Court summons

khaleesi

Back in 2010 my partner took out a £250.00 loan with provident for help at christmas.
At the time we both did not work and later had other debts come up,
we discussed this with the lady that would come and collect the money and she convinced us to take out further loans each which paid the last one and gave us any money left over. This carried on for 2 years constantly being convinced to take out further loans to cover the cost of last ones and continue paying more. By this time I was working part time at minimum wage.

We moved house and had some financial difficulty and stupidly left it.

Now they have sold the loans onto lowell who have been writing to us both separately claiming from either one of the other the full amount of both our loans from us individually. So basically combined 2 separate loans in 2 names into 1.

Now they have summoned my partner to court over the full amount despite it being 2 loans.

Now since the move I have lost all the paperwork but I am worried as I dispute the fact they have combined them as we are not married just at the same address and that they kept reselling us loans we could not afford at the time. I cant get all the paperwork together as I have not got it to dispute the amounts.

On my Credit file I have showing a default of £3,080 for Provident and yet a default of £5,180 from Lowell which shows a £2000 increase in what I actually owe Provident and the same goes for the claim from my partner for court showing the same £5,180.

Is this even legal to combine 2 debts for 2 separate people into 1 and it is fair. Plus I dispute it over the fact they illegally kept reselling us loans to pay of past ones and increasing what we owed them.

Citizens advise just said admit it as I do not have all the paper work and that Provident have now sold it on so would be hard to go directly back to them? I have seen reports of how they have illegally resold loans to thousands of customers and how these customers have claimed back off them since 2015.

I am so scared of bailiffs coming to my door as I suffer with anxiety as it is.

Please do not judge me I know we was stupid but we was struggling at the time and moved due to finding work.

Gaz83

Loans have joint and several liability. This essentially means that a lender can pursue one person for the full amount of a loan, even if the loan was taken out in joint names. Perfectly legal and very common.

Why do you think the fact that they kept reselling you loans was "illegal"? What law were they breaking?

[Deleted User]

You need to check your paperwork. It sounds as if you took out further loans on a joint basis, rather than individual.

If not, then you need to ask them to clarify who is liable for which loans.

khaleesi wrote: »

they illegally kept reselling us loans to pay of past ones and increasing what we owed them.

Not sure what you mean by this. It's not illegal for them to sell loans (that is their business model). Whether it was a good idea for you to choose to buy them is another matter.

khaleesi

I cant paste the link in as a new member but there was a news report last year about provident illegally reselling loans, It is illegal to resell loans ontop of loans knowing someone can not afford the repayments.

And none of our loans with them were joint they were sepeate loans in seperate names. Thats like saying house mates can pass there loan on to someone who shares the same house but has no links

khaleesi

This is a Copy and paste of the report from the independant in 2015

It follows a case won by a Donegal couple who took on the State's largest moneylender through the financial services ombudsman.
They had loans from Provident Personal Credit, but were illegally offered new loans before they paid off the old ones.
The couple complained to the ombudsman, won their case, and got compensation.
They had £4,370 (€6,780) in loans written off, and were awarded £450 (€698) each in compensation. The ombudsman's written finding, which has been seen by the Irish Independent, lists the monetary amounts in sterling.
Now experts say that up to 100,000 people who are estimated to have had their moneylender loans illegally rolled over into new loans could be in line to have them written off and receive compensation.
In 2013 the Central Bank found that a quarter of the more than 360,000 customers of moneylenders were offered new loans before they had cleared their existing one.
It is thought that even more people are now borrowing from moneylenders.
Provident was fined €105,000 by the Central Bank last December after the illegal refinancing of existing loans was brought to its attention by whistleblowers who worked for the company through Sinn F!in Finance spokesman Pearse Doherty.
Mr Doherty said the finding by the ombudsman meant anyone with a moneylender loan that had been refinanced could now seek to have it written off, and be compensated.
He claimed Provident was quietly doing this for anyone who requested it.
"The ombudsman's findings could be seen as a test case and could see Provident and other moneylenders being taught a very costly lesson. I would appeal to anyone with a rolled-over loan to come forward and make a claim to their moneylender."
Mr Doherty criticised the Central Bank for failing to do more to ensure affected customers were compensated for having loans illegally refinanced.
Financial expert Karl Deeter said the ombudsman's finding had set a precedent.
"Everyone who borrowed from a moneylender should make sure it did not happen to them, and if it did this case sets a precedent for compensation."
He called on the Central Bank to conduct a full audit of loans issued by all moneylenders to see exactly how many people have been issued with new loans before existing ones were paid off. There could be potentially thousands of people who have been mis-sold loans."
A spokesperson for the Society of St Vincent de Paul said it has been campaigning for a long time about the refinancing of loans by moneylenders.
Provident did not deny it was cancelling loans and compensating customers.
Asked if it was settling with anyone who had a loan refinanced who complains, a Provident spokesman said it would look at all cases brought to its attention.
"Anyone who makes a complaint of any type will have their complaint fully investigated and if we find in favour of the customer, we will act accordingly.
"Any customer who is not satisfied with the result of our investigation would be free to take their complaint to the financial services ombudsman," Provident said.
The Central Bank said it would take action if it finds cases of refinanced loans.

