DNW's UE Diary

[DNW]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Barclaycard1

Name                     - Barclaycard Plat Visa
Type of account          - Credit Card
Date commenced           - Sept 2004
Approx balance           - £3,161
Date last paid           - Mar-11    
Arrangement/not paying   - Not paying
Status                   - In Arrears  (DN rec'd 03/09)
Account owner            - DCA (Mercers)

Key:
Them
Me
Other


Activity

1. 18/04/11 Acknowledge receipt of I&E, refuse to reduce or stop charges
2. 27/04/11 Request for payment
3. 13/05/11 Reduced credit limit
4. 01/06/11 Reminder of overdue payment and informed it will be passed to Mercers to send default notice.
5. 30/06/11 Mercers - accept £1 payments, to be reviewed in 2 months. No interest or charges to be applied while making token payments.
6. 24/07/11 I wrote and requested refund interest & charges (sent to Barclays & Mercers)
7. 17/08/11 CCA request sent
8. 03/09/11 DN Received from Mercers
9. 05/09/11 Acknowledged CCA request - they're looking for it and will get back to me
10. 13/09/11 Letter rec'd from Mercers - 48 hours notice (letter dated 06/09/11), I have ignored their demands for payment so they are now passing my account to a local firm who may send a rep to visit me (ignored)
11. 29/09/11 Covering letter for Recon CCA enclosed - but no encs in envelope
12. 29/09/11 Letter received - Calders - 7 day notice (ignored)
    
13. 17/10/11 Current T&C received
14. 19/10/11 Letter sent to Calders - Harassment & Threat of Doorstep-Visit
15. 04/11/11 Letter received - Formal Demand for Payment (full balance) - until paid, no statements will be sent. If not paid by 08/11/11, debt collectors may call or you may be taken to court. We will set off any funds available to us.
    
16. 09/11/11 - Sent Final Response - Unenforceability (No CCA Received)
17. 15/11/11 - Received from Barclays - They feel they have fulfilled their obligations and complied with my s.78 request..... Re section 61, they point to paragraph 230 Carey vs HSBC, and say "It's insufficient.. to point to the absence of a signed, or a proper s78 copy as a foundation for a plea of an improperly executed agreement... They believe my credit agreement to be fully compliant and will oppose allegations that it isn't..... With regards to the OFT, they do not hold my account to be in dispute..... Attached was a copy of my CCA
18. 28/11/11 Niddy says

*** update ***

06/12/11 - Received a letter from Barclaycard notifying me this has now been assigned to MKDP LLP

Does that mean it's been it's been sold on, and do I need to do anything at this stage?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Excellent, thanks

Thats another crossed off the 'waiting for the court papers to drop through the letterbox every day' list!!

Well some lenders still issue papers so don't get complacent, but yea - you can chill a wee bit

[DNW]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Thanks Billy, good luck to you too, I've had some successes in terms of some of my debts (as they stand at the mo) are unenforceable, but a lot of mine are enforceable which is a bit of a worry. It can certainly get a bit of a rocky road at times so don't be afraid to post any questions or concerns - someone has pretty much always seen/heard it all before.

[billytommo]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

DNW, your scenario sounds so similar to mine it's untrue. Good to hear that you are getting some successes but I am only just on the road to sorting my situation out. I, too, had the old grey matter in the sand for far too long. Good luck to you and all.

Billy

[DNW]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Excellent, thanks

Thats another crossed off the 'waiting for the court papers to drop through the letterbox every day' list!!

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Update:

1. 15/11/11 - Received from Barclays -
   

• They feel they have fulfilled their obligations and complied with my s.78 request
• Re section 61, they point to paragraph 230 Carey vs HSBC, and say "It's insufficient.. to point to the absence of a signed, or a proper s78 copy as a foundation for a plea of an improperly executed agreement
• They believe my credit agreement to be fully compliant and will oppose allegations that it isn't
  
• With regards to the OFT, they do not hold my account to be in dispute
• Attached was a copy of my CCA

Other than uploading my CCA for Niddy to see (will do this tomorrow) - is there anything I need to respond with or anything I need to do with this for now?

this is

all they've sent is terms..... ignore their letter of 15th - see what they do next!

Well done

[greymatter]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Thanks Niddy

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Where do I find Pauls firm reuccesses please?

Case Laws are here: ---> allaboutFORUMS | Case Law Database

Paul works for the solicitors firm mentioned within the case laws quoted by Garlok, above.... (Watsons of Llandudno)

[BBoo]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Wait and see, but if they sell the debt, that could be good news!

[swanfan]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Yep, wait and see. :niddy

[DNW]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

MBNA

Name                     - MBNA
Type of account          - Credit Card
Date commenced           - Dec 2006
Approx balance           - £8,700
Date last paid           - Mar-11    
Arrangement/not paying   - Token Payment
Status                   - In Arrears 
Account owner            - Lender

Key:
Them
Me
Other

Activity

1. 27/04/11 Missed payment reminder
2. 29/04/11 Card cancelled
3. 11/05/11 Notice of arrears
4. 31/05/11 Payment reminder
5. 16/06/11 Card cancelled
6. 30/06/11 Accepted I&E shortfall, will write again with a repayment plan
7. 13/07/11 Notice of arrears
8. 24/07/11 My letter - request interest freeze and no change in circumstances.
9. 15/07/11 (crossed with my letter) Accept £1, zero interest & charges
10. 17/08/11 CCA Request sent
11. 03/09/11 CCA received and sent to Niddy
12. 03/09/11
13. 06/09/11 Received - DN
    

UPDATE:

16/11/11 Received account terminated letter. Various recovery options they may consider:

• Sale of debt
• Placement of debt
• Litigation

I will be informed of any further action



I would guess there's nothing for me to do with this at the moment other than sitting tight and seeing which option they take? Sale or placement would obviously be preferable to me.

[garlok]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

We are not allowed to advertise on here but there is a lot of reading around the forum to lead you in the correct direction and I would treat successes not only in court but where Paul has forced creditors to back down prior to court.

Have you read Harrsion v Link ???

Have you read Phoenix Recoveries v Kotecha?

Have you read Amex v Brandon which I believe there was at least help behind the scenes?

Have you read any of the Cabot threads some very recently?

There is an enormous amount of material around if you look and draw conclusions.
We are not with Paul's firm but another specialist. However there have been and are issues which would have scuppered and destroyed us had I not done the study and learning and I am still learning whilst we carry forward the battles.

regards
Garlok

[greymatter]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Where do I find Pauls firm reuccesses please?

[garlok]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Sorry about giving the wrong impression here on a re-read of the post I should have said just look at the recent SUCCESSES of Paul's firm on behalf of us mere mortals.

regards
Garlok

[garlok]

Re: DNW's UE Diary

Hi DNW,

Upload for Niddy's checking ASAP. However two things. You say the start date is 2003 which is prior to the April 2007 enactment of the repeal of s127. Hence they cannot say that the s61 argument is not relevant. They are in your case as you retain the full protections of s127 due to the dates. This does not allow the courts to issue enforcement without the fully compliant documentation. Firstly if Carey is examined in great detail it will be noted that the claimants were in fact the debtors who made no positive assertions as to not signing a fully compliant CCA1974/2006 agreement, the case was heard on assumed facts not actual facts and never went to full trial. Waksman stated that he was only ruling on the vaildity or otherwise of s78 requests for information purposes although he strayed into other territory not covered in his terms of refererence and under s108 and s234 of the judgement he said "original" original" several times over. Plus a wider picture of the case and judgement shows that he in fact was basing his findings on the assumed facts that ALL agreements were post April 2007.

EVEN the solicitors involved in these cases have their knickers in a twist and it is taking places like AAD to sort them out and point out the error of their ways. They have been blinded by the case law history which is being built up by the creditors against weak, ill advised defences put up by litigants in person. Creditors are hand picking the cases carefully to try and plant the illusion that Carey is the be all and end all of all cases.

Take a look at the recent case history of Paul's firm for a start.

regards
Garlok