West 28th Street Limited

[MrO666]

So firstly how the f*** do you know that sort of internal information

Which is why Dan’s report is so important

if the loans aren’t employer loans and therefore are subject to the CCA then the loans are illegal and not enforceable.

Agreed..........that info would only be available to someone actually involved in this, or who's a bloody good hacker.........

[eek]

Agreed..........that info would only be available to someone actually involved in this, or who's a bloody good hacker.........

everything tells me that Validoom is either the owner or a member of West 28.

[Wtaf]

Did West 28th have enough liquid assets to purchase this book in 2022? No
Have they declared this asset since? No
Have they proven the date of assignment? No
Are they FCA registered? No

[Superfly]

everything tells me that Validoom is either the owner or a member of West 28.

Dans current position was to ignore ("those receiving your letters should take no further action unless enforceability is established"), and Validooms advice is to engage and not ignore.

[looperevil]

everything tells me that Validoom is either the owner or a member of West 28.

Or he is part of the Elysium group fighting against this (which is my suspicion) which is ok, It is gives a good insight as to how they are working on the case

[looperevil]

Did West 28th have enough liquid assets to purchase this book in 2022? No
Have they declared this asset since? No
Have they proven the date of assignment? No
Are they FCA registered? No

And these are the key points we all need to put in our responses to any court orders. And for what it's worth - Felicitas were never registered either in the IoM.

[MrO666]

Just to state the obvious, whilst W28 could in thoery issue a statutory demand, if the alleged debt that it claimed to try and recover had previsouly been disputed, then it blows that argument out of the water, as you cannot use a SD to try to enforce a genuinaly disputed debt. In this scenario you state your case as to why the SD is invalid, request for it to be withdrawn, and also make a claim for costs against W28 for vexatious litigation.

The only other way W28 could try and engforce payment, would be to take you to court and convince them that any alleged debt was indeed 100% above board and legally enforeacble. In this scenario W28 would need to legally set out their case against you, at which point you would know what they're claiming and what you need to dispute and defend.

To the best of my knowledge, there isn't any other instrument they can use to suddenly hit you with a court issue demand.

We have laws in this country (thankfully) that need to be followed to the letter.

I'm happy to be corrected if anyone knows of another option or angle, as it would be good for people to know and be aware.

W28/Trethowans trying to take probably 100's if not 1000's of people to court would be interesting....and expensive.

[eek]

Just to state the obvious, but whilst W28 could in thoery issue a statutory demand, if the alleged debt that it claimed to try and recover had previsouly been disputed, then it blows that argument out of the water, as you cannot use a SD to try to enforce a genuinaly disputed debt. In this scenario you state your case as to why the SD is ibvalid, reques for it to be withdrawn, and also make a claim for costs against W28 for vexatious litigation.

The only other way W28 could try and engforce payment, would be to take you to court and convince them that any alleged debt was indeed 100% above board and legally enforeacble. In this scenario W28 would need to legally set out their case against you, at which point you would know what they're claiming and what you need to dispute and defend.

To the best of my knowledge, there isn't any other instrument they can use to suddenly hit you with a court issue demand.

We have laws in this country (thankfully) that need to be followed to the letter.

I'm happy to be corrected if anyone knows of another option or angle, as it would be good for people to know and be aware.

W28/Trethowans trying to take probably 100's if not 1000's of people to court would be interesting....and expensive.

I’m not aware of any other options either - the short cut (if it’s an employer loan) is a Statutory Demand but that isn’t easy if it’s a CCA loan.

but reality is everything is in limbo until Dan publishes his report at which point I suspect W28 will have a different problem (past history shows that law firms rapidly lose interest in clients when their name is publicly associated with tax avoidance schemes).

if Trethowans are still working for W28 next month they will be rather unique

[cojak]

Just to note West 28 paid a grand total of £30k for the debt and they get 25% of any monies recovered.

It is pretty garratueed that they have made substantially more money as many people have understandably but unfortunately settled with them.

It is unfortunate because unless they have specifically stated that the full debt has been settled they will be back for more.

West 28 are also working with other companies who are based overseas


West 28 are arguing that none of the debts are statutory barred. The belief that some people have that the timer starts when the loan is created is incorrect.

It can be very dependent on details of the contracts and there is no standard contract which is what makes it this whole mess very complex.

For example everybody here can all have different contracts, some might state that the loans do not have to paid back for 10 years, 15, 25, 50, upon death or 75 years of age etc..

This why saying the loans are statue barred might not necessarily be correct, it is a lot more complex

West 28 are very much banking on people ignoring the demands / not getting legal advice and having judgements automatically made against them which is a situation you very much do not want to be in.

Again I stress please do not ignore any demands you recieve from West 28, get legal advice from where ever you feel comfortable with.

This does not sound like a punter caught up in this stench, it sound like someone wearing a gas mask.

Unless you convince the Mods otherwise I suggest you stop posting before I make the decision for you…

[Diagnose b4 u prescribe]

Posting here for the first time as with others being traumatised by the statements of loan arriving through the door.
I have seen comms from Elysium and what is their strategy but not sure how potent that is.

Is your brother in law a firm that can take other people onboard along with you, if/when demands are sent? We are being tossed around between many firms for money but if you have a personal connection with a barrister that would be far more assuring than someone on the phone you dont know.

Sorry for not replying sooner but I took an extended BH break and didn't catch up with this thread until today. My ex-Barrister Brother in Law is actually retired but to be frank I've kept him on the back burner in the highly unlikely event these we ever went all the way to Court. My opinion remains that these crooks will prefer to remain in the shadows and would not wish their ludicrous claims to be exposed and their credibility torn apart in Court. So thus far I've been happy to 'fly solo' and not yet needed to engage him at all!

I have just caught up with the latest posts and I feel even more optimistic that these shameful attempts to extort money from us all will very soon come to an end. I warmly welcome the intervention of Dan Neidle plus the glut of constructive posts about how best to defend yourself should the need arise (and I stil don't think it will).

On that basis I will continue to ignore those questionable posts that scare / encourage me to join a costly 3rd party group action to pursue some vague defence / attack. I will also ignore any written correspondence from West 28th or subsequent entities UNLESS there is a direct consequence of not refuting some new tactic such as those dodgy statutory demands. In terms of future actions, there's enough content in this thread for me to write an even better letter than the one I wrote to demolish that SD. And as for costs, I've just checked and Royal Mail's latest price for a signed for letter is £3.80. Wow, this is getting expensive!!