**DISCONTINUED**- Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

[sloane82]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

Brilliant there was PPI, get that back, by writing to the bank the debt is null and void. Contact the financial ombudsman service, regarding this, get an sar regarding your accounts and have a look at what you, have purchased.

[Diana M]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

Brilliant there was PPI, get that back, by writing to the bank the debt is null and void.

Why would a PPI reclaim make the debt (currently subject of live legal proceedings) null and void ? I can't think of any reason.

The OP has to file a WS by 4 pm today.

Di

[Diana M]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

HC have not responded to my letter. Now in the process of completing witness statement as time is running out.

I would not have expected Howard Cohen to Discontinue a £6.5k claim a couple of weeks before a listed hearing for which they have already paid the hearing fee. Their attitude may well have been "let the DJ decide the outcome" since they're unlikely to be risking costs in the Small Claims Court. They'll want to give it a go especially when the Defendant is a LIP and the Claimant will be represented by solicitors at the hearing.

It's unclear from your thread whether those Directions allowed for you to file an amended Defence after the Claimant filed their amended POC. Did you?

In your first post you say that this claim is in your friend's name so they must sign and swear that the contents of ithe WS are true obviously.

Without having seen any paperwork it's not possible to comment on what your friend should include. They (your friend) can be cross examined (under oath) on the contents of that WS at the hearing so please make sure that they are aware of this.

I wish your your friend good luck on the day.

Di

[Nomoneynoproblem]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

I would not have expected Howard Cohen to Discontinue a £6.5k claim a couple of weeks before a listed hearing for which they have already paid the hearing fee. Their attitude may well have been "let the DJ decide the outcome" since they're unlikely to be risking costs in the Small Claims Court. They'll want to give it a go especially when the Defendant is a LIP and the Claimant will be represented by solicitors at the hearing.

It's unclear from your thread whether those Directions allowed for you to file an amended Defence after the Claimant filed their amended POC. Did you?

In your first post you say that this claim is in your friend's name so they must sign and swear that the contents of ithe WS are true obviously.

Without having seen any paperwork it's not possible to comment on what your friend should include. They (your friend) can be cross examined (under oath) on the contents of that WS at the hearing so please make sure that they are aware of this.

I wish your your friend good luck on the day.

Di

Hi Di

The direction order was silent on the Claimant filing an amended defence, however we have amended our defence and attached it as part of the witness statement exhibits and have asked the judge for permission to do this in light of the Claimant's amended POC. Yes we have submitted our WS this morning signed in my friends name. In our WS have included all the evidence of the Claimant not been compliant and told the story from the begining and leading up to the hearing from the 16th. The Claimant had not complied with any of the requirement of CCA not until the Judge issued them with a direction failing the case will be struck out. As advised on receipt of the amended POC we quickly wrote back to them and rejected the reconstituted agreement and I also made the court aware of this.

I believe the Claimant will try and base their case on Carey v HSBC but in there case this will be flawed as the exhibit produced was not legible and full of errors which will be pointed out moreover we will be pushing for s61 (1) (a) and 127 (3) of the act.

Also there are issues with the default notice that was issued by Mercers and not barclays, and the timing to remedy the breach which has also been mentioned. I will need some support here in presenting the case.

As of today the Claimant has yet to submit their witness statement.

Regards

NMNP

[Nomoneynoproblem]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

New development yesterday was the deadline for the exchange of witness statements from both parties. I duly submitted mine in accordance with the direction and can confirmed it was received by the Claimant. I have subsequently writte to the court this morning that they are none compliant and such action has put my case at a disadvantage and copied the letter to the Claimant.

Lo and behold this afternoon I received the Cliamaint's witness statement and reading through they have used evidence contained in my WS to change their story slightly. They are now saying the CC was issued in 1997, which is different from what they stated in their amended POC which they could have only picked up from my amended defence which they referred to in their WS.

More significantly they have included a new exhibit which is purportely meant to be a copy of the notice of assignment from Barclays to MKDP. I always jump off my chair as the alleged letter is a forgery. The letter was written on a plain piece of paper and it's meant to have been from Barclays..lol are they that stupid.

I need urgent advice on this one.

- - - Updated - - -

Cleary this letter is fraudulent.

