Hello - I have an update on this case that I'd like someone's opinion on please

Since my defence was posted to them in June I have heard nothing from either the court or claimant.

This morning I received a General Directions Order from the County Court. In September, a Shoosmiths trainee wrote to the court with the following order:

"The claimant seeks an order that:

1. Arrow Global Ltd be substituted as claimant in these proceedings

2. No order as to costs

On 31 March 2014, Brittanica Recoveries transferred all it's rights & liabilities in relation

to a number of defaulted loan agreements including this agreement to Arrow Global Ltd & others

Therefore in accordance with CPR 19.4 we invite the court to substitute the claimant"

A copy of the Notice of Assignment has been attached from May this year.

The court has given me 7 days to object to this.

Given that I still have received nothing with regards to original agreement or default notice,

does anyone have an idea what they're trying to pursue here?

Do I need to respond to reiterate that I'm still waiting for documents?

Greatly appreciate any comments.

Thanks.

Its just a change of claimants...you may now see some activity on the claim .... or perhaps not:wink:

Andy

Hah thanks Andy.

Hello. I wanted to add to this old thread as Shoosmiths have once again darkened my door almost 2 years to the date when I put my defence to the court. Quick summary - last time I acknowledged the debt to my recollection was at the start of this thread in November 2011. It was a loan to pay off a credit card. Following a defence submission to the court on 16th June, I heard from them for a change of claimants in 2014 but nothing else.

Yesterday I received an answer to my defence (text below) I’d be grateful to any comments or signpost to relevant reading particularly in respect of the fact that they are still maintaining that they provided a reconstituted agreement signed electronically and this is sufficient. Thank you

We note you have filed a defence to our clients claim, contending that our client is not entitled to the claimed balance.

 

You seek to defend the claim on the basis that:

 

You sent the Claimant a CCA request in accordance with s.77/78, requesting a true copy of the credit agreement along with any other documentation that the act requires. The claimant received the request on 3 May 2014

On 9 May 2014 the Claimant supplied you with reconstituted documentation but no true copies of the documents have been supplied to date

A CPR 31.14 and section 78 request were sent to us. We received the requests on 1 May 2014

On 2 May 2014 we wrote to you stating that we hope to have the requested documentation to you by 2 June 2014. As of 6 June 2014 neither Shoosmiths or the Claimant have provided you with the requested documentation

A note of assignment has been received from Brittanica to Arrow Global but no notice of assignment has ever been provided from the original creditor Egg. No Default Notice has been provided. No true copy of the original credit agreement has been provided

 

In response we set out our client’s position below.

 

It is noted you sent our client a request pursuant to sections 77/78 Consumer Credit Act 1974. You acknowledge in your defence that a response was provided on 9 May 2014

You have suggested true copies of documentation have not been provided to you. In response we enclose the following

* Agreement dated December 2006 signed electronically

* Terms and conditions

* Annual Egg Loan Statement

* Notice of assignment (Egg > Brittanica)

* Notice of Assignment (Brittanica > Arrow)

3. In your request made pursuant to CPR 31.14 you requested a copy of the agreement, a copy of the Notice of Assignment and a copy of the Default Notice. As detailed at point 3 above a copy of the Agreement and the Notices of Assignment are enclosed

 

As to your request for a copy of the Default Notice, the outstanding liability arises under a loan account and under section 87 consumer credit act 1974, service of a Default Notice is only ‘necessary before the creditor can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor of a regulated agreement….. a0 to terminate the agreement or b0 to demand earlier payment of any sum’

 

If you consider the enclosed agreement you will note that the Agreement is dated 6 December 2006. The sum as advanced under the loan and the terms or the loan state that the sum was to be repaid by way of 84 monthly instalments.

 

In view of the information set out above, the duration of the loan was a maximum of 84 months from 6 December 2006. This would have meant that the agreement was to to end on or around 6 December 2013. Therefore there was no actual requirement to either a) to terminate the agreement or b0 to demand earlier payment of any sum.

 

The monies were due in any event under the agreement and there was in fact no actual requirement to serve a default Notice on you. We therefore do not consider that the absence of a default notice has any impact on our client’s claim

 

4. Please refer to point 3 above

5. Please refer to points 3 and 4 above. Yu will note a Notice of Assignment has been enclosed

 

In view of the information set out above we do not consider you to have any prospects of successfully defending our client’s claim.

 

We therefore invite you to consider any proposals you may have to resolve this matter amicably at the stage and enclose an income and expenses form to be completed and returned to our offices within the next 14 days.

 

For the avoidance of any doubt should we not receive your completed income & expenditure for by 16 June we are instructed by our client to file an application for summary judgement to the court.

Claim Issued 23rd April 2014.

Do you recall the date of your last payment to this agreement ?

Andy

Payment to Egg I believe was 2008/9 - I'm trying to locate my paperwork from the loft to confirm. Last payment of any kind was a repayment plan arrangement made to Westcot in December 2011

Thank you LS

Many payments made to Wetcloths after Dec 2011?

Hi Andy, nope Nov 2011 was the last. Then I joined here and batted back their further attempts.

can we actually see your defence please

I believe you changed it from what andy advised 2 yrs ago.

std willy waving..instructed...??

