HFC Loan Court Claim-Advise needed

[SupermanX]

Hi

I've recieved a court calim from HFC for a personal loan. Claim issue date was 11.07.08. I've already stated that I would fully defend the claim, so I have 28 days to file defense

 

Particulars of claim: "The claimant claims payment of the overdue balance due from the Defendant under a contract dated on or about 09.11.04 in the sum of xxx

 

1-20.06.08 Default balance xxxx

2-20.06.08 Collection charge xxx

Total xxx"

 

1) A CCA request was sent on 28.04.08, so far I've had no reply.

2) I sent a CPR18 request on 24.07.08 so far I've had no reply.

3) Today i sent a CPR18 failure request letter to the court and HFC

 

Can someone help me with drafting the defense as this time around I'm dealing directly with the claimant and there are no third parties involved apart from their solicitors.

 

Thanks

Super

[pompeyfaith]

They are still within the timescale for the CPR PART 18 request so you may have been a bit premature in sending out a failure notice to HFC and court was cpr 18 send via special delivery if so they would of got it the day after 25th july so the 14 days do not expire until the 8th august

 

Regards

 

Leon

[Hopeful1]

This is the defence Paul / PT2537 did for me prior to HFC producing docs:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/131502-weightmans-hfc-county-court-4.html#post1425119

 

[SupermanX]

Thanks for your replies.

 

I actually managed to stop the cpr18 failure letter

 

I will send this on Monday should I not hear from HFC.

 

Super

[SupermanX]

Hi

 

I'm looking to submit the following defense, could someone advise if this is good to go

 

"

Quote

"I'm basing my defense on penalty charges, vexatious behaviour in the claim. None receipt of a consumer credit agreement."

DEFENCE

 

The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the Particulars of Claim, /at all. It is averred that the Claimant has failed to serve a Notice of Assignment in accordance with section 136(1), of the Law of Property Act 1925, in respect of the alleged debt. The amount detailed in the Claimant’s claim, includes penalties charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Accordingly, the inclusion of penalty charges in the purported Notice of Assignment renders it entirely legally unenforceable. The Claimant has failed to comply with section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, by furnishing a Notice of Assignment in respect of that which is denied, that is inaccurate, W.F.Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke [1956].

The defendant requires sight of the deed of assignment of the debt. In addition the defendant requires proof of service of the Notice of Assignment in accordance with s196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 which is required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action in their own name since it appears this is an assigned debt. the reason the defendant requests this information is inter alia to clarify the dates are correctly stated on all documents , the defendant notes that if there are errors in the assignment it may be rendered in effectual in law per W F Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke and another - [1956] 2 All ER 169

 

 

It is therefore averred that the Defendant does not know the case that has to be met and the Particulars of Claim neither disclose any cause of action with any reasonable prospect of success and are an abuse of the process of this Court and, in compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules can and should be struck out pursuant to part 3.4 of the same. Furthermore, the Defendant contends that the Claimant’s conduct in issuing this claim is vexatious and amounts to unlawful harassment, pursuant to section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

Regarding that which is denied, on the 28th April 2008, a request was made under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, to obtain a copy of a credit agreement that the alleged debt refers to. It was sent by recorded delivery to HFC Bank Limited, with the statutory £1.00 fee enclosed. It was received on the 30th April 2008. HFC Bank Limited had twelve working days from receipt of the request, in which to furnish a credit agreement, as stipulated in Regulation 2 of The Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations 1983.

So far I have not received a response to my request. Accordingly, having failed to produce a credit agreement within the requisite timescale/ at all, the original creditor are in default of said request under section 78(6)(a) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Regarding that which is denied, on 24th of July 2008 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/ 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/ termination notice, and a copy of the Notice of Assignment required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action. Accordingly, having failed to produce a credit agreement within the requisite timescale/ at all, Claimants are in default of said request under section 78(6)(a) of The Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

 

To Date the claimant has failed to comply with my request under the CPR and I have not received any such documentation requested. As a result it has proven difficult to compose this defense without disclosure of the information requested, especially given that I am Litigant in Person.

