SXGuy's UE Diary

[Paul.]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

Guys, im just rewording my LBA back to Aplins.

Taking in to account Pauls post regarding pre action protocol, i will include something similar to this regarding the crux of my argument.

Your thoughts?

no, i wouldnt send that as it stands.

Im going out now, taking my son out so ill be out for a while, but that letter would not satisfy a preaction protocol reply

[SXGuy]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

Niddy emailed me earlier and said he thinks the main points have been included so should be ok, and said he had seen me post here and would add anything if he thought he should.

But ill email Paul tomorrow with the revised wording and ask if he can add anything.

I notice that the civil procedure rules allow the defendant to ask for documents the claimant relies on, but they obviously dont have to comply unless its a request once a claim has been issued, so not sure if i should ask or not.

Given they cant enforce on the back of what they sent me, it would be interesting to see if they actually hold the termination notice, DN and Deed of assignment.

[ScabHunter]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

It might be possible to get Paul to look it over and give an opinion - it wouldn't take him more than a minute. If anyone in authority reads this, could they please let him know about it, and just see if he can take a very quick look when he gets the chance?

It would be very much appreciated.

SH

[fluffystuff]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

Send recorded delivery!

[SXGuy]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

I have had an incredibly busy day in between getting drowned and blown to hell, so I've only just had time to have a butcher's at this. On the whole I agree with fluffystuff, although I can't see why paragraph No. 3 shouldn't remain also. All it does is point out once again that the would be claimant has been obstructive in refusing to reply to communications.

Watch your dates - if you really did receive documents on 30th December 2012, it must have been in Dr. Who's Tardis.

If there are no other points which could work in your favour, such as PPI on the original account, then I'd just chop it off at paragraph 5 and send it.

The only other thing I would do is change "s.77-79" in the first line to whichever is correct (fixed sum - s. 77, running account - s.78, hire purchase - s. 79). It is splitting hairs, but you still want to make it 100% accurate, and not give the impression that you've just copied and pasted a template.

SH

Thanks SH, i totally missed the date thing, will make sure i double check all dates before its sent.

ill make the changes you suggest, thanks once again.

Im gonna send the letter off at the begining of next week, so if you or anyone has any other helpful tips before then ive still got time to add/amend anything.

[ScabHunter]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

I have had an incredibly busy day in between getting drowned and blown to hell, so I've only just had time to have a butcher's at this. On the whole I agree with fluffystuff, although I can't see why paragraph No. 3 shouldn't remain also. All it does is point out once again that the would be claimant has been obstructive in refusing to reply to communications.

Watch your dates - if you really did receive documents on 30th December 2012, it must have been in Dr. Who's Tardis.

If there are no other points which could work in your favour, such as PPI on the original account, then I'd just chop it off at paragraph 5 and send it.

The only other thing I would do is change "s.77-79" in the first line to whichever is correct (fixed sum - s. 77, running account - s.78, hire purchase - s. 79). It is splitting hairs, but you still want to make it 100% accurate, and not give the impression that you've just copied and pasted a template.

SH

[fluffystuff]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

I know exactly what you mean but fingers crossed, your letter will do the trick.

Maybe mum has a sixth sense that everything will be fine, do hope so. Good luck!: x

[SXGuy]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

Thanks fluffy!, its all starting to feel abit heavy now tbh, i can see an N1 looming and im panicing abit really.

I should calm down though i know that, i have at the very least a chance to file a defence and see what happens before i decide what to do next.

Funny enough i seem to be worrying more than my mother and its her debt!

[fluffystuff]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

Guys, im just rewording my LBA back to Aplins.

Taking in to account Pauls post regarding pre action protocol, i will include something similar to this regarding the crux of my argument.

Your thoughts?

I would use Paul's letter and insert your paras 1,2,4&5, just my humble opinion!

[SXGuy]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

little update.

Received two letters from Triton, one dated 30th November (must have crossed post with my reply from the last) and one dated 10th December.

First one, again says they are disapointed in no payment and may seek to recover through an external agent.

