link financial - court papers already!!

louietudor

here you go:

the defendant are indebted to the claimant under the terms and conditions of a credit agreeement dated 29.3.04 and assigned to the claimant. The agreement is regulated by the consumer credit act 1974. the agreement provided that interest would be payable before and after the judgment. the right to proceed for the subsequent interest is reserved. default accured in payment and the loan was calle din under S.87

10past6

louietudor wrote: »

the loan was calle din under S.87

For them to enjoy the benefits of s87, they must comply with s88 first, basically that means issuing a correct default notice in the prescibed format, you say you've not received one, the POC (N1) don't state they've issued one, that's a good enough defence to begin with.

10past6

louietudor wrote: »

- plus should i be so scared of a ccj? -

No, not if you have no plans for credit in the future

louietudor wrote: »

i am tempted to fight but as i dont feel 100% certain i was not defaulted i don't think this is an option as im sure if i won this round

It's for them to prove they've complied with the correct procedure when bringing this case against you.

louietudor wrote: »

they would then make sure they default me and get the ccj anyway

They can't as you no longer have an agreement with them, they've terminated your agreement, the only way they can re issue a new default notice is by you signing a new agreement, which I doubet you'll be doing.

louietudor wrote: »

i do admit to owing the money

No one's saying you don't owe the money, you're asking if they'ce complied with the legislation laid down in bringing this case.

louietudor

i feel a bit a twot to be honest - i checked and checked for the default letter and then about 30 mins ago thought to check some of my ex partner mail still left with me and there was the default letter - i would scan it and pass it to you but if im honest it looks right- theres a default arrived 15.11.8 and a letter demanding full payment dated 13.12.8 - scribbled on both is a note to say called ge and gave payplan no again - so i guess im up the creek without a paddle - like i say sorry i did not mean to waste you time its just with 13 or so creditors ive had so many letters that they all start to look the same - guess ill call payplan tomorrow

10past6

You've not wasted my time, you're not beaten yet, scan both letters and PM them to me, I'll then tell you if you're beaten.

louietudor

many many thanks again - letters scanned and pm'd

10past6

This is a very very fine line here, there is a shorftfall of 2 days re the default notice, tbh, I think you may struggle with it if you tried to use it as a defence.

If you asked me what would I do under the circumstances, I'd have to accept it, although the law is there to protect YOU, and I would be the first to use it, there are times when one has to have a tiny % of leway.

On the letter dated 15.11, how may pages are there, as you'v only PMd the front page.

louietudor

sorry there was another sheet but all is said was attached are notices we are required to serve under the consumer credit act 1974

10past6

louietudor wrote: »

sorry there was another sheet but all is said was attached are notices we are required to serve under the consumer credit act 1974

That's what I was after, as long as you have those details, there's not much more I can suggest.

YOU still have the the option to pursue a defence on the non compliance of issuing a correct default notice, and I'll assist you if required, but as I said earlier, I doubt it will bring the result one would hope, however, the decision is yours.

louietudor

many many thanks - i think im resigned to accepting it