cheers

3. Paragraph 1 is noted, The service was for TalkTalk TV, The service was cancelled by myself within 14 days of the start date, due to an unusable service not fit for purpose; not terminated. I have the letter, sent by TalkTalk confirming cancellation of the TV service. This was the last contact I had with TalkTalk. would that be better? cheers

Hi again guys, I have re-tweaked the defence again, hopefully this one is ok to send. 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The claimant's’ particulars of claims disclose no legal cause of action as the claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16.2 The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2.The claim is denied. I am unaware of what debt the claimant refers to. I have requested information pertaining to the claimants claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond in full to my request, offering only a copy of the Notice of Assignment, I have no recollection of having received the original and the claimant has not been able or unwilling to supply; (a) The agreement (b) The default notice © The termination notice (d) A statement of account 3. Paragraph 1 is noted, The service was for TalkTalk TV and was not upheld on their side as the service did not go live on the written start date. When the service did begin it was insufficient for purpose i.e. a TV service that was unwatchable from both from an internet speed and quality of equipment perspective (low visual quality TV box). The service was cancelled by myself within 14 days of the start date, not terminated (the implication of the particular of claim is that this was TalkTalk's decision). I have in my possession a letter, dated 27/04/15, that was sent by TalkTalk confirming cancellation of the TV service along with a pre-addressed equipment returns package and all TalkTalk property was returned on the 29/04/15 as printed on the post office receipt. This was the last contact I had with TalkTalk. 4.The claim is denied and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for. 5. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 6. On the alternative, ias 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. 7. 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. cheers Dave

Hi Andy, I have made the amendments, I do not know if the point I made in paragraph 3 letter c is relevant or if I should leave it out but it popped into my head, so I put it Defence 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The claimant's’ particulars of claims disclose no legal cause of action as the claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16.2 The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2.The claim is denied. The agreement with TalkTalk was for TalkTalk TV and was not upheld on their side as the service did not go live on the agreed start date. When the service did begin it was insufficient for purpose i.e. a TV service that was unwatchable from both from an internet speed and quality of equipment perspective (low visual quality TV box). The service was cancelled by myself within 14 days of the start date, not terminated (the implication of the particular of claim is that this was TalkTalk's decision). A letter, dated 27/04/15, was sent by TalkTalk accepting cancellation of the TV service along with a pre-addressed equipment returns package and all TalkTalk property was returned on the 29/04/15 as printed on the post office receipt. This was the last contact I had with TalkTalk. I have requested information pertaining to the claimants claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond in full to my request, only offering a Notice of Assignment and not been able or unwilling to supply; (a) The agreement (b) The default notice © The termination notice (d) A statement of account 3.The claim is denied and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and © show how TalkTalk intended to provide a service after cancellation and requesting the return of their equipment. 4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 5. On the alternative, ias 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. 6. 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. Cheers Dave

Hi Thanks guys, I missed that number with regards to amendments, it was more a case of do I amend? but I mistook their introduction letter as a notice of assignment. Is the defence ok to admit now then? is the way I drafted the additions into your original defence correct. Also do mcol accept attachments so I can use the receipts and letters as evidence? Thanks Dave

I have received these letters today from Lowell's, I had no previous knowledge of the letters until today. Do these affect my defence in any way and if so how should I amend. Defence 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The claimant's’ particulars of claims disclose no legal cause of action as the claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16.2 The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2.The claim is denied. I am unaware of what debt the claimant refers to. The agreement with TalkTalk was for TalkTalk TV was not upheld on their side as the service did not go live on the agreed start date. When the service did begin it was insufficient for purpose i.e. a TV service that was unwatchable from both from an internet speed and quality of equipment perspective (low visual quality TV box) The service was cancelled by myself within 14 days of the start date, not terminated (the implication of the particular of claim is that this was TalkTalk's decision). A letter, dated 27/04/15, was sent by TalkTalk accepting cancellation of the TV service along with a pre-addressed equipment returns package and all TalkTalk property was returned on the 29/04/15 as printed on the post office receipt. This was the last contact I had with TalkTalk. I have requested information pertaining to the claimants claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond. 3.The claim is denied the Claimant has not served a Notice of Assignment pursuant to the law of property act 1925 and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and © show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 5. On the alternative, ias 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. 6. 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. cheers Dave docs1.pdf

Brilliant, thanks Andy, I will get that sorted and repost for approval before uploading to mcol.

