Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

[Amethyst]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

Currently the only documentation that must be supplied in order to obtain a judgment is a copy of the agreement - IF that agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 - and IF the consumer sends a formal CCA request and £1. Otherwise standard evidence rules apply.

It doesn't seem this will help stop the bulk claims based on a wonky list of names and numbers supplied by the original creditor. The agreement should be the basis of any claim and it should be compulsory to supply it. I think 'disproportionate' needs defining. Is it disproportionate to force the original creditor to supply agreement copies to the debt purchaser when debts are sold on ? Then the DCA's have them and don't have to continually go back to the original creditor for them.

I've got a Vanquis assignment list somewhere.

[Amethyst]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

This is the data that is passed over. ( from Vanquis to 1st Credit )

[joedempsey]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

So for the thickos like me...will they or won't they have to provide documents before a claim.
or or we still going to have to beg for documents.

[PAWS]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

Well I have been reading through the arguments against these changes from The UK Cards Association, The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives and the CJC. I will be the first to admit it took my uneducated brain a while to wade through this lot but the main message from the DEBT COLLECTORS who like to be called CREDITORS is that this would encourage people to try and avoid paying what they owe.
The problem is that these scumbags feed on the fact that most people are sacred of the legal system and worried that if they speak out against these people or try and fight the claim they will be hauled through the court and shamed as well as having a CCJ slapped on them. They pay up or as we have often seen suffer extreme mental anguish.
I received a strongly worded letter from Arrow telling me I owe them 5k for a MasterCard that I had opened in 2006. I asked for the supporting documents and after 18 months I received a 1994 store card application form with ‘MasterCard’ scribbled on the top of it. They had also changed the number on the top and done a very bad job of it. As for statements, they sent someone else’s account details but forgot to remove the lady’s name and address off one of the pages.
Despite this it is up to me to prove I do not owe them this money not the other way around.
Surely any individual or organisation wishing to haul another through the courts would have to produce better evidence than this! Whether I would win in court or not is not the point. These Debt collectors put people through hell for months and when the alleged debtors try and speak out they are accused of trying to avoid paying what they owe.
Thank God for Legal Beagles because a few years ago this bloody behaviour caused a friend of mine to take her own life and it would be naïve to think she was an isolated case. I cannot tell you how emotional I feel when I see people go from extreme terror to confidant pride. Thank God for PT and the other legal experts on here who are willing to roll around in the dirt with these bullies and expose their shoddy practices.
The members of the CPRC are getting paid to a**e about for months on end pandering to the financial industry’s bullies while the angels on here spend hour after unpaid hour helping to repair destroyed lives.
Enough!

[Amethyst]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

We'll still have to beg. But we'll get the wonderful opportunity to complete a form before they send a court claim out. They do hint strongly toward people asking for a copy of the contract but then it is hidden away on page two in Box J.

Actually it does give consumers a bit of stalling time - 30 days to respond to formal pre-action letter, then possibly another 30 days if you are seeking debt advice.

[joedempsey]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

We'll still have to beg. But we'll get the wonderful opportunity to complete a form before they send a court claim out. They do hint strongly toward people asking for a copy of the contract but then it is hidden away on page two in Box J.

Actually it does give consumers a bit of stalling time - 30 days to respond to formal pre-action letter, then possibly another 30 days if you are seeking debt advice.

well if you amethyst says it's good well that's good enough for me..

[PAWS]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

AND, the original lenders should not be allowed to simply fling peoples details about without first having to prove the debt exists either. What about the case where an MD of a large firm was hounded by a debt collector who called the company he worked for introducing himself as a Debt Collector who chased people who have ‘done a runner’. He claimed the chap owed American Express money. The chap went straight to a solicitor (who it turns out was rubbish) with the final statement showing he had closed his Amex Card with a 0 balance. He eventually got his solicitors fees paid but the rumours at work were rife and he eventually left in a cloud of shame and embarrassment because, when it comes to debt, the accused is assumed guilty regardless of the outcome.
At least Faust had a bloody choice before his soul was sold.
Looks like I picked the wrong day to cut down on my smoking!!!!

[Nibbler]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

New post from DC on this...

http://debtcamel.co.uk/debt-pre-acti...-improvements/

[bb41]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

Not sure if this is in the right place but I am being taken to court after nearly 3 years (due to not hearing from claimant) The court claim form came out of the blue last week.

I didn't receive any letter from claimants solicitor with just a 2 line claim with no evidence. I responded immediately with a ream of paper as evidence including invoices etc.

As I didn't receive any letter laying out their claim , the property address which the claim was purporting to is wrong and also the address the claimant has put on is different to the one on our contract, on their website and on companies house. (The address is a personal address of one of the members of the company ) How will the court look at the claim under these new protocols ??

[med2uk]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

Not sure if this is in the right place but I am being taken to court after nearly 3 years (due to not hearing from claimant) The court claim form came out of the blue last week.

I didn't receive any letter from claimants solicitor with just a 2 line claim with no evidence. I responded immediately with a ream of paper as evidence including invoices etc.

As I didn't receive any letter laying out their claim , the property address which the claim was purporting to is wrong and also the address the claimant has put on is different to the one on our contract, on their website and on companies house. (The address is a personal address of one of the members of the company ) How will the court look at the claim under these new protocols ??

Hello, you're in the wrong place, you will need to start a new thread, go to where it's says court claim and everything you need to know is there. I'm sure someone will reply to you soon, they are very good here. Good luck.

[Amethyst]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

A new pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims is introduced and comes into effect on 1 October 2017.The new protocol can be seen in the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (PDF)
Source: Civil – Civil Procedure Rules
The rules bring in new requirements for creditors to provide full information about a debt, including a statement of account and details of charges, and inform the debtor of his right to request copies of any agreement the debt may be based upon, at the letter before claim stage of proceedings.
The creditor must give debtors 30 days to respond to the letter before claim, and provide a form for the debtor to complete indicating whether they are seeking debt advice, wish to pay the debt or have a dispute over the debt.
Should a claim continue to the courts the court will consider the parties compliance with the new protocols when managing the case.
The information and reply sheets are included in Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims (PDF) in the Annex.

[enaid]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

Jeeez that will scupper a few DCAs me thinks or am I wrong?

[Amethyst]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

mmm not sure, I'm not overly keen on the wording of the reply sheet - it's all heavily biased towards paying - plus I'm thinking on statute barring side of things too. Overall positive though, information provision, and should relieve the pressue on the courts a bit because lots of claims are simply settled when the debtor receives it - so this might cut out some of that, and also might save DCA's taking a claim to court where it is disputed or they don't have the agreement etc to comply with the CCA - as they'll know before issuing that the debtor is likely to defend on that basis, so save thousands of claims just going on hold while the DCAs scurry about trying to find some kind of proof the debt exists - should have to do that first.

Yip overall good I think, see how it works in practice / proof of the pudding etc.

[enaid]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

Nothing on SB as I can see but surely that can not over rule the Limitations act ?
Like you say it needs testing and am thinking round about Christmas time we will have quite a few new members struggling with how and what to do.

[Nibbler]

Re: Changes to Debt Pre Action Protocols - Your views

mmm not sure, I'm not overly keen on the wording of the reply sheet - it's all heavily biased towards paying - plus I'm thinking on statute barring side of things too.

Have to read it all properly, but I guess they have to tread a line between covering some bases on spurious DCA claims and keeping it more general.

To be honest, it is better than I was afraid it was going to be!