Santander

by dkent1977 Sun Oct 01, 2017 5:50 pm

Another day, another letter!

As usual its been printed and sent from Cabot and not Santander as evidenced by the Cabot page "1of6" mark on the side of the letter and them coming in the same envelope (it also contains Cabots letter and a NOA). As you can see, it clearly says that 'your account has been sold'.

What letters should I send them? The bank ones? Debt purchaser ones? DCA as agents? Naturally I'm going to edit it and question the authenticity of the supposed 'Santander' letter they sent.....

(excuse the dodgy picture...I had to use my webcam!)

Santander San-le10

by **daveiron** Sun Oct 01, 2017 6:06 pm

Hi,
I would do the new 3 letters to whoever corresponds with you OC,DCA (agent) & debt purchaser. the more times you
request the info & its not provided ,the better.

by dkent1977 Sun Oct 01, 2017 8:03 pm

So I've added this bit in "Take notice that I now require from you all of the information listed below along with the Documents of Title and Notice of assignment from Santander, as the one that you have sent appears to have been constructed and printed by yourselves and could possibly constitute fraud by misrepresentation." Too much?
Section 5 states "A signed statement that you are in possession of the Original Agreement, and that this agreement has never been sold or traded in any way." but we know it already has been from their letter? Should I remove that or leave in and add that the debts already been paid, thanks for paying it but I have no contract with you??
Also are we no longer asking for the DOA? The letter does mention Lynn v Pelias.....

by **daveiron** Mon Oct 02, 2017 2:02 pm

Hi,

Keep sec 5 in .They say they have bought all rights and title to the debt.The original Agreement is key,its their only
proof of claim . Just ask yourself why is it the one document they can never provide ?

Re the van lynne case i think it states notice of assignment not the deed .

by Tiggy Mon Oct 02, 2017 4:42 pm

The Van Lynn case refers to the Deed of Assignment.

Lord Denning states in the Pelias Construction Case (Van Lynn Developments v Pelias Construction Co Ltd 1968 (3) All ER 824) where he said the debtor is entitled to "view the sale agreement to ensure that the assignee can give him good discharge under the contract."

by **daveiron** Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:14 pm

Tiggy,
can you please show me where in the judgement it states deed of assignment .All i can find in the copy i have is notice of assignment.If you can give me a link that would be great.

by Tiggy Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:17 pm

Tiggy wrote:The Van Lynn case refers to the Deed of Assignment.

Lord Denning states in the Pelias Construction Case (Van Lynn Developments v Pelias Construction Co Ltd 1968 (3) All ER 824) where he said the debtor is entitled to "view the sale agreement to ensure that the assignee can give him good discharge under the contract."

by **daveiron** Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:46 pm

Tiggy,

I have read the transcript and can find no mention of deed only notice.

by Tiggy Tue Oct 03, 2017 9:01 am

daveiron wrote:Tiggy,

I have read the transcript and can find no mention of deed only notice.

Which transcript were you reading, the case or the appeal?

by **daveiron** Tue Oct 03, 2017 9:22 am

Tiggy,

this is all despite looking extensively that i could find ,if you can find the reference in the judgement to deed of assignment ,please could you post it .
I may be wrong but it seems to me Lord Denning stated " the right to see the sale agreement"

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=82254

thanks dave

by Tiggy Tue Oct 03, 2017 9:35 am

daveiron wrote:Tiggy,

this is all despite looking extensively that i could find ,if you can find the reference in the judgement to deed of assignment ,please could you post it .
I may be wrong but it seems to me Lord Denning stated " the right to see the sale agreement"

http://www.getoutofdebtfree.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=60&t=82254

thanks dave

What we need to do is go back to an original transcript and see exactly what the wording was to see if it's been changed.

The Law of Property Act is almost 100 years old and brought together legislation from the late 1800's early 1900's when the use of the word deed was more prevalent.

by dkent1977 Tue Oct 03, 2017 2:58 pm

Should I add in a bit about DOA then? Is the bit about fraud by misrepresentation a bit much at the moment and it should be left until a later date??

by **daveiron** Tue Oct 03, 2017 3:42 pm

Hi dkent,

I have just added to the letters. Reference to the sale agreements.
That should be all thats needed.

by dkent1977 Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:30 pm

Cool. Thanks. Removed the fraud bit and am instead asking for the original NOA from santander.....

by waylander62 Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:44 pm

the sale agreement in cases such as this, is indeed a sale agreement between the OC and the purchaser, however it is a sale agreement which is always executed as a deed.

so... the sale/assignment of your debt is executed as a deed so hence the deed of assignment would therefore be correct.

by Jinxer Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:47 pm

I wouldn't ask for the Notice of Assignment as they will have that.

by **daveiron** Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:48 pm

Hi waylander,

The letters quote the Van Lynn case ,which states sale agreement , There appears to be no reference in it to deed.

by waylander62 Wed Oct 04, 2017 8:57 pm

daveiron wrote:Hi waylander,

The letters quote the Van Lynn case ,which states sale agreement , There appears to be no reference in it to deed.

as i said before it IS a sale agreement, but executed as a deed. same thing now as it was back then it is STILL a sale agreement.

if they want to try and be clever regarding this issue, then you be more clever, and let them know you are well aware that their sale agreement was executed as a deed.

1000's of times they have been asked for the deed of assignment and i have NEVER seen any of them argue that point , only that they wont provide a copy because it contains other peoples personal information.

by **daveiron** Wed Oct 04, 2017 9:02 pm

If we are quoting case law which says we have the "right to see the sale agreement" we need to quote what was actually said.

by **assassin** Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:26 am

Its fraud by FALSE representation and not fraud by misrepresentation.

Misrepresention can refer to a miostake done in error and unwittingly, where as fraud by FALSE representation is a clear act of doing something with intent.

by **assassin** Thu Oct 05, 2017 1:29 am

2

Fraud by false representation

(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b)intends, by making the representation—

(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2)A representation is false if—

(a)it is untrue or misleading, and

(b)the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3)“Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—

(a)the person making the representation, or

(b)any other person.

(4)A representation may be express or implied.

(5)For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

SECTION 2 FRAUD ACT 2006

by pitano1 Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:01 am

[wink]
i see no EVIDENCE that...FRAUD...has NOT been committed
regarding this matter.
this averment is supported by particulars of the matters relied upon.’

That statement will [should] have them running around when
they are asked to prove a negative...
regards.
pitano1

by dkent1977 Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:02 am

assassin wrote:Its fraud by FALSE representation and not fraud by misrepresentation.

Misrepresention can refer to a miostake done in error and unwittingly, where as fraud by FALSE representation is a clear act of doing something with intent.

Thanks. Am going to leave out for the time being. Might need it later.... Wink

by dkent1977 Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:17 am

pitano1 wrote:[wink]
i see no EVIDENCE that...FRAUD...has NOT been committed
regarding this matter.

That statement will [should] have them running around when
they are asked to prove a negative...
regards.
pitano1

I'll ask for the NOA from Santander and if they say "We've sent it already", I'll have something else to fire back at them Smile

by pitano1 Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:30 am

go-bro.
in the meantime IF....you USE... the above... the particulars they rely
on are.....?

A pack of lies.

by Sponsored content

Santander

Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander

Re: Santander