Pookies UE Diary

[pooksthebear]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

The first thing you need to do is quantify both your own objectives and the risk involved.

If, for example, you were unemployed and had no assets, you could even try to blag it at this stage. The chances are that they would not chance court, and even if they got judgment you might be able to get a DRO and wipe everything out. A home owner with a job, in the same situation, would be taking an insane risk.

What about the default? Was there any PPI added? If there are other possibilities for challenging their position, then there may still be a way of making one last attempt to fight this off. Only you would know.

If you decide that the only alternative is to pay, and you seem to have decided this based on the last letter, then you can still challenge their obstructiveness in refusing to listen to reasonable proposals. Plainly, they are acting unreasonably by ignoring your offer to settle, and threatening court instead. This will violate the pre-action protocols, and could easily count against them in court.

If I was in this situation, and had decided that there was no alternative but to pay, I would now be making formal complaints to both the DCA and the solicitor about their obstructiveness, and their refusal to even consider reasonable offers to settle. The complaint to the DCA could be escalated to the Financial Ombudsman Service, for which the DCA would be charged a mediation fee. As this would amount to a significant percentage of the alleged balance, they would presumably want to avoid this.

In any case, it would allow you to demonstrate to a court that you had been entirely reasonable in attempting to resolve the situation, while they had deliberately prevented you from doing so.

SH

The default is due to drop off next year, no there was no ppi and I think its futile to try to fight them off, I have no defence and I think they would take it all the way.. even for the small sum of £1300. I will have to pay it but I thought they would have at least responded to my offer.

How do I make a formal complaint to the DCA and Mortimer Clark.. are there any template letters? I could send this along with a copy of my letter of 5th Feb. Would I have to wait for a response before I could escalate it to the FOS or could I write to them at the same time?

Thanks, Pooks

[ScabHunter]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

The default is due to drop off next year

By default I meant the actual process of defaulting, rather than the default registered with the CRAs. If the default notice was defective, or the termination carried out without enough time being allowed, that would have given you a potential arguing point.

How do I make a formal complaint to the DCA and Mortimer Clark.. are there any template letters?

No, this has gone beyond the stage where templates can really be of any use. I can draft out something for you if you would like, over the weekend, so it is ready for posting on Monday.

Would I have to wait for a response before I could escalate it to the FOS or could I write to them at the same time?

The FOS would only consider complaints once the business has offered its final response, or when eight weeks have passed with no response. In a case such as this, they are mainly a threat to try to get the DCA to listen to what you have to say.

SH

[pooksthebear]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

By default I meant the actual process of defaulting, rather than the default registered with the CRAs. If the default notice was defective, or the termination carried out without enough time being allowed, that would have given you a potential arguing point.



No, this has gone beyond the stage where templates can really be of any use. I can draft out something for you if you would like, over the weekend, so it is ready for posting on Monday.



The FOS would only consider complaints once the business has offered its final response, or when eight weeks have passed with no response. In a case such as this, they are mainly a threat to try to get the DCA to listen to what you have to say.

SH

I honestly cannot remember any default notice etc but seeing as im dealing with Mortimer Clark (and I know how ruthless they can be).. and seeing as the debt is only £1300.. and seeing as the default drops off my credit file next year I think perhaps it will be easier and less stressful all round to just pay it.

Yes please SH, if you dont mind then that would be fantastic if you can draft me a letter. I could have offered them a bit more than the fiver a month but that was my starting point and thought if that was unacceptable they would have responded ( I was paying them a fiver a month previously through a dmp).

My main concern is avoiding a ccj, worried sick they are gonna take me to court.

Thanks SH, Pooks

[jadex]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

My main concern is avoiding a ccj, worried sick they are gonna take me to court.

Hey mate,
When I got court papers, it was "only" for £100 more.
Then if you lose (with stress on "if"), then you still have some time (4 weeks?) to pay it without getting CCJ on your credit file.
If you lose, and if you don't pay within timescale, then CCJ will appear on your file, so cheer up!
Look at your problem this way: they want £1300 and don't want to budge, so your risk is £100 more (and you still may win, or be ordered to pay lower amount - claim back all unfair charges, etc.).
If you have the money then there is no real downside of going to court (bar stress, of course).

[ken100464]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

Pooks

I know its hard to not be scared witless by the turn of events.

But as SH and Pixie have said already its not the end of the road.

Marlin have done what they intended to do. Spooked you.