 

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.

 

The Claimant, possessing no legal right claim monies allegedly owed, has acted unlawfully in issuing a Default Notice and registering said Notice with Credit Reference Agencies. Such conduct is a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 and amounts to defamation. Furthermore, the Defendant avers, that the Default Notice is wholly unenforceable, given that the amount claimed regarding that which is denied, contains penalty charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

The Claimants have not established any legal right to issue a claim/ proven that any debt exists.

 

It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant’s claim is entirely spurious and without merit and should be struck out for the aforementioned reasons. "

 

Thanks for your assistance

Super

[AndyOrch]

Hi

 

I'm looking to submit the following defense, could someone advise if this is good to go

 

"

Quote

"I'm basing my defense on penalty charges, vexatious behaviour in the claim. None receipt of a consumer credit agreement."

 

 

DEFENCE

 

 

 

The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the Particulars of Claim, /at all. It is averred that the Claimant has failed to serve a Notice of Assignment in accordance with section 136(1), of the Law of Property Act 1925, in respect of the alleged debt. The amount detailed in the Claimant’s claim, includes penalties charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Accordingly, the inclusion of penalty charges in the purported Notice of Assignment renders it entirely legally unenforceable. The Claimant has failed to comply with section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, by furnishing a Notice of Assignment in respect of that which is denied, that is inaccurate, W.F.Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke [1956].

The defendant requires sight of the deed of assignment of the debt. In addition the defendant requires proof of service of the Notice of Assignment in accordance with s196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 which is required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action in their own name since it appears this is an assigned debt. the reason the defendant requests this information is inter alia to clarify the dates are correctly stated on all documents , the defendant notes that if there are errors in the assignment it may be rendered in effectual in law per W F Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke and another - [1956] 2 All ER 169

 

 

It is therefore averred that the Defendant does not know the case that has to be met and the Particulars of Claim neither disclose any cause of action with any reasonable prospect of success and are an abuse of the process of this Court and, in compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules can and should be struck out pursuant to part 3.4 of the same. Furthermore, the Defendant contends that the Claimant’s conduct in issuing this claim is vexatious and amounts to unlawful harassment, pursuant to section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

Regarding that which is denied, on the 28th April 2008, a request was made under section 78 (should be 77 Fixed credit)of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, to obtain a copy of a credit agreement that the alleged debt refers to. It was sent by recorded delivery to HFC Bank Limited, with the statutory £1.00 fee enclosed. It was received on the 30th April 2008. HFC Bank Limited had twelve working days from receipt of the request, in which to furnish a credit agreement, as stipulated in Regulation 2 of The Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations 1983.

 

So far I have not received a response to my request. Accordingly, having failed to produce a credit agreement within the requisite timescale/ at all, the original creditor are in default of said request under section 78(6)(a) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Regarding that which is denied, on 24th of July 2008 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/ 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/ termination notice, and a copy of the Notice of Assignment required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action. Accordingly, having failed to produce a credit agreement within the requisite timescale/ at all, Claimants are in default of said request under section 78(6)(a) of The Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

 

To Date the claimant has failed to comply with my request under the CPR and I have not received any such documentation requested. As a result it has proven difficult to compose this defense without disclosure of the information requested, especially given that I am Litigant in Person.

 

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.

 

The Claimant, possessing no legal right claim monies allegedly owed, has acted unlawfully in issuing a Default Notice and registering said Notice with Credit Reference Agencies. Such conduct is a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 and amounts to defamation. Furthermore, the Defendant avers, that the Default Notice is wholly unenforceable, given that the amount claimed regarding that which is denied, contains penalty charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

The Claimants have not established any legal right to issue a claim/ proven that any debt exists.

