Help - Court date in 2 weeks

splytjaws

Hi 

Hoping someone can assist.

The court case is set for a couple of weeks time...I'm in a real state

Last payment made was Feb 2018

Both the DNs they have sent are invalid. I have already made the point that they are and that they cannot issue a 2nd DN for the same debt (which they have done), but I have just come across the following...can I use this as well?

A default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237)

Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

MattMattMattUK

splytjaws said:

Hi 

Hoping someone can assist.

The court case is set for a couple of weeks time...I'm in a real state

Last payment made was Feb 2018

Both the DNs they have sent are invalid. I have already made the point that they are and that they cannot issue a 2nd DN for the same debt (which they have done), but I have just come across the following...can I use this as well?

A default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237)

Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

The bold text you have copied in seems AI generated and the second paragraph appears to be total BS. 

Why do you think the default notices they have sent are invalid? If they are genuinely invalid then that is your defence, throwing random AI rubbish into the proceedings will not help in any way. If they are valid then that would lead to the next step, depending on all of the relevant detail.  

You have a loan, you have not paid it, if you provide mor information then people may be able to offer some useful advice.

splytjaws

MattMattMattUK said

The bold text you have copied in seems AI generated and the second paragraph appears to be total BS. 

Why do you think the default notices they have sent are invalid? If they are genuinely invalid then that is your defence, throwing random AI rubbish into the proceedings will not help in any way. If they are valid then that would lead to the next step, depending on all of the relevant detail.  

You have a loan, you have not paid it, if you provide mor information then people may be able to offer some useful advice.

Hi, thanks for reply...

This was a car loan which was given to me when I was only bringing home around £800 a month from my part time job (had 3 small children)...the repayments were £244 pm. Got into difficulties paying, enough said.

It's a long story but after I put my case forward they left it almost 3 years before trying to initiate court proceedings. I argued my case to them directly and they left it another 18 months before they finally did take it to court. Then they messed up and it was thrown out because they 'forgot' to send something to court. They paid £300 odd to ask for it to be reinstated, the judge allowed it, albeit that he said there is a question over it being Statute Barred....last payment was Feb 2018.

The dates on the DN notice(s) are exactly 14 days. The dates don't take into consideration any time for me to receive said DN - they were sent via Royal Mail postage. 

fatbelly

splytjaws said:

Hi 

Hoping someone can assist.

The court case is set for a couple of weeks time...I'm in a real state

Last payment made was Feb 2018

Both the DNs they have sent are invalid. I have already made the point that they are and that they cannot issue a 2nd DN for the same debt (which they have done), but I have just come across the following...can I use this as well?

A default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237)

Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

You go to the hearing and listen to what the judge says about the defence you have already put in.

If you never acknowledged the debt by payment or in writing after Feb 2018 then you just need to know the default date that the lender is/was quoting on your credit report. If there is a 6-year gap between that and the date of claim then I hope your defence was that the claim is statute barred, as the judge hinted, rather than quibbling about validity of Default Notices, which may well undermine your main defence

sourcrates

Agree with fatbelly, the crux of the matter is whether or not 6 years passed between the default notice being issued, and the date of your last payment, the validity of the default notice is just side-tracking your main defence.

Brie

But is it statute barred?  

OP said I put my case forward they left it almost 3 years before trying to initiate court proceedings. I argued my case to them directly and they left it another 18 months before they finally did take it to court.  

So since Feb 2018 there have been 2 times 18 months apart that the OP may have admitted to owing the money.  Guessing that given there was 3 years since the last payment before there was contact made, add 18 months, so perhaps the last admission of debt was in perhaps in Sept 2022.  Less than 6 years back.

So wouldn't a better defence be that the loan was not affordable at all?  Or is that what the OP tried to do in 2021 & 2022?

splytjaws

Ok,.,just back from court after WINNING the case...

The judge accepted it was ok to send 2 DNs, but he stated that they did not comply with the CCA, therefore the termination notice was judged as being null and void.
Because they had claimed the date of Statute began when this termination notice was issued, and this was now null and void, this completely smashed their claim. The Judge did say the TN was issued correctly, but he ruled this inadmissible as it was issued on the back of a Default Notice that did not comply with the CCA. 

Victory and a very happy bunny sat here typing...Thank you for all help  

splytjaws

sourcrates said:

Agree with fatbelly, the crux of the matter is whether or not 6 years passed between the default notice being issued, and the date of your last payment, the validity of the default notice is just side-tracking your main defence.

...the validity of the default notice is just side-tracking your main defence.

To be fair, this is actually what won me the case. After much deliberation the judge agreed the DNs were not valid, therefore it meant the TN was also invalid. Because of this, he ruled the SB date was when the last payment was, and not the date on the Termination Notice.

sourcrates

splytjaws said:

sourcrates said:

Agree with fatbelly, the crux of the matter is whether or not 6 years passed between the default notice being issued, and the date of your last payment, the validity of the default notice is just side-tracking your main defence.

...the validity of the default notice is just side-tracking your main defence.

To be fair, this is actually what won me the case. After much deliberation the judge agreed the DNs were not valid, therefore it meant the TN was also invalid. Because of this, he ruled the SB date was when the last payment was, and not the date on the Termination Notice.

Well then I stand corrected, well done for getting the right result.