The other letter dated 10th December, is an exact copy i got on the 30th November, saying they have instructed natwest to commence legal proceedings.

on the 30th November, i sent them the threat to commence litigation template plus a copy to natwest along with the CCA Request yet again and the £1 PO. Both sent recorded delivery.

Ive not had any response to those letters. so i will send triton a letter asking them to refer to my letter dated 30th November.

Im now wondering whether natwest have played all their cards because they cant argue anything about DPA for my request anymore and im yet to receive any CCA.

[SXGuy]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

Guys, im just rewording my LBA back to Aplins.

Taking in to account Pauls post regarding pre action protocol, i will include something similar to this regarding the crux of my argument.

Your thoughts?

On 07th December 2011 I made a formal request for a copy of my Consumer Credit Agreement, pursuant to s.77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA1974).

On 30th December 2012 I received a document, which did not comply with my request, namely because the terms and conditions supplied, were not those from account inception. It is clear, that the prescribed terms, make references to paragraphs omitted within the terms and conditions, and therefore cannot be a "true copy" for which your client relies upon.

On 30th December 2012 I sent a letter to your client clearly explaining why the request remains outstanding, I regret this letter was ignored.

Whilst I appreciate and understand the provision of the recent Carey v HSBC {and others} case that stipulates a reconstituted agreement can be provided, I would like to point out that it does not say that your client can simply send some generic random terms.
I draw your attention to MBNA v McCullagh in this instance.

The remit of s.127 and s.65 of the CCA1974. Section 127(1) of the Consumer Credit Act (CCA 1974) is subject to the restrictions imposed by sections 127(3) & (4). Those subsections set out the circumstances in which the court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) of the Act. Put simply, a court cannot make a judgment on an unenforceable debt without the original agreement, or at least a genuine "true copy".

Consequently, any legal action you pursue will not only be fully and vigorously defended, it will also be averred as both unlawful and vexatious. As such I respectfully suggest that this account is returned to your client for immediate resolution prior to my seeking legal advice against you; due to the fact you cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities as the account was already in dispute at the time you became involved.

If you decide to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action.

[SXGuy]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

Before you decide what to do, I would suggest reading this post.

http://forums.all-about-debt.co.uk/s...&postcount=289

Read also the one above it, which contains a threat letter from solicitors. Then, read the response, and follow the thread from that point on. It may well give you the tools you need to construct an effective response.

SH

This was what i had thought about using actually.

Normally id send niddys lba template but these guys deserve something more bespoke to rethink the situation.

Id rather try and stop them from issuing a claim now, than compling a defence after.

Where Paul has added "The main crux of my dispute is "

I was going to add something like this....

On XX/XX/XX I made a formal request for a copy of my Consumer Credit Agreement, pursuant to s.77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA1974).

On XX/XX/XX I received a document, which did not comply with my request, namely because the terms and conditions supplied, were not those from account inception. It is clear, that the prescribed terms, make references to paragraphs omitted within the terms and conditions, and therefore can not be a "true copy" for which your client relies upon.

On XX/XX/XX i sent a letter to your client clearly explaining why the request remains outstanding, i regret this letter was ignored.

Whilst I appreciate and understand the provision of the recent Carey v HSBC {and others} case that stipulates a reconstituted agreement can be provided, I would like to point out that it does not say that your client can simply send some generic random terms.

I draw your attention to MBNA v McCullagh in this instance.
Therefore this account remains unenforceable in line with section 127(3) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and as a result, any litigation will be barred from judgement.

Any changes or additions you guys think i should make, id really apreciate some help.

[ScabHunter]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

Before you decide what to do, I would suggest reading this post.

http://forums.all-about-debt.co.uk/s...&postcount=289

Read also the one above it, which contains a threat letter from solicitors. Then, read the response, and follow the thread from that point on. It may well give you the tools you need to construct an effective response.

SH

[vint1954]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

This is the letter that I would be sending imediately

http://www.all-about-debt.co.uk/temp...lity/s5-t1.php

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: SXGuy's UE Diary

Northampton was set up = no documents to be attached a cop out by Banks etc to get around legislation on pre-text that it is quicker way to N1 use also away around people not challenging, this was said decades ago!?