''Assignment''

[Bill-K]

Re: ''Assignment''

Hi Bill - I love that letter. Just one thing - rules over NOA's have changed and the onus is now on the person being assigned the debt to send an NOA (only strengthens your letter) and in some circumstances a NOA does not have to be issued, though most DCA's don't know that as they don't know the law.

Point taken, Labman. TBH, I never really checked out the ultimate veracity of it all, and simply relied on most DCA's not knowing that, either !!! I'm learning a lot from this thread - so, thanks, guys !!!

[labman]

Re: ''Assignment''

Point taken, Labman. TBH, I never really checked out the ultimate veracity of it all, and simply relied on most DCA's not knowing that, either !!! I'm learning a lot from this thread - so, thanks, guys !!!

I think that's a perfectly safe assumption. If it works, use it! lol

[DoubtingThomas]

Re: ''Assignment''

Lowells have been very busy this week sending out all these duplicate letters!

Will watch with interest to see how you get on Middenmess......

[ODC]

Re: ''Assignment''

I guarantee two things about the alleged letter from Sharkleycard and the one from Clownells

The so called Sharkleycard one was in an envelope with the Leeds losers return address on it and somewhere near the bottom will have a Clownells reference

If you examine the barcodes or matrix on bothe letters you will find a connect

[charitynjw]

Re: ''Assignment''

Law of Property Act 1925
136 Legal assignments of things in action.(1)Any absolute assignment by writing under the hand of the assignor (not purporting to be by way of charge only) of any debt or other legal thing in action, of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to claim such debt or thing in action, is effectual in law (subject to equities having priority over the right of the assignee) to pass and transfer from the date of such notice—(a)the legal right to such debt or thing in action;(b)all legal and other remedies for the same; and(c)the power to give a good discharge for the same without the concurrence of the assignor:Provided that, if the debtor, trustee or other person liable in respect of such debt or thing in action has notice—(a)that the assignment is disputed by the assignor or any person claiming under him; or(b)of any other opposing or conflicting claims to such debt or thing in action;he may, if he thinks fit, either call upon the persons making claim thereto to interplead concerning the same, or pay the debt or other thing in action into court under the provisions of the M1Trustee Act, 1925.(2)This section does not affect the provisions of the M2Policies of Assurance Act, 1867.[F1(3)The county court has jurisdiction (including power to receive payment of money or securities into court) under the proviso to subsection (1) of this section where the amount or value of the debt or thing in action does not exceed [F2£30,000].]

Can anyone give a definitive interpretation of "under the hand of the assignor".
(ie Halsbury's, case law, Propert Notices: Validity & Service, etc)

[charitynjw]

Re: ''Assignment''

What exactly constitutes a 'Notice of Assignment' --it must have a defined format to prove to the debtor that a debt has been legally transferred/sold and that that a new entity is now entitled to the benefit.

It's worth having LoPA 1925 s196.4 up your sleeve

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...20/section/196

(4)Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-house, and if that letter is not returned [F1by the postal operator (within the meaning of the Postal Services Act 2000) concerned] undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered.

[Bill-K]

Re: ''Assignment''

Can anyone give a definitive interpretation of "under the hand of the assignor".
(ie Halsbury's, case law, Propert Notices: Validity & Service, etc)

This, I think, is what my unlearnéd missive above alluded to - in that I cannot see how some obscure DCA operating from the Caymans can lawfully pursue a debt, simply by sending THEIR OWN 'Notice of Assignment.'

So...I get the same 'lawful' notice from 20 such 'lawful' DCA's. I contact the OC, who tell me it's not their problem - it's been sold on to 20 DCA's.

Can't be right, can it ? Surely the 'Assignor' must have a responsibility to assign lawfully. This MUST surely include a duty to inform the borrower exactly WHO the assignee is...?

I'm well out of my depth here, so please be gentle !!!

...as if.....!!!