Think of a FOS referral fee. That balanced against what you owe. Risky gambit by Marlin if they dont take heed of you offering to settle. They are supposed to engage with a debtor developing their own plan to repay.

Its not up to them to chose what you have and havnt. A judge can they cant. Its intrusive and only gives them the big stick to beat you with because both sides of the tissue isnt being used.

Marlin have sent these I/E forms seemingly out to everyone plus their dog who has ever had misfortune to deal with them.

They are doing it to spook people. My OH had one this week but not for Egg or HSBC but a MBNA card.

Looks like button B on the threatogram machine has got stuck.

[pooksthebear]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

Hey mate,
When I got court papers, it was "only" for £100 more.
Then if you lose (with stress on "if"), then you still have some time (4 weeks?) to pay it without getting CCJ on your credit file.
If you lose, and if you don't pay within timescale, then CCJ will appear on your file, so cheer up!
Look at your problem this way: they want £1300 and don't want to budge, so your risk is £100 more (and you still may win, or be ordered to pay lower amount - claim back all unfair charges, etc.).
If you have the money then there is no real downside of going to court (bar stress, of course).

Cheers Jaydex but unfortunately I dont have £1300 so for me I need to avoid the judgement and find an agreeable monthly payment. My credit file is is clear next year so dont want a ccj on there for another 6 years.

Pooks

[pooksthebear]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

Pooks

I know its hard to not be scared witless by the turn of events.

But as SH and Pixie have said already its not the end of the road.

Marlin have done what they intended to do. Spooked you.

Think of a FOS referral fee. That balanced against what you owe. Risky gambit by Marlin if they dont take heed of you offering to settle. They are supposed to engage with a debtor developing their own plan to repay.

Its not up to them to chose what you have and havnt. A judge can they cant. Its intrusive and only gives them the big stick to beat you with because both sides of the tissue isnt being used.

Marlin have sent these I/E forms seemingly out to everyone plus their dog who has ever had misfortune to deal with them.

They are doing it to spook people. My OH had one this week but not for Egg or HSBC but a MBNA card.

Looks like button B on the threatogram machine has got stuck.

Thanks Ken, your right of course. I have offered them a fiver or £500 full and final.. but did advise them I needed a months notice for the £500 for my mum to withdraw it for me. I could borrow some from elsewhere though if they wont wait a month. A response from them would have been nice though!

[ScabHunter]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

Here are the two letters I would send. The first is to the solicitor, the second to the DCA.

You will need to fill in the dates. Make sure that the letters are headed "Formal Complaint".

LETTER ONE

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Dear Sirs,

I am in receipt of your letter dated xxth March 2013, the contents of which are noted. Since your letter clearly refers to the threat of litigation, I am treating it as a formal letter of claim, albeit an entirely defective one. I refer you to the Civil Procedure Rules Pre Action Protocol Practice Direction, in particular Annex A and Annex B. You will note your letter fails spectacularly to comply with either of the aforesaid Annexes.

Since you are a firm of solicitors, I cannot excuse such failures, and place you on notice that any litigation on the back of this letter will result in an immediate application to the Court requesting the matter stayed with costs against you and your client on the indemnity basis. I refer you to Para 4.6 of the Practice Direction which explains the consequences of non compliance with the Pre Action Protocol.

I refer you also to my letter of 5th February 2013, sent to your client Marlin Financial Services, the contents of which have been entirely ignored. You will note that in that letter, I made two proposals as to how this situation could be resolved. I proposed that I could either pay a lump sum of £500 in full and final settlement of the alleged debt, or that I could set payment at a level of £5 a month. As previously stated, I am able to raise the sum of £500, albeit not instantly, should you wish to conclude this matter swiftly. Alternatively, I am able to make payments of no more than £5 on a monthly basis.

I have therefore done everything within my power to try to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion, without the unnecessary involvement of the legal system. By refusing to acknowledge these proposals, you are not only in breach of the Pre Action Protocol, you are also abusing the legal system by using it is a threat tool instead of for its intended purpose, which is the resolution of disputes which cannot be settled any other way.

