BW Legal PRAC Financial Payday UK

[mike22861]

]Claim Received 04 March 2019

Claim Acknowledged

Total Amount Claimed 1100

Claimants Name PRAC Financial Limited

Solicitors Firm BW Legal

Original Creditor Instant Cash Loans Ltd T/A Payday UK

Original Debt Payday Loan

Particulars of claim The Claimant's claim is for the sum of 800 being monies due under a loan agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 between the Defendant and Instant Cash Loans Ltd t/a Payday UK under account ref ######### and assigned to the claimant on 09/12/2016, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The Defendant has failed to maintain the contractual payment under the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served and not complied with.

The claim also includes statutory interest pursuant to section 69 of the county courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00% from the date of assignment to 01/03/2019 being an amount of 150

Is the debt statute barred , the particulars of claim gives no date of agreement but the later "Agreement " sent says payback was due 25/02/2013

I have sent CCA and CPR letters nothing at all back from PRAC or Instant cash loans only An Agreement and a Statement from BW Legal

Defence also sent in based on the no information standard copy from here as at the time BW had not provided any details at all.

Background: In early 2013 My Bank informed me of 7 payday loan payments due to go out of a dormant account I hadn't been using . This was immediately stopped and details of the 7 companies obtained.

Fraud was reported through the police but then just referred to Action Fraud. Payday UK didn't respond to any correspondence and noting more was heard until PRAC/BW

I have had the case transferred to local court , no hearing date but today received the request to have a witness statement in by 6th November

I would just like some advice on best way to go re witness staement details.

I have had no default notices and assignment notices as stated in my defence statement, I did agree to mediation but obviously I could not say yes to the have I all the information question.

I have copies of the Action Fraud Emails.

Not anything Bank Wise as it was more than 6 years ago since the account was closed.

I am aware of the assignment chain of MEM, instant cash loans etc of which so far BW / PRAC have failed to provide any notices.

The Address on the Agreement is 2 years out of date at the time of generating.

I can prove I was not residing at that address at the agreement date

I would appreciate anyone who has any experience with BW/PRAC/Payday UK giving me any advice

The agreement states that the loan is between myself , MEM Consumer Finance and Payday UK MEM consumer finance is not mentioned in the particulars of claim

The agreement does not mention Instant Cash Loans Ltd

[mike22861]

Sorry this dropped into the incorrect Forum , can one of the admins move it to Court Cases please.

[mike22861]

Can anyone help on the chain of companies , I believe that Payday UK (MEM Consumer Finance) was nothing to do with Instant Cash Loans at the time.
So far BW legal have provided no assignment notices at all but I suspect that there can't be one between Payday UK and Instant Cash Loans.
I only need this as a back up as I expect the initial fraud defense will suffice but it is always a good idea for a plan B with these

[mike22861]

I got my witness statement in on time after receiving BW Legal's with 48 hours before the deadline.
I now have a 90 minute hearing on the 20th January
In the witness pack BW Legal; admitted they cannot obtain the default notice which they note in their particulars of claim and have instead provided a reconstituted document purporting to be from Instant Cash Loans Ltd, all the part where instant cash loans ltd has been added is in completely different typeface to the rest of the document. Checking at companies house it shows MEM consumer finance was via a tortuous route wholly owned share wise by Dollar Financial, on Dollar Financial accounts it shows instant cash loans and MEM Consumer Finance as separate companies. How do I best show that there is no connection between Payday UK (MEM Consumer Finance) and Instant Cash Loans Ltd
jaguarsuk I think this gem is in your field

[jaguarsuk]

MEM Consumer Finance Ltd traded as Payday UK then sold the brand to Instant Cash Loans Ltd which as you say were wholly owned by the same parent company, if as the claimant claims the loan was from the latter then they wouldn't have been unauthorised to lend by the Financial Conduct Authority as their license start date was 17/02/2016 (https://register.fca.org.uk/ShPo_Fir...000000m7BoRAAU) and you say the due date is listed as 25/02/2013.

MEM were licensed (an error page loads when I click through, if that persists you might have to contact them to get a copy of the register entry) and the FCA register shows Payday UK as one of their brands (search results: https://register.fca.org.uk/shpo_sea...=3wq1nht7eg7tr).

If the loan agreement shows the loan between you and MEM, then the claimant has failed to evidence the loan they are claiming is owing per their particulars of claim pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 s.77.

Your arguments are thus:

1. The loan was not taken out with Instant Cash Loans Ltd, the claimant has failed to evidence the loan agreement of the loan they are claiming is owing per their particulars of claim pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 s.77 and the default notice has been incorrectly reconstituted. The Claimant has failed to evidence Notice of Assignment of the alleged loan from MEM Consumer Finance Ltd t/as Payday UK to Instant Cash Loans Ltd t/as Payday UK pursuant to The Law of Property Act 1925 s.136 and thus their legal right to bring the claim. Consequently you are not liable as alleged in the particulars of claim or at all.

