Upcoming Court case, Claimant no longer owns debt?

Skools_Out_2019

Nicey75 wrote: »

Hi, wonder if someone could give me some advice.
I have a court case to dispute a debt from a payday loan provider. I am disputing this as they have utterly failed to follow any form of reasonable debt collection protocol.

I will galdly provide you the advice you seek here.
Based on that as your line of defence, your defence will definitely fail.

But that may be used in mitigation when judement is given against you. You may be able to convince the court that costs, such as the court costs incurred in bringing this claim against you, should exceptionally not be awarded against you.

Nicey75 wrote: »

However, I received notification from the company's legal representatives that the debt is now owned by a completly different company and they are representing the new owner of the debt.
Therefore I will be attending court next week but the debt dosent belong to the claimant?

As their legal representatives have advised you already, they are representing the new owner of the debt.

If that needs a change of name of claimant, then they will presumably do that by application.
Would you have any reasonable reason to contest such an application?

Whether you do or don't does not affect the fact you owe the money.
All that you are questioning is who the money is now owed to.

I suggest you avoid the time, trouble, inconvenience and possible cost of court action by resolving this in advance of court. i.e by paying the debt you owe.
There seems no dispute that you owe the money, and it does not appear there is any dispute who you now owe the money to.

Skools_Out_2019

And there's the bell. See ya later, guys! :hello:

Paul_DNAP

Nicey75 wrote: »

I am aware that companies can sell debts.
My question was about the fact that the claimant in the upcoming court case no longer owns or holds any rights with regards the debt

When they sell the debt they also transfer ALL legal responsibilities arising from your contract with them, and that includes the new owner being able to defend your case against the lender.

SnowTiger

Nicey75 wrote: »

I am aware that companies can sell debts.
My question was about the fact that the claimant in the upcoming court case no longer owns or holds any rights with regards the debt

Nicey75 wrote: »

However, I received notification from the company's legal representatives that the debt is now owned by a completly different company and they are representing the new owner of the debt.
Therefore I will be attending court next week but the debt dosent belong to the claimant?

I'm confused.

Aren't the legal representatives you mention representing the (new) owner of the debt?

Or is the original debtor representing the new owner of the debt?

sourcrates

Nicey75 wrote: »

Yes, a lender sold it to Asset, who instructed TM to commence legal procedings. TM sent me notification that THEY had sold the debt to another company. Yet court case is already scheduled. Me v Asset.

fatbelly wrote: »

You are correct, The claimant has to get court permission to change the name of the claimant.

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part19/pd_part19a

You should of course attend. You should find that that has happened.

This is the advice to follow, it’s just a legal process that should have been complied with by the hearing.

What else are you hoping to achieve here ?

Because relying on the fact the creditor did not follow pre-action protocols is not a defence to the claim, it’s a technical breech of procedure, but not an irreversible breech.
You still need a defence, a defence would be either, you don’t owe the money, or, the debt has been paid, or, the amount they are claiming is wrong.

Anything else is likely to be thrown out.

Nicey75

What I was looking for was the advice given by Fatbelly, this has answered my query exactly. Thank you.
No, this is not the defence, my defence is based on the missadministration of my account, leading to incorrect charges.
I have statements and copies of correspondence and will defend using that as original claimant did not contribute to any mediation.
But my query about ownership has now been answered.

Kentish_Dave

Nicey75 wrote: »

What I was looking for was the advice given by Fatbelly, this has answered my query exactly. Thank you.
No, this is not the defence, my defence is based on the missadministration of my account, leading to incorrect charges.
I have statements and copies of correspondence and will defend using that as original claimant did not contribute to any mediation.
But my query about ownership has now been answered.

Why would incorrect charges render the debt unenforceable?

boo_star

Kentish_Dave wrote: »

Why would incorrect charges render the debt unenforceable?

It won't but it's either another troll or someone wanting to hear what they want to hear.

PixelPound

boo_star wrote: »

It won't but it's either another troll or someone wanting to hear what they want to hear.

They have mentioned pre court action protocol but not mentioned any claim form, so they have a hearing yet is beyond me. If a claim form hasn't been issued, legal proceedings haven't started, so no defence filed and no court hearing. It sounds like they have received pre-court action letter and jumping the gun. Another pre action letter could be sent with the correct info and if no response a claim issued.