Accordingly, and in accordance with the CPR Pre Action Protocol Practice Direction, I look forward to your reply to these proposals. Note that any further obstructiveness and refusal to consider, or reply to, reasonable proposals to settle this matter without the need for litigation will result in a formal complaint being forwarded to the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

Yours Faithfully,

LETTER TWO

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Dear Sirs ,

I am in receipt of a letter sent to me on your behalf from Mortimer Clarke solicitors. This letter, dated xxth March 2013, is being treated as a formal letter of claim, albeit an entirely defective one. I refer you to the Civil Procedure Rules Pre Action Protocol Practice Direction, in particular Annex A and Annex B. You will note that this letter fails spectacularly to comply with either of the aforesaid Annexes.

Since Mortimer Clarke is a firm of solicitors, I cannot excuse such failures, and place you on notice that any litigation on the back of this letter will result in an immediate application to the Court requesting the matter stayed with costs against Mortimer Clarke and yourselves on the indemnity basis. I refer you to Para 4.6 of the Practice Direction which explains the consequences of non compliance with the Pre Action Protocol.

I refer you also to my previous letter of 5th February 2013, the contents of which have been entirely ignored. You will note that in that letter, I made two proposals as to how this situation could be resolved. I proposed that I could either pay a lump sum of £500 in full and final settlement of the alleged debt, or that I could set payment at a level of £5 a month. As previously stated, I am able to raise the sum of £500, albeit not instantly, should you wish to conclude this matter swiftly. Alternatively, I am able to make payments of no more than £5 on a monthly basis.

I have therefore done everything within my power to try to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion, without the unnecessary involvement of the legal system. By refusing to acknowledge these proposals, your legal representatives are not only in breach of the Pre Action Protocol, they are also abusing the legal system by using it is a threat tool instead of for its intended purpose, which is the resolution of disputes which cannot be settled any other way.

I now expect my proposals to be given due consideration, as is required by the Civil Procedure Rules, and the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance. Your continued refusal to deal with this matter appropriately will result not only in the aforementioned application to the Court requesting the matter stayed, should this point in proceedings be reached, but also in this formal complaint being escalated to the Financial Ombudsman Service at the appropriate time.

Accordingly, I look forward to your response to these proposals.

Yours Faithfully,


SH

[pooksthebear]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

Here are the two letters I would send. The first is to the solicitor, the second to the DCA.

You will need to fill in the dates. Make sure that the letters are headed "Formal Complaint".

LETTER ONE

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Dear Sirs,

I am in receipt of your letter dated xxth March 2013, the contents of which are noted. Since your letter clearly refers to the threat of litigation, I am treating it as a formal letter of claim, albeit an entirely defective one. I refer you to the Civil Procedure Rules Pre Action Protocol Practice Direction, in particular Annex A and Annex B. You will note your letter fails spectacularly to comply with either of the aforesaid Annexes.

Since you are a firm of solicitors, I cannot excuse such failures, and place you on notice that any litigation on the back of this letter will result in an immediate application to the Court requesting the matter stayed with costs against you and your client on the indemnity basis. I refer you to Para 4.6 of the Practice Direction which explains the consequences of non compliance with the Pre Action Protocol.

I refer you also to my letter of 5th February 2013, sent to your client Marlin Financial Services, the contents of which have been entirely ignored. You will note that in that letter, I made two proposals as to how this situation could be resolved. I proposed that I could either pay a lump sum of £500 in full and final settlement of the alleged debt, or that I could set payment at a level of £5 a month. As previously stated, I am able to raise the sum of £500, albeit not instantly, should you wish to conclude this matter swiftly. Alternatively, I am able to make payments of no more than £5 on a monthly basis.

I have therefore done everything within my power to try to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion, without the unnecessary involvement of the legal system. By refusing to acknowledge these proposals, you are not only in breach of the Pre Action Protocol, you are also abusing the legal system by using it is a threat tool instead of for its intended purpose, which is the resolution of disputes which cannot be settled any other way.

Accordingly, and in accordance with the CPR Pre Action Protocol Practice Direction, I look forward to your reply to these proposals. Note that any further obstructiveness and refusal to consider, or reply to, reasonable proposals to settle this matter without the need for litigation will result in a formal complaint being forwarded to the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

Yours Faithfully,

LETTER TWO

FORMAL COMPLAINT

Dear Sirs ,

I am in receipt of a letter sent to me on your behalf from Mortimer Clarke solicitors. This letter, dated xxth March 2013, is being treated as a formal letter of claim, albeit an entirely defective one. I refer you to the Civil Procedure Rules Pre Action Protocol Practice Direction, in particular Annex A and Annex B. You will note that this letter fails spectacularly to comply with either of the aforesaid Annexes.