 

It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant’s claim is entirely spurious and without merit and should be struck out for the aforementioned reasons. "

 

Thanks for your assistance

 

Super

 

 

 

Hi Super how many have these have you got on the go:D

 

Amendments in red and have you ever recieved a Default Notice for this Claim ? Nice defence BTW where did you get that:rolleyes:

 

 

Regards

 

Andy:-)

[SupermanX]

Lol

 

Thanks for the corrections, still a beginner

 

I have 3 on the go at the moment, but there is potential for more, maybe 5 or 6 . I think I received a default notice by normal post sometime ago but I cannot find it. Back then my filing was not tidy.

 

I'm glad you like (my) defense

 

Super

[AndyOrch]

Ok Super do the amendments but dont submit yet when is your defence submission deadline?

We need to beef up the the default notice plea.

 

Regards

 

Andy;)

[SupermanX]

My defence submission deadline is today

 

Super

[SupermanX]

My defence submission deadline is today

 

I've done the amendments as suggested

 

Rgds

Super

[AndyOrch]

Ok will be back shorty with the Default Plea amendment.

 

 

 

Regards

 

Andy:)

[SupermanX]

Thanks

[AndyOrch]

"I'm basing my defense on penalty charges, vexatious behaviour in the claim. None receipt of a consumer credit agreement."

 

 

DEFENCE

 

 

 

The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the Particulars of Claim, or at all. The defendant is unable to plead effectively or at all. The defendant is embarrassed.It is therefore averred that the Defendant does not know the case that has to be met and the Particulars of Claim neither disclose any cause of action with any reasonable prospect of success and/or are an abuse of the process of this Court and, in compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules can and should be struck out pursuant to part 3.4 of the same. Furthermore, the Defendant contends that the Claimant’s conduct in issuing this claim is vexatious and amounts to unlawful harassment, pursuant to section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970

 

Regarding that which is denied, on the 28th April 2008, a request was made under section 77 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, to obtain a copy of a credit agreement that the alleged debt refers to. It was sent by recorded delivery to HFC Bank Limited, with the statutory £1.00 fee enclosed. It was received on the 30th April 2008. HFC Bank Limited had twelve working days from receipt of the request, in which to furnish a credit agreement, as stipulated in Regulation 2 of The Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations 1983.

 

So far I have not received a response to my request. Accordingly, having failed to produce a credit agreement within the requisite timescale/ at all, the original creditor are in default of said request under section 78(6)(a) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Regarding that which is denied, on 24th of July 2008 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/ 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/ termination notice, and a copy of the Notice of Assignment required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action. Accordingly, having failed to produce a credit agreement within the requisite timescale/ at all, Claimants are in default of said request under section 78(6)(a) of The Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

 

To Date the claimant has failed to comply with my request under the CPR and I have not received any such documentation requested. As a result it has proven difficult to compose this defense without disclosure of the information requested, especially given that I am Litigant in Person.

 

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.

 

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. In respect of the figures claimed, it is averred that the sums claimed contain charges which are unfair within the meaning given in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 and it is further averred that the charges levied are punitive in nature and are penalty charges

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)

 

 

The Claimant, possessing no legal right claim monies allegedly owed, has acted unlawfully in issuing a Default Notice and registering said Notice with Credit Reference Agencies. Such conduct is a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 and amounts to defamation. Furthermore, the Defendant avers, that the Default Notice is wholly unenforceable, given that the amount claimed regarding that which is denied, contains penalty charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

The Claimants have not established any legal right to issue a claim/ proven that any debt exists.

 

It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant’s claim is entirely spurious and without merit and should be struck out for the aforementioned reasons.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ok Super there you have it I hope it is ok for you. You will have this masterd by the 5th one;)

 

 

Regards

 

Andy:cool:

Edited August 13, 2008 by Andyorch

[SupermanX]

Great Thanks.

 

I'm trying my best

 

Super

[AndyOrch]

And doing exceptionally well Super I might add.

 

 

I wish you well with your submission dont forget to print off your Proof time reciept

 

 

Regards

 

Andy:)

[SupermanX]

Hi Andy

 

I'm slightly confused? My defence should only be the default plea you posted? I can disregard the previous version you sunmitted?

 

"I'm basing my defense on penalty charges, vexatious behaviour in the claim. None receipt of a consumer credit agreement."