[sloane82]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

The account is now statute barred, under the statute limitation's act of 1980, they cannot claim a penny, as it has been over 6 years, claim your ppi, back through, barclay's and all charge's back.

- - - Updated - - -

So basically from 1997-2003, they had a 6 year window, to get money back, because you had ppi, on your account, they have mis-sold you that under sections 5-7 of the consumer protection's for unfair trading regulation's 2008, i'd also contact the financial ombudsman service also.

[Diana M]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

The account is now statute barred, under the statute limitation's act of 1980, they cannot claim a penny.

Is it?

Where has the OP said on this thread that their friend's debt is SB because their last payment on the account was more that six years before the claim was issued in February 2016?

Di

[sloane82]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

It states in earlier posting's that the card, was taken out in 1997.

[Kati]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

It states in earlier posting's that the card, was taken out in 1997.

when it was taken out has no bearing on a SB'd status ... it all goes on when the last payment/default was

[sloane82]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

And when was, the last payment, Barclay's owe the customer ppi.

[nemesis45]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

The letter is not a forgery just an internal file copy by the look of it.

When was the account defaulted , the date the account was opened as [MENTION=49370]Kati[/MENTION] said has no bearing on Limitations Act 1980 provisions.

nem

[Nomoneynoproblem]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

Nem pls look again at the letter. It's written on plain paper. Not Barclays letter head etc. No corporate headings. Surely anyone can write such letter.
The account is not statute bar and PPI claim is being pursued separately.

[nemesis45]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

Nem pls look again at the letter. It's written on plain paper. Not Barclays letter head etc. No corporate headings. Surely anyone can write such letter.
The account is not statute bar and PPI claim is being pursued separately.

Hi,

If you look at one corner there's a dark triangle and it's marked copy, office /internal copies are not printed on headed paper there is no need to do
this, having seen quite a number of these documents in my opinion it is a genuine copy.

nem

[sloane82]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

Oh right it's good, to hear that, your getting your money back.

[Nomoneynoproblem]

Re: What to do next - Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd/Howard Cohen

We live to fight another day........

Just had our day in court this morning and I must admit it was a little bit daunting. The night before I had carefully laid out our plan of action with notes, and cross examination questions etc. We were feeling much confident that we had this in the bag.

Arrived at Court this morning and the Claimant's solicitor game to find us and started asking what I would term fishing questions. Not giving much away she quickly disappeared. As part of my preparation I read up on the rules of conducting the procedures and I was prepared that the Claimant goes first and we will then cross examine and then read our prepared witness statements.

How wrong was I. Lol as soon as we got in front of the judge all the confidence built up soon quickly disappeared. The Judge can be described as a no nonsense judge turned to us and asked us to state our case and state how the reconstituted agreement does not conform to the prescribed terms. We told him and then he asked what judgement are you basing this on and we stated the same as the Claimant "Carey v HSBC" HE GOES DO YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE RULING I said now. (First mistake) he goes you are not expecting me to look this up are you....e said sir but! turns to the other side and asked them for a copy of the judgement luckily they could not produce one as well. Now the man is truly agitated asking what we expect him to now. I said Sir, I can help you by pointing to the relevant section (bonus point) then he turns to the other side and was just as nasty to them asking about the reconstituted agreement dos not tally up with their witness statement, I complained that the whole doc was illegible he stated he can read his ok, and that do I wear glasses (no need to be rude sir ) and stated he noticed I had highlighted some of the para I told him I did struggle. I then pointed out all the inconsistency with the reconstituted agreement i.e. wrong address, two different dates of alleged agreement taken out conditions don't match.


He turns to the other side and asked what he was suppose to do now, they asked for an adjournment and me sensing victory raised my hand up, he quickly shut me down and stated if I object there is no way he is going to find in my favour due to inconsistencies in my statement and not enough evidence and no laws quoted.


In a nutshell he has asked the other side to put in an amended defence within the next 14 days and then I will need to do the same on receipt and then we both need to submit new witness statements and then prepared for trial round 2.

I complained about the other side not abiding by previous directive orders and he warned then and said the new order will be given in date rather than days so they will need to be submitted by a certain date.....

My question is what can I expect from Cohen now. Can they now change some of their evidence in light of what happened this morning. ie can they now insert the old address on the reconstituted agreement.