Cabot Financial - Simple Procedure (Scotland)

[User457]

Nope, I know the default notice and proof of assignation is missing, but how do I word this in the response... I don’t know if they can produce these but I’m guessing not and that seems to be the beat argument right now, I know scottishsolicitor has questioned the assignation of the debt also ?

What do I reply with ?

[Ruby]

Gut tells me that if they have not provided you with a copy of such, then they will not produce it in court either.

I would perhaps write something like:-

I dispute the debt due to: -
.
No notice of the assignation of the debt.
No proof of intimation of the assignation upon the respondent .
No Default notice.
No Proof of intimation of the default notice.

How does that sound ?

[User457]

I believe the assignation has been complied with, unsure about the proof of assignation but likely so... with regards to the default notice and it’s assignation, certainly not so may have to go with these only. I know it doesn’t sound like they have it but what happens if they produce it ? Same thing happened with the statement from original lender, no indication of it being available then produced in court at the cmd ?

What is worse case scenario ? They produce and then what ? I need to appply for time to pay ?

[Ruby]

I believe the assignation has been complied with, unsure about the proof of assignation but likely so.

Sorry, you have lost me. How can you believe that assignation has been complied with if you have not seen proof?

As far as worst case scenario, yes I guess it would be to apply for time to repay and also a CCJ on your credit file .

Remember Nolans rely on people getting scared !

[Amethyst]

I believe this will suffice as proof http://legalbeagles.info/forums/file...tch?id=1398042
Diana M ?

[jaguarsuk]

I believe this will suffice as proof http://legalbeagles.info/forums/file...tch?id=1398042
Diana M ?

That contract of sale is not signed by Next, therefore Next have not sold the debt to the purchaser unless a further copy exists with a signature. Anyone can draft and sign a contract saying they have bought something without asking the other party to sign. It's the other party's signature that makes it a contract between them.

If a copy signed by both parties does exist why have they provided an unsigned copy?

If in court this is the contract they produce for assignation of the debt it should be challenged and if they ask for time to produce another copy that should be challenged as well, they've had plenty of time.

The letter stating that Next are happy to agree the purchase is irrelevant, plenty of companies and individuals have the intention of agreeing contracts and then those contracts fall through having never been signed. It's the signature on the contract that counts.

[Amethyst]

Wonder if the column headers have been redacted for a reason - do these two dates look like last payment then default date ?

[jaguarsuk]

Wonder if the column headers have been redacted for a reason

It's probably they have one spread sheet with every debtor on and rather than filter, then screenshot they have just took a screenshot and redacted the data of all the other debtors. That's why there is a column explaining what the debt is as "Mail Order."

[ScottishSolicitor]

I believe the assignation has been complied with, unsure about the proof of assignation but likely so... with regards to the default notice and it’s assignation, certainly not so may have to go with these only. I know it doesn’t sound like they have it but what happens if they produce it ? Same thing happened with the statement from original lender, no indication of it being available then produced in court at the cmd ?

What is worse case scenario ? They produce and then what ? I need to appply for time to pay ?

Sorry but you are being completely naive about this. If you want me to review things thoroughly you know where to find me otherwise I will just have to leave you to your fate as you don't appear to listen to any advice given

[pt2537]

Hi Sharon

Nope i dont think that is enough, although it depends on two factors

A) the Judge
B) how good the legal submissions are as to why its not sufficient

If you look at Brunt youll see that the PRA group fell over on producing a document exactly like that, so its possible to argue what they have given isnt enough

[Amethyst]

Thanks you any thought on the lack of default notice etc?


so PRA v Brunt ( http://legalbeagles.info/forums/foru...41#post1114741 )
and PRA v Mayhew ( also on that thread but no copy of that )
both on assignment issues ( both England courts)

[Amethyst]

It's probably they have one spread sheet with every debtor on and rather than filter, then screenshot they have just took a screenshot and redacted the data of all the other debtors. That's why there is a column explaining what the debt is as "Mail Order."

Yes, I'm just wondering on the column headers - ie what two dates refer to

[pt2537]

Thanks you any thought on the lack of default notice etc?


so PRA v Brunt ( http://legalbeagles.info/forums/foru...41#post1114741 )
and PRA v Mayhew ( also on that thread but no copy of that )
both on assignment issues ( both England courts)

as you know i am more than happy to share my judgments, if needed i have a copy of the ruling in my folder which i can email over

[jaguarsuk]

Yes, I'm just wondering on the column headers - ie what two dates refer to

Short of the defendant recognising one or both of the dates to explain or asking them via whatever the Scottish version of Part 18 questions are then it's impossible to know

[Diana M]

if needed i have a copy of the ruling in my folder which i can email over

You've already posted the Brunt Judgment in post # 4 on this thread >

http://legalbeagles.info/forums/foru...40#post1114740

Di