Cowbopper UE Diary

[Still Waving]

That being said, if you ignore a LBC you will almost certainly get a claim. If you then go on to win, could the enemy then ask for their costs based on the fact, if they had known the CCA request was dud or there was no DN or something else, they would never have gone to court.

Disregarding the political content in your post - on the above point, surely the onus is on the claimant and their representatives to carry out due diligence prior to bringing an action. If they fail to do so, why would the court reward them in that manner if the case goes against them?

[Roger]

I pointed out that the tactical approach to LBC changed. We I used to advise ticking the box etcc followed by asking for a whole fistful of documents.

I have successfully fought off DCA's BUT frankly more luck than judgement! However I could have lost my Home but for @JLS!!

Colin G Quinn

Don't do anything at this moment Tactics are important so Contact Colin a Litigation Executive at Joanna Connolly Solicitors a firm which specialises in consumer credit. If you need to contact me you can send a message by clicking on my username or by emailing me at colin@joannaconnollysolicitors.co.uk with of course a link back to your post here!!.
The first discussion is free.

Hi,

I have received your reply. I'll ask my colleague Gerry to give you a call, hopefully this afternoon, to explain your options etc. That advice is always free.

There has been a change in AAD advice on receiving a LBC.
Tactics come into consideration and hence the suggestion to seek legal advice!
A good Diary will really help here and makes for good informed decisions.

In my own battle with PRA I and my family are deeply grateful to Joanna Connolly for soundly defeating these Pariah's

The reality is these people are not stupid, if you raise a legitimate defence and they can’t answer it they will not proceed. Well that’s been my experience with 10 chasers so far!!

The steps set out by Roger work well if you can afford the services of JCS. However the OP has said he doesn't have the funds to mount a legal challenge should he receive a claim. Therefore he has to try to avoid a claim arriving at all costs even though this might mean MC looking harder for a valid CCA agreement. Each person/debt is different and there sometimes isn't a 'one size fits all ' approach.

As I understand it, the whole point of the LBC is to a avoid court- now that may be a rather simplistic view and I am certain it is not intended to be generally in the public’s interest. The idea surely is to a) get more people to settle and b) to reduce court time and costs.

That being said, if you ignore a LBC you will almost certainly get a claim. If you then go on to win, could the enemy then ask for their costs based on the fact, if they had known the CCA request was dud or there was no DN or something else, they would never have gone to court.

My personal opinion is that the old way does work, especially for those with lower value claims or no funds to pay for a solicitor. With all due respect to any solicitors, they are part of the capitalist neo-liberal regime we live under. And yes I know exactly what I mean by neo liberal and maybe the tern ‘New Right’ would be more appropriate.

Been there seen it done it! If it works for you thats fine you don't need advice! AAD has seen this before!
The LBC was being used to DCA's to WIN against you by derstroying your defence(s) Would Like to to see the Diaries of Pat and @Timewilltell

But look at what Colin wrote that initial advice is free. A lawyer bang up to date who can advise with current tactics and law.
Now I know who I would first ask! Its your choice as always.

[Pat]

Disregarding the political content in your post - on the above point, surely the onus is on the claimant and their representatives to carry out due diligence prior to bringing an action. If they fail to do so, why would the court reward them in that manner if the case goes against them?

If I am honest I have no idea, but I have been told elsewhere (another forum) that the whole point of the LBC and PAP was to iron out irregularities. I also know there have been small claims cases where costs have been awarded to the defendant because the claimant had been told there were things missing but carried on regardless ( with brown under moonlit sky- I’ll name that song in 1). Is it worth taking the risk? I would add equally, if you are represented , by ignoring the PAP would it kill any chance of getting costs?)

[Roger]

If I am honest I have no idea, but I have been told elsewhere (another forum) that the whole point of the LBC and PAP was to iron out irregularities. I also know there have been small claims cases where costs have been awarded to the defendant because the claimant had been told there were things missing but carried on regardless ( with brown under moonlit sky- I’ll name that song in 1). Is it worth taking the risk? I would add equally, if you are represented , by ignoring the PAP would it kill any chance of getting costs?)

AAD has Seen this before THE DCA's have been using the LBC tactically its like Playing POKER where they hide their hand and see YOURS!
Pat has it seems considerable knowledge and experience of claims I wonder why?

[Pat]

I pointed out that the tactical approach to LBC changed. We I used to advise ticking the box etcc followed by asking for a whole fistful of documents.

I have successfully fought off DCA's BUT frankly more luck than judgement! However I could have lost my Home but for @JLS!!


Been there seen it done it! If it works for you thats fine you don't need advice! AAD has seen this before!
The LBC was being used to DCA's to WIN against you by derstroying your defence(s) Would Like to to see the Diaries of Pat and @Timewilltell

But look at what Colin wrote that initial advice is free. A lawyer bang up to date who can advise with current tactics and law.
Now I know who I would first ask! It’s @Rogyour choice as always.

I have been a long time lurker here and elsewhere, I have never set up a diary or put myself on public display, what i will say is I now have over £40000 that is well and truly SB - all done essentially the way Niddy used to advise. I could never have afforded legal representation . My very first LBA as it was then was responded to with a CCA request- more by luck than judgement and I never heard from them again.