 

 

 

DEFENCE

 

 

 

The Defendant denies that he is liable to the Claimant as alleged in the Particulars of Claim, or at all. The defendant is unable to plead effectively or at all. The defendant is embarrassed.It is therefore averred that the Defendant does not know the case that has to be met and the Particulars of Claim neither disclose any cause of action with any reasonable prospect of success and/or are an abuse of the process of this Court and, in compliance with the Civil Procedure Rules can and should be struck out pursuant to part 3.4 of the same. Furthermore, the Defendant contends that the Claimant’s conduct in issuing this claim is vexatious and amounts to unlawful harassment, pursuant to section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970

 

Regarding that which is denied, on the 28th April 2008, a request was made under section 77 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, to obtain a copy of a credit agreement that the alleged debt refers to. It was sent by recorded delivery to HFC Bank Limited, with the statutory £1.00 fee enclosed. It was received on the 30th April 2008. HFC Bank Limited had twelve working days from receipt of the request, in which to furnish a credit agreement, as stipulated in Regulation 2 of The Consumer Credit (Prescribed Periods for Giving Information) Regulations 1983.

 

So far I have not received a response to my request. Accordingly, having failed to produce a credit agreement within the requisite timescale/ at all, the original creditor are in default of said request under section 78(6)(a) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Regarding that which is denied, on 24th of July 2008 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/ 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/ termination notice, and a copy of the Notice of Assignment required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action. Accordingly, having failed to produce a credit agreement within the requisite timescale/ at all, Claimants are in default of said request under section 78(6)(a) of The Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

 

To Date the claimant has failed to comply with my request under the CPR and I have not received any such documentation requested. As a result it has proven difficult to compose this defense without disclosure of the information requested, especially given that I am Litigant in Person.

 

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.

 

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. In respect of the figures claimed, it is averred that the sums claimed contain charges which are unfair within the meaning given in the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contract Regulations 1999 and it is further averred that the charges levied are punitive in nature and are penalty charges

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)

 

 

The Claimant, possessing no legal right claim monies allegedly owed, has acted unlawfully in issuing a Default Notice and registering said Notice with Credit Reference Agencies. Such conduct is a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 and amounts to defamation. Furthermore, the Defendant avers, that the Default Notice is wholly unenforceable, given that the amount claimed regarding that which is denied, contains penalty charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999.

 

The Claimants have not established any legal right to issue a claim/ proven that any debt exists.

 

It is the Defendant’s position that the Claimant’s claim is entirely spurious and without merit and should be struck out for the aforementioned reasons.

 

Tks

[AndyOrch]

Hi Super

 

No the above is the Final Draft you should submit. The red is the intro I have changed apologies for the confusion

 

Regards

 

Andy:)

Edited August 13, 2008 by Andyorch

[SupermanX]

Cool Tks

 

Super

[SupermanX]

Hi

Can I use the below for my AQ, I got this from another thread, please note that the claimant HFC is not a thrid party:

 

ALLOCATION QUESTIONNAIRE

 

Have you sent a copy of this completed form to the other party Yes

 

A. SETTLEMENT

 

For All

 

1. Given that the rules require you to try to settle the claim before the hearing, do you want to attempt to settle at this stage?

 

No

 

Reasons: Without production of the requested documents, I am at a disadvantage and am unable to negotiate a settlement without the full facts.

 

B. LOCATON OF TRIAL

 

Is there any reason why your claim needs to be heard at a particular court? NO

 

C. PRE-ACTION PROTOCOLS

 

You are expected to comply with the relevant pre-action protocol.

 

Have you done so? No

 

If No, explain why?

 

This case is not covered by any approved protocol; I have tried to act reasonably in exchanging information and documents relevant to the claim but have had no response from the claimant in this regard.