[labman]

Re: ''Assignment''

Hi Charity,

Now here's an interesting point. The EU Directives state otherwise, and I have read a post about this from a solicitor who used to be very active on this site, that the EU Directives would take preference over the LoPA.

It would be interesting to have a definitive answer to this, as it makes a vast difference to the law when dealing with assignments.

[charitynjw]

Re: ''Assignment''

Hi Charity,

Now here's an interesting point. The EU Directives state otherwise, and I have read a post about this from a solicitor who used to be very active on this site, that the EU Directives would take preference over the LoPA.

It would be interesting to have a definitive answer to this, as it makes a vast difference to the law when dealing with assignments.

Hi labman

For clarity, is this re s136, or 196?

[labman]

Re: ''Assignment''

Excellent point Charity Thank you. I guess it would be 136 as it was in response to this:

It is the responsibility of the assignee (the creditor acquiring the rights) to ensure that notice is given. However, he does not have to give notice himself, but can agree with the assignor (the creditor assigning the rights) that the assignor will give notice instead, depending on what is more sensible in the circumstances. It is important, however, that notice is given as soon as reasonably possible and in a way that is clearly understandable by the borrower.

[middenmess]

Re: ''Assignment''

Excellent point Charity Thank you. I guess it would be 136 as it was in response to this:

It is the responsibility of the assignee (the creditor acquiring the rights) to ensure that notice is given. However, he does not have to give notice himself, but can agree with the assignor (the creditor assigning the rights) that the assignor will give notice instead, depending on what is more sensible in the circumstances. It is important, however, that notice is given as soon as reasonably possible and in a way that is clearly understandable by the borrower.

I presume that telling the borrower whether it's equitable or absolute is covered by this?

Were there additional statements in '136' that suggest that lowlife and others should produce a mock-up of the original creditor's [ Barclaycard] letterheads in a deliberate attempt to misinform the ''borrower'' as to the status of any assignment?

[DoubtingThomas]

Re: ''Assignment''

ODC
I guarantee two things about the alleged letter from Sharkleycard and the one from Clownells

The so called Sharkleycard one was in an envelope with the Leeds losers return address on it and somewhere near the bottom will have a Clownells reference

If you examine the barcodes or matrix on bothe letters you will find a connect


No barcode or matrix match for both. Tiny print up left side of both letters says:
1/2
2/2
At the bottom of bad Barclaycard letter head mock-up letter: “Barclaycard is a trading name etc of BBplc.....................1, Churchill Place London........”

FAQ on back of Lowells letter –
FAQ 3
Why didn’t my lender tell me?
The terms and conditions of the agreement you entered with the lender means they are allowed to sell your account without giving you any notice. However, your lender has tried on a number of occasions and may have even used the services of a debt collection company to recover what you owe. As their attempts failed your account was sold and you were notified of this. At the same time you were sent a letter from Lowell notifying you of the change of ownership.

Both letters together in same envelope, with 2nd class “S” stamp on it.
I find this misleading
DT

[middenmess]

Re: ''Assignment''

Hi DT

I presume that you've also received the self same letters.

Did they manage to get your account number right?

The mock up/psuedo B/card letter is so poorly forged that it would only look authentic to the most vulnerable members of our society-----and I'm sure that lowlife wouldn't stoop that low

[DoubtingThomas]

Re: ''Assignment''

Yes I did/have - and same mistakes as on yours, maybe worse!
DT
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
Actually, so bad would say even most vulnerable may be able to spot it. Think they ran out of coloured ink when printing off....

[labman]

Re: ''Assignment''

I'd write back saying you do not acknowledge this debt as the account number is incorrect and the Notice of Assignment is not only unclear in contravention of the EU Consumer Credit Directive and (if the case) in breach of Section 196(4) of the Law of Properties Act 1925 as it was not sent by recorded delivery, thus rendering any Notice of Assignment invalid.

See what they have to say in response.