Or

2. Instant Cash Loans Ltd were carrying out unregulated activity as they were not licensed by the FCA at the time the loan was taken and as such you are not liable as alleged or at all pursuant to The Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) (Amendment) (No.2) Order 2013 Part 8 Chapter 2 Article 48.

Consequently the claim should be dismissed and the claimant ordered to pay the defendant costs of and occasioned in dealing with this matter.

[mike22861]

Court day today I will report how it goes

[MIKE770]

good luck

[Amethyst]

Best of luck - as this was never your loan to begin with the judge should come down on your side - particularly with the lack of evidence assignment between MEM and ICL, the dodgy default notice from a company who didn't own the debt at that time and your action fraud reports. Fingers crossed anyway xx

[mike22861]

Well that didn't go as expected, firstly was approached by their advocate, he stated he didn't have a copy of my witness statement so I gave him a copy, about 30 minutes later he came back and said he was going to request an adjournment as no one at BW Legal was available, I replied not my problem they knew when the hearing was and chose not to attend but send you. \the Judge didn't listen to me at all and granted his adjournment, even though I stated that him not having paperwork does not change the facts the case fails on the default notice and assignment alone, I might have well not been there.

[jaguarsuk]

Well that didn't go as expected, firstly was approached by their advocate, he stated he didn't have a copy of my witness statement so I gave him a copy, about 30 minutes later he came back and said he was going to request an adjournment as no one at BW Legal was available, I replied not my problem they knew when the hearing was and chose not to attend but send you. \the Judge didn't listen to me at all and granted his adjournment, even though I stated that him not having paperwork does not change the facts the case fails on the default notice and assignment alone, I might have well not been there.

Absolute joke, what did they put in the witness section of the N180?

[Amethyst]

Oh for goodness sakes. The Claimant had a copy of your Witness Statement, and indeed, should have ensured their representative had it. Judges do give too much leaway on this behaviour IMO. Sadly it's BW just assuming the defendant won't turn up so it'll just be a walkover in court. Grrrr.

Not much you can do about it although when/if it comes to a new hearing ( or indeed should they chose to discontinue ) ask for your costs of today as well as for the new hearing ( travel, time off work etc ) so keep any receipts from todays parking/transport etc.

[mike22861]

To be honest it felt like an old boys club, the schedule was shuffled to suit this advocate he had 4 hearings in total, I was the only defendant that turned up, so the schedule was shuffled so my case adjournment could be heard and he could stay in court for his other 3 in a row. It definitely shows the reason you should turn up I reckon if it had been left to paper from me I would have lost., BW did say they would have a witness and in their witness statement said they would send an advocate, I doubt the same leniency would have been offered myself if I had turned up without my paperwork. I have to say it doesn't seem at all fair or balanced rather than BW having to prove anything it feels like I have to prove their mistakes.
*

[jaguarsuk]

To be honest it felt like an old boys club, the schedule was shuffled to suit this advocate he had 4 hearings in total, I was the only defendant that turned up, so the schedule was shuffled so my case adjournment could be heard and he could stay in court for his other 3 in a row. It definitely shows the reason you should turn up I reckon if it had been left to paper from me I would have lost., BW did say they would have a witness and in their witness statement said they would send an advocate, I doubt the same leniency would have been offered myself if I had turned up without my paperwork. I have to say it doesn't seem at all fair or balanced rather than BW having to prove anything it feels like I have to prove their mistakes.

Unfortunately there is a prejudice towards LiP by some judges, because they had to take so long to qualify and the person in front of them opposing you has, it's as if you shouldn't have the right to be taken to be equal to them. It's definitely favourable for those in the club in some quarters.

That said it's not all judges, I have been in front of some very fair judges and on occasion where I have thought I was going to have to battle a request for costs had them tell me there is no reason to respond when I requested before tearing the opposition a new one for even suggesting my conduct was unreasonable.

It's a lottery unfortunately.

[mike22861]

Update: I have a adjourned hearing date for the 25th of February where I will try again, this time I think I should request the claim struck out on the basis they have an incorrect (made up) default notice and no assignment notice from MEM if they press the default notice I shall bring in the credit Licence or lack thereof sadly I think the Judge is most definitely not going to be impartial, I will be asking for a cost order for time off work and travel x 2*

[mike22861]

jaguarsuk I have found that all the assets liabilities from MEM Consumer Finance (Payday Loans UK ) were transferred to Instant Cash Loans Ltd on the 28th Feb 2015 am I required to get a notice of such ie assignment