Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

[PlanB]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

No idea who pt2537 is

Let me assist :nerd: :nerd: :nerd:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17670803

This case was won by PT2537 and the legal team at Watsons solicitors and *Mayhew* the Defendant was PlanB (moi) who was very happy with the successful outcome based entirely on PT's superior knowledge of consumer law.

http://www.watsonssolicitors.co.uk/santander.html

[FORCEOFONE]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

Well, what can i say

Class act, the A team

Serious now, people may get fed up with my postings some times but, i do not do opinions or hearsay

Straight in with statutory obligation or case law to reference

No mistakes that way

[pt2537]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

Thank you for dropping into our little debate pt2537

Case law reference as well, just what the doctor ordered

What i am getting at is this:

The first contact a debtor receives from a debt agency is normally a goodbye letter from the creditor, and a hello from the debt agency saying the debt has been assigned

The first instinct is to phone the debt agency, that will then result in confirmation of receipt of the notice of assignment.

What will be the situation if the debtor ignores all contact with the debt agency, the debt agency then issues a claim stating a notice of assignment has been served. The debtor states he has not received it.

How can the debt agency prove receipt by the debtor of the assignment notice so it is effectual in law

Well the difficulty is, what must a notice of assignment say?

It needs to tell you who owns your debt, who you have to pay, who can effectively give you a good discharge. That is what Denning LJ said.

Now, as long as you get notice that t he debt has been assigned, that is sufficient in my view.

It is unlikely that you wont get any letters at all before the claim form is issued. I had a client try to run this argument that the letter was not sent by registered, the Court said, well you clearly recieved the notice, so what is the issue. The judge went on to point out that there was sufficient notice of assignment in the letter of claim in any event.


If you were to ignore a letter of claim then in my opinion you are a fool, as the letter of claim is the best chance you have at pre action discovery, so id rather obtain all the documents needed.

In any event another point you havent looked on, is what if the notice isnt received? so what? the assignment will still be good, it will be in equity, and with leave of the Court the original creditor can be joined to proceedings so what then?

The assignment point youre running doesnt really bite on much in reality

[FORCEOFONE]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

In reality then a court will advise the debtor to go away and rethink his options

I appreciate your clarity and objectivity on this, and backed up with established facts

Once again

Thanks to all that have contributed to this debate

[gravytrain]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

I think there has been cases won on the assignment issue though, I seem to remember one where the date of the assignment didn't tally with the termination date and rendered it void, perhaps PT can remember the case.

[pt2537]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

There is HFO v Burney which is recent, theres also the famous Harrison v Burke,

But those dealt with issues relating to the assignment and the notices not corresponding. The Notice,if it states the date then it must be accurate. If the notice is silent on the date then it falls away.

Of course, it does depend on the Claimants pleaded case, as the Court of Appeal made clear in Brandon, the creditor needs to get its tackle in order, or it will end up with difficulties

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Section 196 Law of Property Act 1925

I have never received a NOA by Recorded Mail - they come in the regular post. There's always a "Goodbye" letter from the original creditor and a "Hello" letter from the debt purchaser usually in the same envelope.

Same here, nothing sent by recorded delivery, from what I've heard, that's always the case.

The first instinct is to phone the debt agency, that will then result in confirmation of receipt of the notice of assignment.

What will be the situation if the debtor ignores all contact with the debt agency, the debt agency then issues a claim stating a notice of assignment has been served. The debtor states he has not received it.

How can the debt agency prove receipt by the debtor of the assignment notice so it is effectual in law

All DCAs make a point of showing their phone numbers in big, bold letters and encouraging people to ring. On these forums, we make a point of telling people to communicate only in writing.

Would be interesting to see if a case had been won purely on the argument of the NoA not being sent out and/or received! :noidea:

If you were to ignore a letter of claim then in my opinion you are a fool, as the letter of claim is the best chance you have at pre action discovery, so id rather obtain all the documents needed.

The problem is that people are often not aware of the importance of such letters of claim and tend to dismiss them as yet more threats. As they are not in a prescribed format, they tend to be confused with standard threat-o-grams. :ohwell: