Many thanks. I will get this letter off now and update when I hear something.

here's an update on where we are at the moment.

A while back as mentioned the court asked if I wished to continue to defend as they thought Lowell had submitted all the requested documents.

Lowell had not however submitted the notice of default I asked the court to request they do that.

Two weeks later the notice of default arrived from Lowell and then I heard nothing until today.

This morning I received a 'General Form Of Judgement or Order' from the county court.

They are asking me to now file a defence but given that Lowell have provided all the required documents I'm not sure where to go with it.

I can see that a large part of the alleged balance is made up of charges but I doubt that carries much weight.

I had originally offered to make payments of £50 per month when the account first went into default but they refused to accept it.

In hindsight I should have just paid the £50 per month regardless because at least that may have weighed in my favour at the moment.

Have attached the letter as a pdf and redacted any personal info as well as the court details.

Any advice or thoughts on where I should go from here?

Thanks

Lowell-General-Form-Of-Judgment.pdf

scan the DN please

Ok here's the DN they sent

Lowell-Capital-One-DN.pdf

I'm thinking that I may have come to the end of the road with this one? Lowell have submitted all the documents requested so now the ball is in my park and I don't think I have anywhere to hit it

no there are no prescribed terms that must be present on that application slip

read andy's post

They did provide the statements although there are no "detailed" statements between 6th Feb 2004 and 6th August 2009 and even more odd where is shows 'paid in' and 'paid out' both are £0.00 so for over 5 years nothing was paid in and nothing paid out?

The minimum payment due and new balance changes over that period as does the credit limit but there are no other details.

As for the original credit agreement, apart from that small slip with my signature and the date I take it there is also supposed to be a back side to it with the full terms and conditions?

Thanks again for your help. Most of us would be completely lost without this website.

all their statement 6 years and beyond show zero - seems 6 years only reporting on balances etc - nothing new there capital one

credit application form them is no doubt short version name address and a siggy thats all.

Ok but is that short version of the credit application form with my signature on it all the court needs? In other words if I were to ask the court to stay the judgement on the basis that the full T&C's were not supplied would that work?

nothing to do with missing t&c's

prescribed terms

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?335464-Prescribed-terms-in-an-agreement&highlight=prescribed+terms

Ahh, ok got it. The 'prescribed' terms are those that show the credit limit and repayment details including the percentage rate. Apologies, I should definitely read more before asking!

after writing back to the court a couple of weeks ago asking them to stay the judgement and request that Lowell provide the full prescribed terms I received a letter from the HM Courts & Tribunals Service as follows:

Dear Sir

Re: Case Number XXXXXXXX Lowell Prortfolio I Ltd vs Mr XXXX XXXXXX

Your letter dated 7 April 2017 was referred to District Judge XXXXX who has directed as follows:-

I will not make a further order of my own initiative at present. The defendant must comply with the order made by Deputy District Judge XXXXXXX on 3rd April 2017 by 19 April 2017.

Yours faithfully.

XXXX XXXXXX

first of all how can I comply by the 19th April when it is already the 25th April and the letter they just sent me is dated 24th April? I don't have a time machine unfortunately.

Leaving that aside

I assume now I just go ahead and submit a defence of one sort or another.

I have no doubt this will eventually come down on the side of Lowell and I will be left with a CCJ and big bill to pay off but I guess all I can do now is try.

well id ignore that if the letter has only just arrived or call the court and tell them so..

not sure where we advised writing and requesting a stay..you cant do that...

and we'd never advise that.

you got a form of judgement

you must abide by that...

I didn't say you advised I write and ask for a stay. On the form of judgement it gave the option to do that otherwise I would not have done it.

where?

I didn't say you advised I write and ask for a stay. On the form of judgement it gave the option to do that otherwise I would not have done it.

Correct it does allow to vary or stay the order....which is standard procedure....however given the stage we are at in the claim a court would not allow you the defendant to stay the claim and we would certainly never advise same.

I suggest you submit a particularised defence .....rapid

Regards

Andy

If the court would not allow a stay of judgement then they should not muddy the waters by giving the option to do so. I simply took the option so I have done nothing at all wrong in that respect. Perhaps they should try speeding up the reply process.

In any case the point of this whole exercises is to drag it out as long as possible. I have no doubt at all that the judgement will be in favour of Lowell because realistically we have been through all the reasons why this thing should never get to court and apparently that is exactly where it is heading. The only defence I could possibly have would be on technical grounds and Lowell seem to have satisfied the court in that respect.

I'll think of something I'm sure but don't quite know what as yet.

use the pdf in that post as guidance for a defence - answer what the judge wants.

their paperwork is woefully short

use those to your advantage

Just going to submit my defence, the court gave me until today to get it in. Will deliver in person. But before I do I just wanted to check something about the original agreement with my signature on it.

Is it a "legal requirement" that the original is produced to the court not a photocopy?

If I remember correctly, at least at the time the agreement was signed. Photocopies were not accepted as legal proof of an agreement and it always had to be the original document?

The reason I mention this is because IF it is legally required that the original be produced and Lowell do not have it then perhaps "legally" speaking there is no agreement?

Might be clutching at straws but you guys are far more knowledgable than me about all this so wanted to get your opinion.

I just found out myself that the "original" signed agreement does not need to be produced in court.

my defence seems to revolve around compliance.

I suppose it can be argued that the copy of the signed agreement Lowell provided is not a "true copy" of the original.

It is only part of the original document and does not contain the prescribed terms and conditions and it therefore unenforceable.

I think though I would need to quote the particular piece of legislation concerned or it will not be considered.

Not contain the Prescribed Terms & Conditions @ Inception

I just found out myself that the "original" signed agreement does not need to be produced in court.

 

So my defence seems to revolve around compliance. I suppose it can be argued that the copy of the signed agreement Lowell provided is not a "true copy" of the original. It is only part of the original document and does not contain the prescribed terms and conditions and it therefore unenforceable. I think though I would need to quote the particular piece of legislation concerned or it will not be considered.

And who told you that ?

" When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007? Before 2007, not sure the exact date but I have a feeling it might have been 2005"

Section 127 CCA applies here (pre April 2007)

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/127

Andy

A ruling in 2009 by Judge Waksman at the High Court in Manchester established it was not necessary for a lender to provide the original credit agreement, or even a direct copy, such as a fax or scan.

He ruled it was perfectly acceptable to provide a copy of the agreement reconstituted from other bank sources, so long as it accurately and honestly told the borrower the original terms and conditions, and any subsequent changes.

A ruling in 2009 by Judge Waksman at the High Court in Manchester established it was not necessary for a lender to provide the original credit agreement, or even a direct copy, such as a fax or scan.

He ruled it was perfectly acceptable to provide a copy of the agreement reconstituted from other bank sources, so long as it accurately and honestly told the borrower the original terms and conditions, and any subsequent changes.

But only in the providing a response in connection to a section 77/78/79 request...not for enforcement purposes or if the agreement had been varied.

Another update on this.

Received another 'General Form of Judgement or Order' from the country court today laong with a 'Notice Of Trial Date' which is now set for 7th July.

Have attached both documents (redacted)

but as far as I can see it is now a simple matter of first,

hoping Lowell don't pay the court fee in which case it will be struck out

and then it's up to them if they start the process again

or if it goes ahead I need to rely on the fact that they have not provided a 'True Copy' of the original agreement?

court-order_Redacted.pdf

trial-notice_Redacted.pdf

And dont forget that you have to comply with the directions by the dates stated......points 7 /10/and 11.