System

khaleesi wrote: »

This is a Copy and paste of the report from the independant in 2015

It follows a case won by a Donegal couple who took on the State's largest moneylender through the financial services ombudsman.
They had loans from Provident Personal Credit, but were illegally offered new loans before they paid off the old ones.
The couple complained to the ombudsman, won their case, and got compensation.
They had £4,370 (€6,780) in loans written off, and were awarded £450 (€698) each in compensation. The ombudsman's written finding, which has been seen by the Irish Independent, lists the monetary amounts in sterling.
Now experts say that up to 100,000 people who are estimated to have had their moneylender loans illegally rolled over into new loans could be in line to have them written off and receive compensation.
In 2013 the Central Bank found that a quarter of the more than 360,000 customers of moneylenders were offered new loans before they had cleared their existing one.
It is thought that even more people are now borrowing from moneylenders.
Provident was fined €105,000 by the Central Bank last December after the illegal refinancing of existing loans was brought to its attention by whistleblowers who worked for the company through Sinn F!in Finance spokesman Pearse Doherty.
Mr Doherty said the finding by the ombudsman meant anyone with a moneylender loan that had been refinanced could now seek to have it written off, and be compensated.
He claimed Provident was quietly doing this for anyone who requested it.
"The ombudsman's findings could be seen as a test case and could see Provident and other moneylenders being taught a very costly lesson. I would appeal to anyone with a rolled-over loan to come forward and make a claim to their moneylender."
Mr Doherty criticised the Central Bank for failing to do more to ensure affected customers were compensated for having loans illegally refinanced.
Financial expert Karl Deeter said the ombudsman's finding had set a precedent.
"Everyone who borrowed from a moneylender should make sure it did not happen to them, and if it did this case sets a precedent for compensation."
He called on the Central Bank to conduct a full audit of loans issued by all moneylenders to see exactly how many people have been issued with new loans before existing ones were paid off. There could be potentially thousands of people who have been mis-sold loans."
A spokesperson for the Society of St Vincent de Paul said it has been campaigning for a long time about the refinancing of loans by moneylenders.
Provident did not deny it was cancelling loans and compensating customers.
Asked if it was settling with anyone who had a loan refinanced who complains, a Provident spokesman said it would look at all cases brought to its attention.
"Anyone who makes a complaint of any type will have their complaint fully investigated and if we find in favour of the customer, we will act accordingly.
"Any customer who is not satisfied with the result of our investigation would be free to take their complaint to the financial services ombudsman," Provident said.
The Central Bank said it would take action if it finds cases of refinanced loans.

Report is immaterial. Donegal is in Eire. Their rules/laws are not necessarily the same as the UK.

[Deleted User]

That appears to based on an Irish ruling.

Are you based in Ireland?

Gaz83

As has been said above, that's in Ireland. Irrelevant unless you are too.

National_Debtline

Hi khaleesi


As you refer to amounts in £ sterling and not Euros, I'm going to assume you are based in the UK as opposed to the Irish Republic.


Whatever the facts of the case, the bottom line is that your fiance has received court papers and there will be strict time limits for them to respond, otherwise they risk ending up with a "default" judgment and being asked to pay in full immediately.


Realistically, we will not be able to advise you in sufficient detail on this forum on potentially disputing/defending this summons. Your fiance should seek advice from one of the free debt charities as soon as possible. You may also find guidance on disputing a court claim at www.legalbeagles.info . Please bear in mind that they risk incurring extra legal and court costs if they are unsuccessful in disputing a debt.


For now, it would be wise for your fiance to complete and return the "Acknowledgement of Service" form that should be enclosed with her court papers. This will give them an additional 14 days to respond to the claim, which may help with seeking advice and requesting additional information from the claimant (i.e. Provident/their representatives).


https://www.nationaldebtline.org/EW/factsheets/Pages/replyingtoacountycourtclaim/replyingtoaccj.aspx


Dennis
@natdebtline

khaleesi

Hi and thanks for your reply

Its my fiance, never been married who had the summons.

We went back through a lot and we worked out the biggest loan we had from Provident was £1000 each most of which was paid off and that was because they kept increasing it by giving new loans and paying off old ones which included interest so our payments increased.

We also had a loan which was recommended by our doorstep agent at the time from a company called real personal finance because our car was written off at the time and it was needed for schools and work as we lived rural at the time. This was paid via bank and not the door step and before they became part of provident. This is what we believe the summons is for despite the fact they went bust whilst we was paying this back and our provident agent told us to cancel payments because of this as it wont count towards the debt. We never heard anything since then and last payment was in 2009 so we are disputing this with the court and asking them to provide details as the amount does not add up at all. Surely if it is this one (provident took over real personal finance later) that it is now classes as statue barred?

We maybe owe provident directly around £300 plus interest
real personal finance more but was instructed they had gone bust and to stop payments at the time until something was sorted, I guess provident at the time knew they were going to take over and wanted to make sure they took the debts on but they failed to take over in time and surely last payment was 2009 so over the 6 years. They cant take it as last payment to Provident and add it to that.

So we are disputing this and they will have to show the proof of last payment and we have proof of that through our bank statements as we looked them up. I also fully dispute the amount as even the provident on my credit file is a lot more after finding some past information out.

National_Debtline

Hi again


It's hard to advise too much further at this stage as the details in your posts seem slightly confusing, contradictory even. You initially referred to Provident debts that you were paying up until 2012, but now you state that you believe the summons relates to an account that was last paid in 2009.


You need to determine which debt this court claim refers to before proceeding. If the debt appears to be "statute barred" and you dispute it on that basis, that is a relatively simple matter for the court to rule on.


If, on the other hand, the debt is less than six years old and your dispute concerns the legality of the loans being "rolled over", that is less clear-cut and you may wish to seek legal advice on where you stand.


Dennis
@natdebtline