Since Mortimer Clarke is a firm of solicitors, I cannot excuse such failures, and place you on notice that any litigation on the back of this letter will result in an immediate application to the Court requesting the matter stayed with costs against Mortimer Clarke and yourselves on the indemnity basis. I refer you to Para 4.6 of the Practice Direction which explains the consequences of non compliance with the Pre Action Protocol.

I refer you also to my previous letter of 5th February 2013, the contents of which have been entirely ignored. You will note that in that letter, I made two proposals as to how this situation could be resolved. I proposed that I could either pay a lump sum of £500 in full and final settlement of the alleged debt, or that I could set payment at a level of £5 a month. As previously stated, I am able to raise the sum of £500, albeit not instantly, should you wish to conclude this matter swiftly. Alternatively, I am able to make payments of no more than £5 on a monthly basis.

I have therefore done everything within my power to try to bring this matter to a satisfactory conclusion, without the unnecessary involvement of the legal system. By refusing to acknowledge these proposals, your legal representatives are not only in breach of the Pre Action Protocol, they are also abusing the legal system by using it is a threat tool instead of for its intended purpose, which is the resolution of disputes which cannot be settled any other way.

I now expect my proposals to be given due consideration, as is required by the Civil Procedure Rules, and the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance. Your continued refusal to deal with this matter appropriately will result not only in the aforementioned application to the Court requesting the matter stayed, should this point in proceedings be reached, but also in this formal complaint being escalated to the Financial Ombudsman Service at the appropriate time.

Accordingly, I look forward to your response to these proposals.

Yours Faithfully,


SH

Scab Bunter you are a genius!! Thank you, I will send these by recorded delivery on Monday morning. Hopefully they will then respond with either an acceptance of one of my offers or a counter offer and not with any court papers!

Cheers, Pooks

[pooksthebear]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

Hi, letters have been sent!! Massive thanks to ScabHunter for sorting those letters out. Shall wait and see what happens next.

Thanks, Pooks

[pooksthebear]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

Silly question guys but.. if MCL are not happy with the £5 a month offer are they likely to come back with an amount they have in mind? Suppose what im trying to ask is.. will they allow for negotiations to get to an agreed monthly payment (bearing in mind the letter I have sent them) before they serve any court papers? I know I shouldnt be worrying about this right now but I know how ruthless MCL are!

Thanks, Pooks

[ScabHunter]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

Silly question guys but.. if MCL are not happy with the £5 a month offer are they likely to come back with an amount they have in mind? Suppose what im trying to ask is.. will they allow for negotiations to get to an agreed monthly payment (bearing in mind the letter I have sent them) before they serve any court papers? I know I shouldnt be worrying about this right now but I know how ruthless MCL are!

Thanks, Pooks

I would honestly try to put all of this out of your mind until you get a response. Yes, they are ruthless scum, but those letters were specifically designed to reverse the polarity, in that you, and not them, were calling the tune. You were pulling them up on their failure to comply with the law, you were threatening the solicitors with costs on the indemnity basis, and the DCA with an FOS mediation fee, if they did not start behaving properly.

For now, they are on the back foot trying to avoid potential losses. Let them worry about it, and just wait until they get back to you.

SH

[pooksthebear]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

I would honestly try to put all of this out of your mind until you get a response. Yes, they are ruthless scum, but those letters were specifically designed to reverse the polarity, in that you, and not them, were calling the tune. You were pulling them up on their failure to comply with the law, you were threatening the solicitors with costs on the indemnity basis, and the DCA with an FOS mediation fee, if they did not start behaving properly.

For now, they are on the back foot trying to avoid potential losses. Let them worry about it, and just wait until they get back to you.

SH

Thank you, will do

[pooksthebear]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

I would honestly try to put all of this out of your mind until you get a response. Yes, they are ruthless scum, but those letters were specifically designed to reverse the polarity, in that you, and not them, were calling the tune. You were pulling them up on their failure to comply with the law, you were threatening the solicitors with costs on the indemnity basis, and the DCA with an FOS mediation fee, if they did not start behaving properly.

For now, they are on the back foot trying to avoid potential losses. Let them worry about it, and just wait until they get back to you.

SH

Oh forgot to mention, both Marlin and MCL have the exact same address!

Pooks

[ken100464]

Re: Pookies UE Diary

Just different desks.

Rent boys Pooky thats who they are. In house thugs.