Hi Guys, I received another letter from Lowell's yesterday, not the information requested CPR 31.14 but just a "phone to make payment" letter notifying me about County Court Claim. I have found Andy's defence that has obviously been successful on a number of occasions, below it I have written the details particular to me and would like to know whether they are worth incorporating into the defence or could they jeopardise the defence as they confirm an original agreement? Andy's defence, 1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The claimant's’ particulars of claims disclose no legal cause of action as the claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16.2 The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2.The claim is denied. I am unaware of what debt the claimant refers to. I have requested information pertaining to the claimants claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond. 3.The claim is denied the Claimant has not served a Notice of Assignment pursuant to the law of property act 1925 and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and © show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 5. On the alternative, ias 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. 6. 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. my personal details regarding the particulars of claim. 1) the agreement with TalkTalk was for TalkTalk TV was not upheld on their side as the service did not go live on the agreed start date, when the service did begin it was insufficient for purpose i.e. a TV service that was unwatchable from both from an internet speed and quality of equipment perspective (low visual quality TV box) cancellation was within 14 days of the start date. 2) The service was cancelled by myself not terminated (the implication of the particular of claim is that this was TalkTalk's decision), a letter dated 27/04/15 was received accepting cancellation of the TV service with a pre-addressed equipment returns package and all TalkTalk property was returned on the 29/04/15 as printed on the post office receipt. This was the last contact I had with TalkTalk. 3) I have received no Notice of assignment. 4) I have had no contact with TalkTalk since receipt of letter dated 27/04/15. (the letter and receipt were attached in the original post.) Regards Dave

Thanks again guys, i'm having a read through some of the defences now on the case dismissed forum (after popping my thread in search ). Sorry for needing spoon-feeding through the process; all new to me. I have the defence date set in my phone diary

That's the bit i could do with some help with too please. I'm not really sure what to put in it or how to start. I've not had any dealings with law or courts before.

Thanks again. I have sent off the CPR 31.14 today and retained proof of postage, is it now a bit of a waiting game or is there a next step to move onto?

brilliant, I've filled in mcol as advised and will get 31:14 sent off recorded in the morning. thanks for your help

Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio 1 LTD Date of issue – 12 sep 2017 What is the claim for – 1) the defendant entered into an agreement with TalkTalk telecom limited under account ref* (the agreement). 2) the defendant failed to maintain the required payments and the service was terminated. 3) the agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 07/12/2016 and notice given to the defendant. 4) despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of £421.27 remains due and outstanding. And the claimant claims a) the said sum of £421.27 b) interest pursuant to s69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.092, but limited to one year, being £25.67 c) costs What is the value of the claim? 531.94 Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? broadband, TV services When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? go live date was 03/03/15 Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Assigned Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? no Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? no Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? no Why did you cease payments? 1st month was paid. Contract was cancelled within first month of service as there many problems and the service didn't go live as stated, when it did there were still numerous problems, TalkTalk requested return of their property on 27 Apr 2015 and have not heard from them since. That is until Lowell's started sending letters both to mine and my ex's addresses. I moved on 31 Oct 15 to a new property. What was the date of your last payment? circa April may 15, I will have to check Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? not to my knowledge Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management planicon? no Hi there, as the title implies, I have received a claim form from Lowell's, I hope you can give me advice, I have not done anything as yet but realise I need to respond to the claim to avoid a judgement against me. Any advice on how to defend would be fantastic. cheers Dave