 

 

 

D. CASE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION

 

What amount of the claim is in dispute? Total amount

 

Applications

Have you made any application(s) in this claim? NO

 

Witnesses

 

Xx xxxxx All the facts in the case

XX xxxxx All the facts in the case

 

ExpertsNo

 

TrackFast Track

 

If you have indicated a track which would not be the normal track for the claim, please give a brief reason for your choice:

 

Its is respectfully requested this case be allocated to the Fast Track, it is a straight forward case and is easily resolved on production of the required documentation by the claimant, should the claimant not have the documentation required to progress this case I suggest that there will be no case to answer.

 

 

E TRIAL OR FINAL HEARING

 

How long do you estimate the trial or final hearing will take? 4 Hours

 

Are there any days when you, an expert or an essential witness will not be able to attend court for the trial or hearing? YES

 

Xxxx xxxxx Amend if applicable

 

F PROPOSED DIRECTIONS

 

Have you attached a list of the directions you think appropriate for the management of the claim? Yes

 

If Yes, have they been agreed with the other party? NO

 

G COSTS

 

Leave blank

 

H Fee

 

I OTHER INFORMATION

 

Have you attached documents to this questionnaire? YES

 

Have you sent these documents to the other partyYES

 

If Yes, when did they receive them?

 

Do you intend to make any applications in the immediate future?YES

 

If Yes, what for?

 

An order seeking the Claimants compliance with information previously requested.

 

In the space below, set out any other information you consider will help the judge to manage the claim.

 

If the court is in agreement, the defendant respectfully requests that special directions may be given as per the attached draft order.

 

The defendant proposes these directions in mind of the Overriding Objectives, and in particular the duty of the parties to help the court further them. The issues outlined below are the crux upon which this claim rests, and the proposed directions identify these issues and will allow them to be assessed in advance of the hearing so that this claim may proceed justly and expeditiously;

 

without production of the requested documents, I am at a disadvantage and am unable to serve a proper defence. Failure of the claimant to supply the requested documentation will make the case much harder for the court to deal with as without production of the requested documentation will inhibit the courts ability to deal with the case

 

Its is respectfully requested this case be allocated to the Fast Track, it is a straight forward case and is easily resolved on production of the required documentation by the claimant, should the claimant not have the documentation required to progress this case I suggest that there will be no case to answer.

 

Therefore it stands to reason that this document must be disclosed before this case can progress any further.

 

___________________

 

DRAFT ORDER FOR DIRECTIONS

 

 

 

In the ************* County Court

Claim number **********

 

Between

 

 

************* - Claimant

 

 

 

 

 

and

 

 

xxxxxxxxxx - Defendant

 

 

 

 

 

Draft Order for Directions

 

 

The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of this order send to the Defendant and to the Court:

• Copies of the Credit Agreement and any documents referred to within it which complies with the consumer Credit Act 1974 and all subsequent regulations, which the claimant seeks to rely upon.
  
• Default Notice compliant with s87 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended,
  
• Document, contract or deed of assignment
  
• Notice of assignment, with proof of service of the same compliant with s196 of the Law of Property Act 1925.
  
• Copies of any statement or other document relied upon
  

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

 

The Defendant shall within 14 days thereafter file and serve the following

• An amended defence sufficiently particularised in response to the documents supplied by the claimant.
  

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the Defence will be struck out without further order.

Thanks

Superman

[AndyOrch]

Hi Super

 

Yes the above is one of my AQ replies however this is the N150 not a N149 if it is applicable then feel free to use it.If O/C remove any reference to NoA DoA

 

 

Regards

 

Andy;)

[SupermanX]

Great Thanks Andy.

For HFC I've recieved N150, for my other 2 claims N149.

 

Which one is better?

 

What does O/C stand for?

 

Super

[AndyOrch]

Hi Super

 

N149 = SCT N150 = Fast Track /Multitrack

 

O/C original Creditor no assignments

 

 

Regards

 

Andy;)

[SupermanX]

Hi

 

Is the total amount in the AQ, the total amount including the claimant's costs? or just the money claimed without court fees+solictor's costs?

 

D. CASE MANAGEMENT INFORMATION- Total Amount

 

 

Super

[AndyOrch]

just the initial debt no costs or sols

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

[SupermanX]

Thanks