Jump to content

robert_harper_2000

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    944
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

4 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Win some lose some. Judge spent 40 mins finding a case to help the solicitor!
  2. Lost Judge said the default notice was invalid but he spent 40 minutes finding a case Brandon Vs American Express (as the solicitor they sent said he has no defence for the invalid notice) he said the agreement is valid Jurisdiction issue he said isn’t valid as it says valid in English Law
  3. But the judge will surely say xxxx what do I say to the whole although not having two days I mean having been shorted two days they did receive the secondary and third notices. So the additional notices are invalid end of
  4. I’ve had a claimant witness statement come through today.
  5. My main arguments are the Background Information: I am the Defendant in this case, and I am disputing the validity of the Default Notice and the alleged Paypal credit agreement provided by the Claimant, Lowells. I believe the Default Notice is invalid and the credit agreement is not properly executed, as detailed below. On 18.01.2020, I received a Default Notice from the Claimant, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 14 days. According to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach. The Default Notice was dated the 15th, with an expiry to remedy by the 29th. Assuming it was posted on the same day it was written, it could not have arrived to me until at least 2 days later. As a result, I was not given the full 14 days required by the Act to remedy the default, since at least 2 days were used for postage. Therefore, I argue that the Default Notice is invalid. Improperly Executed Credit Agreement: The Claimant has provided a copy of the alleged credit agreement, which I believe is not properly executed pursuant to Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The copy of the agreement provided lacks any signature, IP address, or tick box verification, as required by Section 4 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 for electronic agreements. Due to these missing elements, I argue that the agreement is improperly executed. Jurisdictional Issue: Furthermore, the alleged credit agreement provided appears to be a PayPal EU agreement. As a result, the agreement is not a UK credit agreement and could have been taken out in any country and I argue that this agreement falls outside the jurisdiction of this court.
  6. ok I'll sent that off. Fingers crossed. Thanks for your support. Appreciate it
  7. this better? In the county Court at Brighton Claim No. xxxxxx Mr xxxxxx -AND- Lowell Portfolio I LTD Witness Statement of: xx xxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx 11/04/2023 Witness Statement for PayPal Credit Agreement Dispute I, XXXXX, hereby declare that the following statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Background Information: I am the Defendant in this case, and I am disputing the validity of the Default Notice and the alleged Paypal credit agreement provided by the Claimant, Lowells. I believe the Default Notice is invalid and the credit agreement is not properly executed, as detailed below. On 18.01.2020, I received a Default Notice from the Claimant, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 14 days. According to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach. The Default Notice was dated the 15th, with an expiry to remedy by the 29th. Assuming it was posted on the same day it was written, it could not have arrived to me until at least 2 days later. As a result, I was not given the full 14 days required by the Act to remedy the default, since at least 2 days were used for postage. Therefore, I argue that the Default Notice is invalid. Improperly Executed Credit Agreement: The Claimant has provided a copy of the alleged credit agreement, which I believe is not properly executed pursuant to Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The copy of the agreement provided lacks any signature, IP address, or tick box verification, as required by Section 4 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 for electronic agreements. Due to these missing elements, I argue that the agreement is improperly executed. Jurisdictional Issue: Furthermore, the alleged credit agreement provided appears to be a pre-Brexit PayPal EU agreement. As a result of Brexit, the jurisdiction of such agreements has changed, and I argue that this agreement falls outside the jurisdiction of this court. Statement of Truth: I, XXXX, confirm that the contents of this witness statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signed: XX XXXXXXX 13.04.2023
  8. Shall I send it anyway and see if it is accepted it won’t do any harm. shall I upload my witness statement and would you take a look? I know I’ve been a bit doodoo so far. should I just quote legislation or do I need to include the actual legislation in the witness statement like quote the actual bit.
×
×
  • Create New...