• 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.

Perch Capital/TM Legal/County Court claim for CCJ/Trial 12 September - advice please!

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

  • Perch Capital/TM Legal/County Court claim for CCJ/Trial 12 September - advice please!

    Hello all,

    My hubby and I took a loan back in February 2016 with Progressive Money (£15,000 over 8 years but the interest was extortionate!) and we defaulted after only a few months. After default we agreed to pay token payments and they were happy with these until 2021 when they sold the debt to Perch Capital. We received an email from a company called ACI about the assignment and they wanted to negotiate payments. Because we were and still are in quite a bad way financially, we weren't able to come to a mutually beneficial arrangement so they decided that the best way forward would be to obtain a CCJ and then apply for a charging order so that they could ultimately get their money back when the house was sold if there was sufficient equity. They have promised they have no intention of trying to force a sale of the house but I really don't trust them! Anyway, TM Legal, Perch's solicitors, issued a claim in the County Court in October last year and we have done our best to get through each part of the process as best we can with some advice from another forum. I had forgotten about this forum until a few days ago when trying to research, you gave great advice back in 2015 with another debt The claim has been allocated to the fast track and the trial is due 12 September. Witness statements have been exchanged and theirs is pretty long and seems very comprehensive.

    I have attached copies of our witness statements and theirs as well as most of the exhibits. The only tiny piece of hope is that the original creditor, Progressive, did not retain a copy of the executed agreement and have confirmed so in May this year (see their email at exhibit 2). However, up until now, TM Legal have only provided a blank copy of the CCA with no signatures. At exhibit 11, they have provided a "reconstituted copy" with our signatures! This is the first I've seen of anything with our signatures on and it appears pretty dodgy to me as this clearly isn't the executed version. I suspect they have copied and pasted our signatures from somewhere but have no idea where given that they have already admitted the original creditor has no signed copy of the agreement! I am told that TM Legal have a dubious reputation and lifting and pasting signatures on is one of their tricks! I've been advised too that a reconstituted version should not have signatures, only the executed agreement. The final thing to do before trial is put together our skeleton argument and I am trying to get advice as to whether I have any chance at all. Any advice received would be very gratefully received. My hubby and I have been out of our minds with worry for almost a year now and our mental health is terrible. The thought of losing our house is devastating especially as we are vulnerable and suffer with chronic conditions which mean we are not working and living on benefits.

    Sorry for the long post and thank you for reading to the end!

    Gibson71
    Attached Files
    Tags: None

  • #2
    First thing, don't stress yourself.

    I think, start by drafting your skeleton argument, the issues being, the documentation they've sent as a 'reconstituted agreement' with signatures, you've been told by the 'original creditor', the 'original agreement isn't available', you are 'vulnerable, your personal circumstances etc.

    In their Witness Statement, v) page 5, they have no way of knowing that you signed / dated it as they weren't there to see you do it and the original creditor didn't retain a copy.

    In their Witness Statement, vii) page 6, where did they get the 'signatures' from?

    In their Witness Statement, x) page 6, people don't always receive all the post that is sent to them.

    Did they tell you it was a 'reconstituted' agreement?

    https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/re...eton-argument/

    https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/CONC/13.pdf

    pt2537 Can you please advise.

    Because it's Fast Track, there might be costs implications. It might be an idea to get some free pro bono advice.

    Comment


    • #3
      Thanks echat11

      You are right in that they have no way of knowing if we signed/dated the agreement, and to be fair I have no idea if we did! As to where they got our signatures, that is something I am trying to work out and have no idea, unless of course they were able to obtain them from something we submitted to the court but we were careful to submit unsigned documents e.g. defence to TM Legal for that very reason. Is it possible the court sent TM Legal copies of what we filed? The original creditor definitely 100% did not send us a copy of the executed agreement even though they say "it appears they did". Yes, they have listed it as a "reconstituted" agreement but my understanding is that a "reconstituted" agreement does not include signatures, only the executed agreement does.

      Re. Fast Track and cost implications, any costs would almost certainly be added to the judgment, I've checked this with the court, and so would be subsequently added to the CCJ if obtained.

      Comment


      • #4
        It use to be said when signing a document especially financial sign (with minor extra identification mark) for any future possible verification.

        Comment


        • #5
          a) Is it possible the court sent TM Legal copies of what we filed?

          More then likely (it might be an idea to call the Court and find out if they sent a copy of your Defence to the Claimant), if you were careful as you state in correspondence you sent, then they would not have signatures.

          In reality there is no 'rhyme or reason' why they need to add signatures when it isn't necessary for them to do so. (I know the reason they've put down, 'completeness') which is 'ridiculous'.


          b) The original creditor definitely 100% did not send us a copy of the executed agreement even though they say "it appears they did".

          They have no way of knowing, they are only speculating, they don't hold a copy of the original. When you read their Witness Statement, they 'gloss over' the cracks in their case with assumptions like 'it appears they did'.

          Comment


          • #6
            Also who placed the February 25/2 label?

            Go through the Default Notice and Letter's of Assignment. Make sure they are compliant.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by echat11 View Post
              Also who placed the February 25/2 label?

              Go through the Default Notice and Letter's of Assignment. Make sure they are compliant.

              No idea, I'm guessing TM Legal. Maybe they placed that there to tick the box of having a date because there is no date included with our signatures?

              How do I know whether the Default Notice/Letter of Assignment is compliant?

              Comment


              • #8
                Something I have just found online that may be relevant to the assignment is that under the Lending Standards Board's Standards of Lending, a company shouldn't sell a debt where the customer has documented a mental health illness. We did document this to the original creditor.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by gibson71 View Post


                  No idea, I'm guessing TM Legal. Maybe they placed that there to tick the box of having a date because there is no date included with our signatures?

                  How do I know whether the Default Notice/Letter of Assignment is compliant?
                  Strange, they added 'signatures', but didn't add 'dates' for the sake of 'completeness'.

                  Regarding Default Notice, you can Google an image of one to see what it looks like.

                  https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga...efault-notices

                  Letter of Assignment - It should contain all the important details, letter head, who's sold the debt, who's bought the debt etc. Google an image of one and compare.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by gibson71 View Post
                    Something I have just found online that may be relevant to the assignment is that under the Lending Standards Board's Standards of Lending, a company shouldn't sell a debt where the customer has documented a mental health illness. We did document this to the original creditor.
                    The original lender isn't registered with Lending Standards Board -

                    https://www.lendingstandardsboard.org.uk/why-register/

                    Read the following, it's from the OFT, who are now the FCA

                    http://www.infohub.moneyadvicetrust..../oft664rev.pdf

                    See if Progressive are registered with any standard codes.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The only thing I can see on their website is the CCTA but nothing seems to come up with regard to mental health.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Draft skeleton argument so far ....
                        Attached Files

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          http://www.infohub.moneyadvicetrust..../oft664rev.pdf

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            echat11 you shared the same link before from the OFT. What am I looking at specifically? It's a huge document.

                            Have you looked at my draft?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by gibson71 View Post
                              echat11 you shared the same link before from the OFT. What am I looking at specifically? It's a huge document.

                              Have you looked at my draft?
                              See if the Creditor or their agents have broken debt collection guidelines when it comes with debtors who have health issues. The OFT has changed to the FCA.

                              No, I haven't as yet.

                              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