Hi DX

Sure my defence submitted two years ago is below

*Edit* My original defence was slightly amended, but I changed it back to Andy's text in the final defence I submitted to the court

1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. 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 with regards to an amount due under an agreement. The Claimant/Solicitor has declined to disclose any original agreement or statements under s78 on which its claim relies upon.

 

3. I am unaware of any legal assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars.

 

On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Shoosmiths LLP Solicitors and Brittanica Recoveries/Arrow Global by way of a CPR 31.14 and a section 78 request. To date, a response has been received on 02/05/14 from Shoosmiths LLP which advised they could not comply with my timescale of 7 days, but intend to send me the 1. Agreement 2. Default Notice and 3. Assignment by 02/06/14. No reply has been forthcoming since then. Arrow Global have informed me that they have been assigned this account from Brittanica Recoveries and have replied to the section 78 request, however this agreement copy is a reconstituted document.

 

Therefore with the court’s permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

 

(b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for;

 

© show how the agreement was legally terminated to allow the claimant relief.

 

(d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

4. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5, it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

5. 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 crediticon Act 1974.

 

6. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

brill

I find their text quite funny actually.

dx

I personally would wait and do nothing and see if they do file an application to lift the stay and request summary judgment...but its your call..you have their disclosure of documents and therefore should be in a position to see if what they have disclosed is in fact valid...there still must be a default notice if you breached the agreement and did not maintain the 84 payments as per the agreement.

Andy

brill

I find their text quite funny actually.

 

 

dx

It's quite striking how your 'willy waving' comment seems after I've gone over all of their past correspondence at the weekend

I personally would wait and do nothing and see if they do file an application to lift the stay and request summary judgment...but its your call..you have their disclosure of documents and therefore should be in a position to see if what they have disclosed is in fact valid...there still must be a default notice if you breached the agreement and did not maintain the 84 payments as per the agreement.

 

Andy

Any idea at what point a default notice would be issued? They seem to be saying it's entirely irrelevant, but given the absence of both that and an original agreement, their argument seems a little weak to my eyes.

Thanks for the advice - I'll wait as you suggest and see if they progress forward.

It should state in their T&Cs of the agreement...credit cards are normally 3 missed payments...personal loans vary...may be one missed payment.....but irrespective they have to serve it to allow you the prescribed period to rectify any alleged breach.

Hi guys,

I've heard back from Shoosmiths finally so would appreciate your thoughts on next steps. They've made an application for summary judgement:

The claimant seeks an order that:

1. The stay be lifted

2. The defence be struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4 and/or the claimant be granted summary judgement pursuant to CPR 24.2 against the defendant because the defence discloses no reasonable grounds for defending the claim and/or he has no real prospect of successfully defending the claim and there is no real compelling reason why the case should be disposed of at trial; and

3. The defendant do pay the claimant's costs to be summarily assessed

-----------

Quick timeline of the case:

Last loan repayment they have recorded is March 2008.

The last token payment was December 2009.

I may have talked to them on the phone after that, but November 2011 was when I started this post and have been batting them back with your help

Last court defence was June 2014

Responding to your PM

If you would scan and redact a copy of the N244 and Witness statement and exhibits.....

Regards

Andy

follow upload

ONE multipage PDF only please!!

Thanks guys - have redacted the paperwork of names, addresses and reference numbers and attached in the one pdf file as requested.

Shoosmith Docs.pdf

so ye ole

we dont need to provide the default notice twaddle as the agreement has now run its course .

and they cant circumvent the need for a signed agreement either

re page 11 egg T&C's clause 1.1 'until we receive the signed agreement'

which they sent you for signing a few days after you signed on line.

andyorch if you look has already pointed to this in the numerous other EGG Loan claimform threads in this forum..

and i'd argue it is extremely unfair to issue a speculative claim in 2014 to halt the statute barred clock

then 4 yrs later issue a claim for summary judgement well after the time the debt would have become statute barred.

I would also be looking at claiming that 8 odd grand ppi back

Application made on the 7th Feb and you have yet to get conformation of the hearing from court.I will run through the above tomorrow with a clear head and post some comments......but quickly one point....

Agreement applied for 2006...online tick box as signature ...now read page 13 of your upload last paragraph...

Andy

 

and i'd argue it is extremely unfair to issue a speculative claim in 2014 to halt the statute barred clock

 

then 4 yrs later issue a claim for summary judgement well after the time the debt would have become statute barred.

I did wonder about the haphazard timing of their actions as well as their perpetual ignoring of the signed agreement. Thanks I've set aside some time to do more reading and will check out Andy's other Egg Loan comments

I would also be looking at claiming that 8 odd grand ppi back

I was under the misapprehension that I should avoid it as it could imply that I am acknowledging the debt, but I've just read a thread that's not the case. The last PPI payment I made was Jan 2007 - does timing matter on that?

no but when this is all done

that could be a pretty tidy sum to your pocket

dx

My weekend reading list has just expanded - I need to get a reply to the order in by Monday but I'll be spending a lot of time on the forums looking over this too. Thanks

but quickly one point....

 

Agreement applied for 2006...online tick box as signature ...now read page 13 of your upload last paragraph...

 

Andy

Oops indeed - blimey! Thanks Andy, appreciate that and look forward to your additional thoughts later