legal argument about, evidence and documents from both PRA and MBNA stating that our client’s specific debt had been assigned, the court held that no assignment had been proved.


              Efforts, over many months, in earlier cases to force PRA into disclosure of un-redacted deeds and deep and sustained forensic challenge to the provenance of documents needed to prove regulatory compliance, finally drew back the veil. The reality behind bulk debt purchasing was revealed.


              This decision shows that just saying an agreement is enforceable and producing a “reconstituted” copy does not prove that it is enforceable. Just saying an agreement has been assigned and producing a notice saying it has been assigned does not prove legal assignment.


              Debt purchasers need to provide proof. If that means the pitifully few pence in the pound they pay for stale debts will increase because banks will now have to start keeping original evidence complying with regulatory consumer protection measures, it is hard to imagine many tears being shed, outside the City of London.

              Originally posted by Diana M View Post
              Re: PRA GROUP (UK) LIMITED v DIANA MAYHEW - WIN

              I have full knowledge of this case since I was the Defendant (Diana M is short for Diana Mayhew).

              I was also the "Client" of Joanna Connolly Solicitors where I currently work. How ironical.

              I have no shame in being taken to court for a debt which arose with MBNA when I was in "financial chaos" at the start of the Credit Crunch which was caused by the banks not me or any of you other debtors out there.

              But I didn't personally owe PRA any money (as agreed by Recorder Bellamy) and that was the reason I decided to fight this case.

              I wasn't only doing it for me, I was doing it for all the other debtors who've been served with claims for a MBNA debt which travelled the same assignment route as mine.

              I was also doing it because the documents produced by the Claimant needed forensic examination. As Jo has said the court found them irredeemably unenforceable. There were two claims for two accounts and both credit agreements failed the test in court.

              It was a win for the consumer not just me.

              PRA have said that they will not be appealing the judgment.

              Di (aka Diana Mayhew)

              Di



              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by warwick65 View Post
                Brandy

                I am confused by your tactics

                The defence has already been entered solely on the grounds the debt is SB which apparently it is not

                Your suggested Part 18 request is for a mobile phone contract which is almost certainly ( as it is not O2) makes a S78 request pretty useless

                In any event, as far as i am aware, a part 18 request is not the place to make a S78 request

                At this point you are saying let the court deal with it - well from what I can see, and unless the defence is amended , the claimant will probably win

                You also say under no circumstances make any offers

                If offers are made they should be headed 'Without Prejudice save as to costs' in which case they can not be brought to the notice of the court
                What tactics are you referring to?

                I'm on the side of the poster, if the poster said they have not made a payment and knows of no payment made in 2013, then I have no reason to doubt the poster.

                Don't get your self confused, The claim is for 'debt' - not a 'mobile phone'.

                To prove the 'debt', they must provide the original consumer credit agreement, where is it? and they must provide the modified consumer credit agreement, where is it??, where are the default notices??

                You are unlikely to be aware that litigants in person who invoke the consumer credit procedure in this way, can ask for copies of agreements in this way, because you will not have ever done so yourself, it is more than apt to do so in this way, because it is a CPR 18 request which relates to their POC.

                I do say, that if they have issued a claim, they want the court to deal with the matter, so let the court do so, after all, so long as the poster follows the procedure particular to ordinary consumers, that being a CPR 7 Notice and a request for information pursuant to CPR 18, then the court WILL deal with it.

                Entities, have no place issuing claims against ordinary consumers, no place at all!!!!

                What offers??, for what purpose?? Debt is not, and I repeat, not, consideration; it's high time, ordinary consumers began to understand this fact I think

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Diana M View Post


                  Yes I have had a claim brought against me and I sensibly instructed myself/my firm.

                  Here is the winning result >








                  Di


                  Interesting

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by warwick65 View Post
                    I think we need to wait for the OP to clarify what exactly the position is

                    We know a defence was entered but no mention of what the 'form' is - it would help to know what that was - a DQ and I&E or something else

                    You must realise that should a S78 request be made the reposes will be that Telecoms agreements are not covered by S77-79

                    As for your comments about entities are less than helpful
                    Why do you say my comments about entities are unhelpful, entities do exist you know, they are all over the place, some of them even make out they are ordinary consumers, they post on consumer forums all the time don't you know, got to be very careful these days imo.

                    Seems to me the poster has been targeted more than once by more than one entity.

                    Totally and wholly unfair imo.

                    The fact s77-79 may not apply to telecoms agreements is not the "actual" issue here, the issue is, an entity is attempting to make out an ordinary consumer is a party to 'their' agreement, when this is simply not the case and is simply not possible.

                    Sure, we lead on the premise that thee is an agreement or that there must be an agreement, but the fact is, whatever the agreement is, it is not one to which the poster is or could ever be a true party to.

                    Therefore, it will not matter what their repose is, the fact is, as soon as the poster invokes the consumer credit procedure under CPR 7, by way of Notice, and requests information under CPR 18, the court will be empowered to deal with the claim on the posters behalf and in the posters interests/defence to protect him/her.

                    That's the be all and end all of it really.

                    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.
                    Working...
                    X