Of course one view is that Colin would say that wouldn’t he and looking at the website Gerry is a ‘Litigation Executive’ - is that Newspeak for xxxxx xxxxx? I don’t know- he may well be qualified but reading the bio he is more of a xxxx xxxx.

[Roger]

I have been a long time lurker here and elsewhere, I have never set up a diary or put myself on public display, what i will say is I now have over £40000 that is well and truly SB - all done essentially the way Niddy used to advise. I could never have afforded legal representation . My very first LBA as it was then was responded to with a CCA request- more by luck than judgement and I never heard from them again.

Pat tactics changed please understand this!
I have won using the Old AAD approach BUT its true the LBC is being used for the benefit of the DCA's , who remember have a little or no documentation when they purchase the account!
TACTICS have changed!

[Timewilltell]

I do find this rely on not responding somewhat bizarre, if a solicitor is employed and advises/chooses to ignore then that’s their choice don’t ask me to pay if it comes back to bite you. If I know they haven’t got the documents from a Sar then why would I worry? More to the point why should any solicitor acting on my behalf worry?

[Roger]

I do find this rely on not responding somewhat bizarre, if a solicitor is employed and advises/chooses to ignore then that’s their choice don’t ask me to pay if it comes back to bite you. If I know they haven’t got the documents from a Sar then why would I worry? More to the point why should any solicitor acting on my behalf worry?

You are just making a lot of noise aren't you!
Look if it works for you! Good Luck! Your choice!
But If I were you I would look very carefully at your Statute Barred Accounts. Because the Case Law has the Statute Bar starting from DN and or admission of the DEBT!
CAN YOU BE 100% SURE THAT YOU HAVEN'T ACTUALLY RESTARTED THE STATUTE BAR CLOCK?
Even a query with CRA's has the potential to be an admission of the DEBT!

[Timewilltell]

Given that I followed advice on here and used AAD said templates I should hope not.

is it noise or just you can’t answer it?

[Pat]

This thread IS about the OP and given the fact they say they can not afford representation they need to find a way forward. Ideally by avoiding court.

Let’s face it, if I enter a defence arguing a non compliant CCA request or similar, they will either run away and find it or let the case be stayed.

Replying to the LBC will make no difference unless they pause, go away and before they find it the debt becomes SB.

Incidentally, Roger, do you not see the irony on you calling Timewilltell noisy?

Remember this is about the OP who can not afford a lawyer.

[Roger]

This thread IS about the OP and given the fact they say they can not afford representation they need to find a way forward. Ideally by avoiding court.

Let’s face it, if I enter a defence arguing a non compliant CCA request or similar, they will either run away and find it or let the case be stayed.

Replying to the LBC will make no difference unless they pause, go away and before they find it the debt becomes SB.

Incidentally, Roger, do you not see the irony on you calling Timewilltell noisy?

Remember this is about the OP who can not afford a lawyer.

Pat
@Cowpopper can talk to Colin and ask advice for free!!!

NOW about you and your debts and I can't comment because their are NO Diaries
CAN YOU BE 100% CERTAIN THAT THESE ARE STATUTE BARRED?
That you haven't, in the eyes of the Law, in your responses to LBC actually admitted to the Debt and thereby restarted the STATUE BAR CLOCK.

[Roger]

Given that I followed advice on here and used AAD said templates I should hope not.

is it noise or just you can’t answer it?

Well thats good news! But can't comment really without sight of the Diaries

Tactics changed and we were advised to change accordingly

13 September 2022, 09:46
Originally posted by ca71 View Post
If/when the LBC drops, I'll be getting JCS on the case.

A few years ago AAD would say ask for this and that with the LBC.
But the DCA's used the LBC to get their ducks in a row and then come back and SUE!

Tactics as well as Law play their part here. Hence a good Diary is important for good decisions.
JCS are at the top of their game!!

[Pat]

Pat
@Cowpopper can talk to Colin and ask advice for free!!!

NOW about you and your debts and I can't comment because their are NO Diaries
CAN YOU BE 100% CERTAIN THAT THESE ARE STATUTE BARRED?
That you haven't, in the eyes of the Law, in your responses to LBC actually admitted to the Debt and thereby restarted the STATUE BAR CLOCK.

First question is will Cowpopper actually get to speak to Colin.

Secondly, please do not be so patronising. Yes I am 100% certain my debts are SB. I usually advise caution in these matters in case a letter has inadvertently changed the case so yes 100%

[Still Waving]

I'm not sure who scored the most 'hits' in this fencing match, but I humbly submit that TIME should be called.

[Pat]

Well thats good news! But can't comment really without sight of the Diaries

Tactics changed and we were advised to change accordingly

13 September 2022, 09:46
Originally posted by ca71 View Post
If/when the LBC drops, I'll be getting JCS on the case.

I don’t think it’s your comments that are needed. As you, yourself conceded a few days ago, diaries are not obligatory.

The link you included does not seem to offer and advice, just a contributor saying if a LoC drops they would contact JCS. That is of course their right and not something you should be telling people they must do. It is one of many options.

I am currently investigating pensions and have just had the fees dropped by 2% in order to be competitive.