You had me panicking then lol. I had to check, but phew!!!!!!!!!! Defence submitted to court in good time!

Good. Keep on top of the shysters.

Not a peep since I submitted my defence on 8 Aug. Not even a "we're disappointed" ... nothng ......

Sigma are unaware what happens if a defence is entered in response....well they are aware its costs money to proceed but is it worth it on debt that they have paid peanuts for and are just chancing thie luck on issuing a Summons.

This stolen unashamedly from CitizenB – it certainly applies to Sigma, in my view.

In Barton Henderson Rasen v Merrett [1993] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 540 Saville J said that it is an abuse of the

court’s process to issue proceedings with no intention of taking the case any further. In

contentious matters the courts exist for the purpose of determining claims. Therefore, starting

a claim with no intention of pursuing it is not using the court’s processes for the purposes

for which they were designed. ‘Parking’ proceedings in an attempt to achieve a settlement

with other defendants justified striking out with indemnity costs in Sodeca SA v NE Investments

Inc. [2002] EWHC 1700 (QB), LTL 27/8/2002.

Yes DB or otherwise chancing their luck that no defence will be submitted...perfect quotation for the basis of a SO.

Regards

Andy

I take it that this silence might be deafening then?

That it is not usual for the response, post defence to take so long (even after their kind offer of a settlement plan)?

‘Parking’ proceedings in an attempt to achieve a settlement

with other defendants justified striking out with indemnity costs in Sodeca SA v NE Investments

Inc. [2002] EWHC 1700 (QB), LTL 27/8/2002

See above!

‘Parking’ proceedings in an attempt to achieve a settlement

with other defendants justified striking out with indemnity costs in Sodeca SA v NE Investments

Inc. [2002] EWHC 1700 (QB), LTL 27/8/2002

 

See above!

I think I understand Donkey.

What is the normal time scale between submitting defence and hearing something back? Is a month reason enough to believe they are parking?

Forgive me if I am asking ridiculous questions to which the answers are obvious.

My partner thought the delay might be due to the big pile they had on the desk.

They have 28 days to inform the court that they wish to proceed, at which point AQs will be issued. Failure to respond means the claim is automatically stayed, but the claimant can apply to have the stay lifted at a future date.

What Sigma appear to be doing is chucking out claim forms like confetti as a debt collection tool, which could be proven to be an abuse of process IF they do not litigate further on any contested claims. This would be prima facie evidence for use in a strike out application, based on the above para, as Andy says.

Worth a complaint to the OFT and the SRA.

Yous see as a newbie to the court world, what concerns me about complaints is as soon as they get wind of it, they persue the claim just to save getting a ticking off and a potential fine.

Maybe, but I think even the number of stayed cases on this forum alone is enough to prove a modus operandi.

but the claimant can apply to have the stay lifted at a future date.

Ooh Donkey do they have to pay for the application to have the stay lifted - please say yes!!!

I for one will not be making an application to strike out. As has been said on previous threads the longer they leave their stay it must give us an advantageous point with the Judge.

This received on Cosalt's thread from Skemdosser

Hi all been meaning to get on here the past couple of days-I have just received a N279 Notice of Discontinuance from HL. Got a wasted costs application to think about now...

My my, what do they have up their sleeve I wonder!!

HH

They’re crumbling...

As I said ages ago, their modus operandi is a simple case of economics. For every one person who comes on CAG, and defends, there are probably 99 who pay up or get a CCJ. CAG is but a flea bite on their arse, sadly.

And yes, they would have to apply via N244 to lift the stay, and pay a fee,

Can i just give all sigma M&S peeps a shout ...and all those who recd letter addressed to the wrong person (albeit with the correct acct details !).

PLEASE check your credit record with the agencies ( or a least callcredit - try noodle for a free account), as Sigma have recorded under "known by another name/alias", the name of the lady they addressed my orig letters too ... (noted they didn't get the partial claim papers name wrong though !)

Anyhoo, I can only assume they've done this with everyone who suffered their "system error", even though its a fault from their end ... and I assume the lady whom recd her letter addressed to me, has her recorded alias as my name ... what a mess !!

Anyhoo, you may want to have a check and raise a query withthem .... I've done this, waiting for them to get back to me.

There are a few other errors in my record, whether this is just Callcredit being carp or what I dont' know, but I've raised 4 errors in total ... so make sure you have a thorough read and spot any probs !!!

Here's the link to join ... https://www.noddle.co.uk/

Or try the normal sources/free trial periods ...

Thought this was worth a heads up to everyone ...

Abs x

My credit file did show up this other person's name, when I disputed this with Noddle saying this person does not live there, Sigma amended it to show my name including my middle name - never used it in anything. This was in the bit where it says "also known as/alias". Statute barred this year so Sigma:lol: