Urgent Advice needed for court case please

[Amethyst]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

why s.82 ? (isnt that modifying agreeements?)

[NS7589]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

(ie have they actually terminated ? and how did you accept said termination ? )

Attached below is the termination letter, after which they stopped adding any more interest/charges to the account. I accepted that they have the right to terminate as I was in default, and did not dispute their termination.

[Amethyst]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

Good stuff, thats a nice clear one then.

Ok so when you say accepted....what do you mean ? Did you write to them to accept, or just do nothing and accept it in your own head (that sounds sarky but it isnt meant to be at all).

Prior to Nationwide issuing the new default notice and rescinding the termination what had happened in court ? Had the judge asked them to do so, stayed the claim etc ?

So since termination you havent had any additional interest/charges added. You;ve continued paying your £2 a month through payplan.

What about the recon agreement ? Can you put up a copy ?

[WendyB]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

So since termination you havent had any additional interest/charges added. You;ve continued paying your £2 a month through payplan.

I think there have been charges Ame.....

Yes, I guess the main difference is that in my case they brought the default to an end a year ago by terminating the agreement, after which there is no agreement for me to continue to be in default of - all that remains is an outstanding debt which they have then sought to recover through the courts, except that they have continued to load charges etc on to it and inflate the amount considerably

[Amethyst]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

Yes little conflaguration; I was going off

Attached below is the termination letter, after which they stopped adding any more interest/charges to the account.

NS ?? I assume in that case

except that they have continued to load charges etc on to it and inflate the amount considerably

was KPR ? or maybe pre termination ?

[NS7589]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

Havent worked out from N7859 if there is no agreement, recon of entire thing, or just recon of T&Cs part of the agreement (ie the app form is signed and refers to terms overleaf etc) so long as the recon is a true recon from the inception of the agreement. (ie not 2010s terms for a 1999 agreement etc)

Attached below are the 2 letters they sent me regarding the recon and 'new' default etc. In reading them you will see that they have supplied an entire recon based on who-knows-which terms - old or new? - as i've never seen the original! They enclosed a 9 page recon agreement which is headed
"THE FOLLOWING IS A RECONSTITUED COPY OF THE ORIGINAL EXECUTED CREDIT AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU AND NATIONWIDE BUILDING SOCIETY. WHILE THE FORMAT AND STYLE OF THIS DOCUMENT DIFFERS FROM THE ORIGINAL YOU SIGNED, IT IS AN HONEST AND ACCURATE RECORD OF THE ORIGINAL TERMS OF YOUR CREDIT AGREEMENT.
DELIVERING THIS DOCUMENT TO YOU SATISFIES NATIONWIDE'S OBLIGATION UNDER SECTION 78 OF THE CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 TO 'GIVE THE DEBTOR A COPY OF THE EXECUTED AGREEMENT'."

They also claim to "enclose a copy of the front page of the original credit agreement" (attached separately below)




Some points to note:

1. It's an interesting "front page", as at the bottom of the page is printed "page 5"!!
2. It looks like an application form to me. The page contains a signature which looks like my signature.
3. If they can produce this "front page", which is really page 5, why not the rest of the document? How strange they just kept page 5?
4. They state that this "satisfies their obligation to provide you with a copy of the credit agreement under s.78 of the Act" - actually I've never made a sec 78 request for a "true copy". Twice I've requested original copies under a SAR and the CPR, does the court consider their recon satisfies those requests?
5. If the "front page", which is really page 5, and actually appears to be the last page, how can 9 pages worth of the new recon be "an honest and accurate record" of the original.

[NS7589]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

Oops - posted twice in error

[NS7589]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

Here's the recon. Its a totally generic form. The only place they have inserted any personal detail is my name and address on the (real!) front page under "Debtor/principal cardholder"

[NS7589]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

Here is my original defence - seems a bit crude looking back on it now - but it was single handed effort and its all true.

Also attached is my response in the later Allocation Questionnaire

[Angry Cat]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

why s.82 ? (isnt that modifying agreeements?)

Earlier agreement as varied!

CC's generally run for three years, so if the date of the first token was 2007, it would appear unlikely that there was a second token issued: terms as varied.

[NS7589]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

Ok so when you say accepted....what do you mean ? Did you write to them to accept, or just do nothing and accept it in your own head (that sounds sarky but it isnt meant to be at all).

No I didn't write to them, as I wasn't (and am still not) under the impression that I have a choice to accept or refuse....? They had a contractual right to terminate based on my default as I understand it, and not subject to me accepting it.

Prior to Nationwide issuing the new default notice and rescinding the termination what had happened in court ? Had the judge asked them to do so, stayed the claim etc ?

AQs, then an order to mediation which they refused. Then silence for about 3 months, until the other side popped up with their application to amend POC and rely on 'new' DN. I'm not aware of the judge asking them to do anything.

So since termination you havent had any additional interest/charges added. You;ve continued paying your £2 a month through payplan.

Correct
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

Originally Posted by NS7589
Yes, I guess the main difference is that in my case they brought the default to an end a year ago by terminating the agreement, after which there is no agreement for me to continue to be in default of - all that remains is an outstanding debt which they have then sought to recover through the courts, except that they have continued to load charges etc on to it and inflate the amount considerably

I am referring her to the period between the original DN and the Termination letter - approx 4 months
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

Earlier agreement as varied!

CC's generally run for three years, so if the date of the first token was 2007, it would appear unlikely that there was a second token issued: terms as varied.

I don't understand this bit Angry Cat - are you saying this is to my advantage or not?

[The Debt Star]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

Earlier agreement as varied!

CC's generally run for three years, so if the date of the first token was 2007, it would appear unlikely that there was a second token issued: terms as varied.

good point.

If terms varied they need to produce a true copy of the original signed agreement, not a recon.

[middenmess]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

You've left your name on the paperwork!!!!

Innovative lawyers award winner 2009 says it all!

By what right can Eversheds send a 'new' Default notice'?

Front page of original agreement says that terms and conditions are ' Version CTV Mar 07'

Recon agreement is Version 26.4 so someone might be able to check their version with the reconstruction

I like the

''The court will therefore conclude..''

--cheeky beggers pre deciding a case before the judge has even heard about let alone heard the evidence!

Original front page says refer to 3.c for other charges that will apply.
On the recon under 3.c [iii] the sentence

''Interest will be charged up to the date we obtain any court judgement against you''

appears to have been added and squeezed in as if it was original it would appear as condition [iv] as it is not related to condition [iii]

[NS7589]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

That when they terminated the contract I owed only the outstanding arrears at the time, and that is all they can legitimately claim.

Quote:
That when they terminated the contract I owed only the outstanding arrears at the time, and that is all they can legitimately claim

On what basis do you think they can do that?

Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339 in the Court of Appeal.

That when they terminated the contract I owed only the outstanding arrears at the time, and that is all they can legitimately claim.

[Angry Cat]

Re: Urgent Advice needed for court case please

:
I don't understand this bit Angry Cat - are you saying this is to my advantage or not?

It was in relation to basa48's comment in post 3 re: variations.

Reg 7 of the Copy Docs Regs 1983, would not apply.