GE Credit Debt assigned to Solictors - Please help!

[rippedoffagain]

Do it online. https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/csmco2/index.jsp

[natandgaz]

Ok letter sent to Howard Cohen.

[natandgaz]

Still not heard back from Howard Cohen.

Do I have 14 days to file the defence or 28 days?

I am concerned as the 14 days is up on Monday, which is the bank hol.

[rippedoffagain]

The claim is deemed to be served five days after the date of claim, I believe. You have fourteen days from date of service to acknowledge. If you don't acknowledge, then you have fourteen days from service to submit a defence, if you do acknowledge then you have twenty eight days from service.

Have you acknowledged service?

[natandgaz]

Yes done that last week!

[natandgaz]

OK letter received today from Howard Cohen.

"We refer to your letter in which you made a request for information under the Civil Procedure Rules.

We are not obliged to provide this information and would advise that the particulars of claim detailed in the County Court Claim Form should be sufficient to allow you to respond accordingly".

What shall I do now??

[andyorch]

Hi

Standard reply from our friends at the moment re CPR 18 request.They are actually flowting the the Northampton Bulk Centre restrictions.Just proceed with your holding defence and make mention to their reply in your defence.


Regards

Andy

[natandgaz]

Can you advise me what to put in my defence?

[andyorch]

Who is the Claimant?

Have you recieved a`Default Note?
Have you recieved a NoA (Notice of Assignment)


Regards

Andy

[natandgaz]

Default Notice received whilst arranging a repayment plan with them a few months ago.

No NOA. Received a letter from Howard Cohen a few weeks ago informing me of their intentions. Claimant is GE Money. As already stated this letter was a big shock for me as I have been making payments as arranged with them.

Thanks.

[andyorch]

Hi

They are aware you were having difficuilties and disregarded that fact.You have maintained payments throughout the payment plan and they have commenced litigation which is their prerogative in the matter
The reality is however, if you are not making normal payments to an account be it P/loan or C/Card, at some point in time, a Court claim will be filed. These Companies as everyone knows, play rough, so why anyone would assume that they will be allowed to continue making nominal payments forever and a day, with the Bank's blessing, when and if they know you own a property is beyond me. More and more people are getting into difficulties with loans and credit cards, so the worse the situation gets, the more aggressive the banks and credit card Companies will become in enforcing debts.

As far as I'm concerned, if you know how to deal with these situations to achieve the best possible outcome from day one, you stand a much better chance of getting rid of or stabilizing debts to an affordable amount and moving on with your life. This has to be preferable to finding yourself living with the constant uncertainty regarding what the creditor might do next, and unable to plan for any sort of future for you and your family

Where you are challenging the legality of a Default Notice due to penalty charges being included in the amount that was claimed, said Notice therefore being legally unenforceable and would also be grounds for securing a stay, as it comes back to the legality or otherwise of penalty charges, which has yet to be established, which in turn could provide you with valuable breathing space in your case. With view to the Agreement or lack of it does not stop you implying it is not with intent to argue its validity. Proof rests with the claimant.
Litigation involves mind games and serves no purpose in giving your opponents the heads up.

Fighting back takes courage, but it's a lot easier than you might think. If some people have opted to write to creditors and challenge what they're doing, this shows a determination to fight. A Court claim is no different, When ever you are questioning/challenging someone else's point of view, you are making an argument, so there's nothing to stop you doing this in front of a Judge, if you have to. Securing the best outcome and stopping them from gaining Summery Judgement, which lets face it is what they are out to achieve, to get their first foot on the ladder to gaining said Charging Order. If you had not intended to defend you would have allowed the above to be much more easily attainable.If you take alook under my profile you will find various holding defences already drafted for other posters even GE Money Claims.If you would like to modify one to suit your case I will give it the once over before submission.

Regards

Andy

[natandgaz]

Andy I am having problems viewing your profile.

Also, GE said they do not have a CCA for me. Does that affect anything?

[natandgaz]

I've had a look at a few defences, but I don't know where to start. Can someone help me please?

[natandgaz]

In the Northampton County Court
Claim number xxxxxxxxxxx


Between

C L Finance Ltd - Claimant

and
xxxxxxxxx - Defendant

Defence

1. I xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx am the defendant in this action and make the following statement as my defence to the claim made by C L Finance Ltd

2. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in the claimants Particulars of Claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof.

3. The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Particulars of Claim as it stands at present, inter alia: -

4. The claimants' particulars of claims disclose no legal cause of action and they are embarrassing to the defendant as the claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16. In this regard I wish to draw the courts attention to the following matters;

a) The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the written agreement referred to, the method the claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, or any default notices issued or any other matters necessary to substantiate the claimant's claim.

b) A copy of the purported written agreement that the claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim, and which appears to form the basis upon which these proceedings have been brought, has not been served attached to the claim form.

c) A copy of any evidence of both the scope and nature of any default, and proof of any amount outstanding on the alleged accounts, has not been served attached to the claim form.

d) The claimant did not send a Letter Before Action as required under the Pre-Action Protocols.

5. Consequently, it is proving difficult to plead to the particulars as matters stand.

The relevant Act of Parliament in this Case

6. Firstly I will address the issue of which Act is relevant in this case, in case it is suggested that the claim falls under the Consumer Credit Act 2006, it is drawn to the courts attention that schedule 3, s11 of the Consumer Credit Act 2006 prevents s15 repealing s127 (3) of the 1974 Act for agreements made before s15 came into effect. Since the agreement would have commenced prior to the inception of the Consumer Credit Act 2006, section 15 of the 2006 Act has no effect and the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is the relevant act in this case.

