Dear ceylon I would very much appreciate it if you could take a quick look at the changes I’ve added in the square brackets as a result of your very valid points. Many thanks in advance and yes I'm glad you mentioned the notification part for even though I know what I meant by that, I wasn't sure if others could tell or mistake it for a notice, notice. I guess in this case notice would mean something similar to: “you have been notified / you have been warned” it’s a warning as in: "so that there may be no doubt as to the penalties, you have now officially been warned that should you do this, then you will have in effect agreed to this clearly stated consequences in advance of you potentially doing it", I have notified them of my rules of the contract which is also what this document/vessel of commerce actually is (even though it might not be wise to use words such as CONTRACTING) and the rules of my vessel are bla, bla, bla for I’m the captain of my ship and if you wanna come on board I’m gonna notify you of my rules, but above all even though this is a NESTED NOTICE within a CONTRACT, what it most importantly is and was stated as such from the word go, was the fact that this is me exercising a HUMAN RIGHT of mine, which is to ask the demanding party to HONOUR me with PROOF of their claim (exempt of any other bullshit), or PAY the consequences for their dishonourable behaviour as NOTIFIED.ceylon wrote:i see a couple of contradictions.
1 is it a letter or a notice?
2 is it a contract or a agreement?
apart from that it looks pretty good
Wishy thanks for what I think you just made me aware of in reference to fines vs. service charges, If I'm right what you're saying is that the £5000.00 for treating it as a complaint, a query, a request for a statement/agreement etc. as well as the other £5000.00 for the privilege of referring to me via any of the afore mentioned prohibited titles, count as SERVICE CHARGES which doesn't involve court, which is something we all want to avoid, but for me to professionally understand the latter even better I'd like to ask what exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean that for a fine to be accepted as payable the courts have to get involved but for service charges it doesn't require a judge’s ruling...!? Anyhow, responses so far were most appreciated (including yours stoneybroke). Thank youwishy wrote:No fines without court.But service charges are great.If they cannot prove what they are saying then you will be utterly delighted to help them with adjusting their records for the following service charges works a treat
I didn't know this but now that I do, it all makes sense.You need an agreement so you can contract. You and I must agree (legal obligations) before the contract can be enforced. A credit agreement becomes a contract (allegedly) through your actions (acceptance), i.e you use the card! But seeing as the card issuer doesn't provide any consideration, then we have an alleged contract. That's my perspective.
The valid assignment in admissible form should identify the particular account at issue,
I like your style buzzer, that was some good shit, very good stuff, that's exactly the sort of thinking and help I was after. With that, you've basically provided me with the last piece of the puzzle in regards to the whole assignment saga that I’ve had problems understanding since the very beginning, but now it all makes sense.smilingalltheway wrote:The valid assignment in admissible form should identify the particular account at issue,
what you want is the deed assignment / sale, plus in incase they haven't purchased it, the terms of the contract between them and their clients and any purchase receipts etc.
and they will never show you the deed of assignment, otherwise if they bought this alledged debt everyone would find out how much they paid ....
My man, Notice of Fair Process... Seriously, can I just say you guys have been amazing, the shit I've just learned from this one topic has reached new heights all thanks to all of your input, one piece of priceless information after another, this notice of fair process is gonna get a professional digestion from me.wishy wrote:Also the DCA should have sent you a "Notice of Fair Process" with the notice of assignment that means they have permission from the information commissionaire to hold your details. If they haven’t done this they are very naughty and should be paying rent for the use of the details.
And from this I now know you meant those first two £5000.00 charges are fines not service charges and many thanks to you for clearing that up for me, perhaps I should reduce them to £500.00 or £1000.00 then it won't be so extortionate what do you reckon, they will still rack up to something worthwhile before it comes to an end and just to be clear, are these examples of service charges?:wishy wrote:As far as the fines you are trying to impose, you are trying to collect fines for Tort/Trespass/Harm, these are all in the realm of criminal, which is uncollectable without first winning a court case, which you cannot win because the amounts are extortionate and you risk counterclaim. However I know from experience that small service charges are collectable. So the burden of proof lies with them, if they cannot provide proof then you will be only too glad to help them in adjusting their records for the following service charges bla bla bla. You will not hear from them again. If you do, then send them an invoice and thank them for their continued use of your services. If they have brought your debt they will use another DCA as agent to collect "who may also need your services in adjusting their files" If they have no proof, then you can easily collect what they owe you
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests