So they never paid the court fee. Asked the court if the hearing would be withdrawn. No they say, we write to them and give them 14 days to pay before it's struck out. Timings mean that takes us beyond the date to submit copies of documents. So copies of documents sent out. Week goes by and then Carter sends a notice of discontinuance. Checked with Court and the hearing has finally been cancelled. So hopefully that's the end of the matter. Thanks for the help and advice.

Are there any sample bundles or guides to preparing one anywhere? So far I'm thinking it's a front page with the case names and number, Index page, claim form, CPR letter and response, Defence, Section 5 Limitation Act, Bank statements, Enforcement Notice and the Default Notice. Is there any case law I could include that is relevant? Anything else that should be in there? Also what is the timing for having the hearing withdrawn if the court fee hasn't been paid? Allocation notice stated fee should be paid by 4 Sept, if that hasn't been paid how soon can we expect the hearing to be withdrawn?

No idea! Been sent a notice of allocation and a hearing date. The letter says to send a copy all documents, bundled together and numbered to the court and opponent at least 14 days before hearing. I'm just not sure what should be included. The defence has referenced the limitations act, does that mean i should somehow include a copy of it or an extract. The defence didn't specifically mention the default notices and statements, and it seems it's for the claimant to prove it's not ststute barred rather then us to prove it is, so do we include the evidence we have of the last payments?

We now have a hearing date set. So time to put a bundle of documents together. Can anyone help with what to include in the bundle? So I'm thinking I need to include the default notice and the enforcement notice along with all the bank statements. Anything else that should be included? If we're relying on the Limitation Act should we include anything for that?

The question about mediation, A1, is just a tick box yes/no. There is no box to write reason in. Did you mean just write on the page anyway next to tick box? Also its to be returned by the 28th July, does that mean it's got to be delivered by the 28th or put in the post by 28th? And who do we send copies to? Lowells or carter or both?

A notice of proposed allocation to Small Claims has turned up with the Directions Questionare from the court, and Carter has sent their copy of DQs along with a letter stating "The claimant is prepared to settle this matter out of court and we look forward to hearing from you regarding negotiations". They have ticked the box to say yes to the mediation service on their form. Two things... 1) What should we do about the mediation. I can't see there is anything to mediate as it's statute barred, but not sure if the court expects you to still go through the process? 2) On their DQ Carter have entered a 0 in the "how many witnesses attending" box. Does that mean they're are not attending at court? Also will I be able to go with the defendant to the court?

They attached a copy of their letter to the court manager instructing them to proceed. Is it safe to just wait to hear from the court? Would anything show on MCOL if questionnaire had been sent out? Currently doesn't show anything since defence submitted.

Carters now replied, having received defence, confirming the claimant wishes to proceed with the claim and that the claimant agrees in principle to mediation. Also included a tel No for without prejudice negotiations. Heard nothing from the court. What happens next and what are the timescales? Is there anything that needs to be done by a certain date?

Thanks for the correction Andy. Today is the last day for submitting the defence. The defendant isn't able to get to a computer until much later today so wondered if I could do it for him online. I notice there is an option to sign it on MCOL as "I am duly authorised by the defendant to sign this statement - the defendant believes that the facts stated in this form are true". Can anyone, with the defendants agreement, sign this? Or is that meant purely for the legal profession to use when representing a client? Are there any consequences/differences if using that option? Would like to get it done sooner rather than leave it until the very last minute.

Ok so I now have the following, Is this ok or have I taken your suggested insertion too literally, and should the added "on the alternative..." be a seperate numbered paragraph? Draft Defence 1 The Claimant's claim was issued on 23 May 2014. 2 The Claimant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980, “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”. The claimant should already be aware that more than 6 years have elapsed between cause of action accrued and the court claim by their court submission. Notwithstanding the above should it be alleged otherwise... 3. On receipt of the claim form the Defendant sent a CPR 31.14 request dated 6 June 2014 for a copy of the agreement and overdraft facility confirmation and terms and conditions, Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974, Notices of Sums in arrears under running account credit CCA2007 sec 86c and Notice of Assignment. This was signed for by the claimant on 11 June 2014. The claimant has yet to comply. Until such time the Claimant can comply with my request for a copy of the Overdraft facility agreement & Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 it relies upon they are prevented from enforcing or requesting any relief as pursuant to the CCA 1974. Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on. (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment. © Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification. (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed. (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. 4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. Hmmm. now I've tinkered with it and re read it a few times it does seem rather weak to be saying 'it's statute barred' and the immediately adding 'but if not then....' . If I revert to a simple statute barred defence and the claimant disputes this, is there a further opportunity to ask them for proof of the debt or does everything have to be in this initial defence? Is it safe to consider the statute barred clock started ticking, by the very latest, when the default notice under Sec 87(1) cca1974 was served? We have this original from Jan 2008 so is over six years old. Sorry if this seems like a lot of messing about but I've got an alternative defence which is just for the statute barred element. Is this one worded Ok? If both defences are worded ok, we can then make a final decision which one to submit after a discussion together. Hope that makes sense. Here is the alternative draft defence. 1 The Claimant's claim was issued on 23 May 2014. 2 The Defendant Claimant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980, “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”. The claimant should already be aware that more than 6 years have elapsed between cause of action accrued and the court claim by their court submission. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. Here's the redacted Notices. No payments or acknowledgements have been made since. If anyone has any advice as to how reliable these would be as to the point at which the statute barred clock started ticking I'd be grateful. That's the only issue I see, when did the clock start? If these can be relied upon then that helps decide whether to just use the simple statute barred defence.

I'm helping a friends son prepare this defence, it's his claim, I've seen the originals of the Enforcement Notice and Default notice and the bank statements covering that period of time, and he is stating that no further acknowledgment or payment was ever made. A sar has been put in to Lloyds but not provided yet. I'm as sure as I can be in the circumstances that it is Statute barred, but as this is for someone else I wondered if it was best to cover all bases. I wanted to be sure that the claimant would have to provide the agreements and proof of payments if they were to continue. I wonder if this is implied with just a statute barred defence anyway, but not sure if you can leave things just implied and was better to specifically state they would be required. I also note that sometimes DCAs come up with 'phantom' payments to prevent statute barring and I wanted to try and include some form of defence that went beyond that, if you see what I mean. But then perhaps it looks a weaker defence with the extra bits, could this be the case, or will it do no harm to keep them in?

I have put together a draft defence as follows, would appreciate some input as to whether it is correct and appropriate. Quick recap, this is a current account (opened 2007) that went overdrawn by around £100 and then had bank charges added that took it to just over £800. Last payment into the account I can find was in Sept 2007. Enforcement notice dated xx December 2007, stating agreement will be terminated xx January 2008. Default notice dated xx January 2008. CPR 31:14 request made but not complied with. (Carters template response) POC This claim is for 800 the amount due under an agreement between the original creditor and the defendant to provide finance and /or services and/or goods. This debt was assigned to/purchased by Lowell Portfolio on XX 07 2013 and notice served pursuant to the law of property act 1925. Particulars Lloyds A/C No xxxxxxxxxxx And the claimant claims 800. The claimant also claims interest pursuant to county court act 1964 from XX 07 2013 to date at 8% per annum amounting to 50. Draft defence 1 The Claimant's claim was issued on 23 May 2014. 2 The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980, “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”. The claimant should already be aware that more than 6 years have elapsed between cause of action accrued and the court claim by their court submission. 3. On receipt of the claim form the Defendant sent a CPR 31.14 request dated 6 June 2014 for a copy of the agreement and overdraft facility confirmation and terms and conditions, Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974, Notices of Sums in arrears under running account credit CCA2007 sec 86c and Notice of Assignment. This was signed for by the claimant on 11 June 2014. The claimant has yet to comply. Until such time the Claimant can comply with my request for a copy of the Overdraft facility agreement & Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 it relies upon they are prevented from enforcing or requesting any relief as pursuant to the CCA 1974. Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on. (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment. © Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification. (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed. (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. 4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. I BELIEVE THAT THE CONTENTS OF THIS DEFENCE ARE TRUE. Some further thoughts There POC are so vague but the defence is a detailed reply, is this a mistake? ( ie mentioning overdrafts and CCA1974 etc.) Should I have included the following, which I see a lot of defences include, "On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the*consumer credit*Act 1974." ? Should the sec 69 interest be challenged?

I see he can submit a defence on MCOL, can it be submitted online on the 33rd day? Do copies of the defence have to be sent to anyone else? In which case they would be printed copies through the post, do they have to arrive by 33rd day? posted by 33rd day? or is there some other timescale for the copies?

The claim was acknowledged, so think we have til Tuesday 24th to file defence. Not sure about the linked addresses. I haven't seen the credit file myself. He has only had one other address, moved over six years ago and the default notice was sent to his current address if that makes any difference.

He says he checked a few months ago and Lloyds wasn't on there. He says it's never been on there checked last year and apparently it wasn't on there then.