7. For the avoidance of any doubt I include the relevant section of the 2006 Consumer Credit Act (Except taken from Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14) - Statute Law Database accessed Saturday 16th August 2008.

11 The repeal by this Act of-

(a)the words "(subject to subsections (3) and (4))" in subsection (1) of section 127 of the 1974 Act,

(b)subsections (3) to (5) of that section, and

(c)the words "or 127(3)" in subsection (3) of section 185 of that Act,

has no effect in relation to improperly-executed agreements made before the commencement of section 15 of this Act.

8. Therefore the Consumer Credit Act 2006 is not retrospective in its application and has no effect upon this agreement and the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is the act which this agreement is regulated by

The build up to this action



The Request for Disclosure

12. Further to the case, I requested the disclosure of information pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules which is vital to this case from the claimant. The information requested amounted to copies of the Credit Agreement referred to in the particulars of claim and any default or termination notices, a transcript of all transactions, including charges, fees, interest, alleged repayments by myself and payments made by the original creditor. Also any other documents the Claimant seeks to rely on, including any default notices or termination notice, and a copy of the Notice of Assignment required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action.

13. To Date the claimant has refused my request under the CPR and I have not received any such documentation requested. As a result it has proven difficult to compose this defence without disclosure of the information requested, especially as I am a Litigant in Person.

14. The courts attention is drawn to the fact that the without disclosure of the requested documentation pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules I have not yet had the opportunity to asses if the documentation which the claimant claims to be relying upon to bring this action even contains the prescribed terms required in Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) which was amended by Consumer Credit (Agreements) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI2004/1482). The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following--
1. Number of repayments;
2. Amount of repayments;
3. Frequency and timing of repayments;
4. Dates of repayments;
5. The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable



15. The courts attention is drawn to the fact that where an agreement does not have the prescribed terms as stated in point 14 it is not compliant with section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and therefore not enforceable by s127 (3). The courts attention is also drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the consumer credit act 1974 and the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and Consumer Credit (Agreements) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI2004/1482) the agreement cannot be enforced
13. It is submitted that if the credit agreement supplied falls foul of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) in so far that the prescribed terms are not contained within the agreement then the court is precluded from enforcing the agreement. The prescribed terms must be with the agreement for it to be compliant with section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974. In addition there is case law from the Court of Appeal which confirms the Prescribed terms must be contained within the body of the agreement and not in a separate document

16. I refer to the judgment of TUCKEY LJ in the case of Wilson and another v Hurstanger Ltd [2007] EWCA Civ 299
"[11] Schedule 1 to the 1983 Regulations sets out the "information to be contained in documents embodying regulated
consumer credit agreements". Some of this information mirrors the terms prescribed by Sch 6, but some does not. Contrasting
the provisions of the two schedules the Judge said:

"33 In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties (with the benefit of legal advice if necessary) and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under s 61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127(3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement. More detailed requirements, which
are designed to ensure that the debtor is made aware, so far as possible, of specified information (including information contained in the
minimum terms) are to be found in Schedule 1."

17. If the agreement does not contain these terms in the prescribed manner it does not comply with section 60(1) CCA 1974, the consequences of which means it is improperly executed and only enforceable by court order

18. Notwithstanding points 14 and 15, any such agreements must be signed in the prescribed manner by both debtor and creditor. If such a document is not signed by the debtor the document cannot be enforced by way of section 127(3) Consumer Credit Act 1974

19. The claimant is therefore put to strict proof that such a compliant document exists


20. . Should the issue arise where the claimant seeks to rely upon the fact that they can show that the defendant has had benefit of the monies and therefore the defendant is liable, I refer to and draw the courts attention to the judgment of Sir Andrew Morritt in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2001] 3 All ER 229, [2001] EWCA Civ 633 in the Court of Appeal


at para 26
"In effect, the creditor--by failing to ensure that he obtained a document signed by the debtor which contained all the prescribed terms--must (in the light of the provisions in ss 65(1) and 127(3) of the 1974 Act) be taken to have made a voluntary disposition, or gift, of the loan moneys to the debtor. The creditor had chosen to part with the moneys in circumstances in which it was never entitled to have them repaid;"

The Need for a Default notice

21. It is neither admitted nor denied that any Default Notice in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant.

22. Notwithstanding point 21, I put the claimant to strict proof that any default notice sent to me was valid. I note that to be valid, 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)

23. 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 would also give rise to a potential counterclaim for damages where damage occurs to my credit rating (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society - [1996] 4 All ER 119)


Conclusion

24. The Defendant denies that there has been any failure to make payment in accordance with the alleged contract. The Claimant has failed to produce a copy of a credit agreement in the requisite timescale/at all, and in the absence of such an agreement, which conforms to sections 60 and 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Defendant avers that no agreement has ever existed for there to have been any failure to make said payment.

25. Without Disclosure of the relevant requested documentation I am unable to assess if I am indeed liable to the claimant, nor am I able to assess if the alleged agreement is properly executed, contain the required prescribed terms, or correct figures to make such an agreement enforceable by virtue of s127 Consumer Credit Act 1974

26. In view of the matters pleaded above, I respectfully request that the court gives consideration to whether the claimant's statement of case should be struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim, and/or that it fails to comply with CPR Part 16.

27. Alternatively, I respectfully request a stay in proceedings until such time as the claimant complies with the requests outlined in paragraph 12 above or until the court orders its compliance with the same. I will then be in a position to file a fully particularised defence and counterclaim and will seek the courts permission to amend my statement of case accordingly.









Statement of Truth


I, believe the above statement to be true and factual