Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

[mystery1]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

They can't a judge can do what they want.

Print of Robinson just in case and tell a judge if they try and get smart that as s78 has not been complied with enforcement is not allowed under s78(6).

The statement should contain

(a)

the state of the account, and

(b)

the amount, if any currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and

(c)

the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.


It should also be signed.

The judge then cannot award against you but of course can strike out the claim.

M1

[Amethyst]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

Hi HB, Not meaning to worry you, just making sure you are prepared for the possibility that the Judge might want to try disposing of the case there and then. Hopefully he won't and will just order they pay your application costs and set a defence filing date. He may want to check that you have a defence before allowing the case to continue. As we haven't seen the agreement you have been sent under 31.14 so don't know whether, if it had been sent under s.78, it is compliant and enforceable, you basically will be arguing non compliance with s.78, and if they argue the agreement has been sent, then the requirement of 78(6) kyboshes that.

Sharon xx

[HB10]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

just been going through the docs IND forwarded...

in POC they have written - Notice of assignement was provided to the defendant by the claimant in writing.

in the docs they have not included this, just a 'Form of notice of assignment'

this is a letter type, without my name, address, acc blanked out and no signature.

the only doc included which is their part - Last letter before legal proceedings.

[mystery1]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

They may not have kept a copy and are not required to either. They should have said so though.

M1

[HB10]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

They may not have kept a copy and are not required to either. They should have said so though.

M1

then what proof do they have by mentioning it in POC?

[mystery1]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

A computer record of posting and a template, i'd imagine.

M1

[Amethyst]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

Hope all goes well this morning xx

[HB10]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

Hi all,

Hearing was pretty straight forward - the Judge has given them 14 days to provide proof of last payment otherwise statute barred. If they present something then defence needs to be filed 28 days after the initial 14 days given to them

im away for couple of days - will give full details on my return.

[EXC]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

Ok so not too bad.

Thanks for the update.

[HB10]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

Hi all,

Sorry for the delay in giving update on hearing – been away few days.

I will give brief notes on the hearing

- I met solicitor representing IND in the waiting area – she did not work for IND and was self employed – worked for LPC Law – gave name but no contact.

- Briefly discussed the case – it seemed she only just read the consent offer IND had given which I had rejected. She did not even have POC with her.

- I mentioned to her that IND had not provided the notice of assignment – it was just a template. She called IND – came back to me and said IND can not produce the notice of assignment. Then she was talking and said this can come down to dispute of quality of evidence – though stopped and said this is beyond today’s hearing so she does not need to give details etc – also mentioned ‘hopefully its settled before the then.’

- Judge’s initial point was to ask if I have received the documents. He then straight away asked the solicitor if she has last date of payment made into account – as the two statements in the docs provided – one has a payment in dec 2006, and the 2007 statement has no payment.

- Claimant shall file and serve statement showing the last payment by the defendant into the account by 4pm 9^th May 2014. To defendant permission to file and serve a defence by 4pm, 6^th June 2014.

- The solicitor was asking for court appearing fee of £102. Judge did not take that well, he asked 2-3 times, on what basis can you even ask that. He even mentioned you have taken 5 months to produce the documents.

- Claimant shall pay defendant cost of application £80.

- I did not get anything more, I did put forward my cost, but judge just asked if I am losing time at work to appear, I mentioned yes and because im self employed – he just simply said you would be able to make that up etc. Strange but anyway that’s how it finished.

[Amethyst]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

Super, a nice no nonsense judge so four days left for them to conjour up a statement showing payments after Nov 2007?

[EXC]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

- Briefly discussed the case – it seemed she only just read the consent offer IND had given which I had rejected. She did not even have POC with her.

How is it that these solicitors seem to show up at hearings so badly prepared?

[wales01man]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

Easy way to try and get £102 when they know nothing wonders why some solicitors are detested?

[Amethyst]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

How is it that these solicitors seem to show up at hearings so badly prepared?

Arrogance of the DCA's.

[mystery1]

Re: Please help - very worried. Ref: IND/Hegarty LLP/Aktiv Kapital/MBNA

How is it that these solicitors seem to show up at hearings so badly prepared?

You can only piss with what you have. Lpc only know what they are told which is good for a well prepared defendant whether they themselves are represented or not.

M1