Its the N157 you appear to have not received...look at post #157 (coincidentally) of the following thread and click the download pdf...thats what your looking for.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?433873-Everlasting-Boilers-County-court-letter/page8&highlight=Notice+of+Allocation

Righto thanks for that Andyorch. Hope I haven't missed out on anything crucial. I'll get onto it on Monday morning.

I've spoken to the court and it seems I haven't missed anything.

It was only looked at by a Judge on Friday and I should receive a letter today or tomorrow.

Apparently a Hearing has been set for 20th November and some Directions have been given, which I will know about when I see the letter.

Wonder if this is the one that had insufficient postage?

Right well the letter which was posted without any postage turns out to be from the court!

I'm going to type out what it says because my scanner is playing up and it raises serious questions for me.

Notice of Allocation to the Small Claims Track (Hearing) 2nd September 2017

District Judge ------

-has considered the statements of case and directions questionnaire filed and allocated the claim to the small claims track.

AND upon the court drawing the attention of the parties to the following warning:

The parties are reminded that Rule 1.1 of the Civil Procedure Rules [see http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/prodedure-rules/civil] provides that part of the court's overriding objective is to enforce compliance with rules, practice directions and orders.

Non -compliance with this order will be regarded as a very serious matter and will lead to sanctions being taken against the non-compliant party. These sanctions may, for example, include excluding documents or evidence at trial or striking out a party's claim, defence or counterclaim and/or the party in default having to pay the costs.

Unless the claimant does by 4.00 pm on the 23rd October 2017 pay to the court the trial fee of £170.00 or file a properly completed application (ie one which provides all the required information in the manner requested) for help with fees, then the claim will be struck out with effect from 23rd October 2017 without further order and unless the court orders otherwise, you will also be liable for the costs which the defendant has incurred.

The hearing of the claim will take place at --- on the 20th November 2017 at The County Court at -------------.

Then there is some generic stuff...........Followed by

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The claim is allocated to the small claims track.

The court must be informed immediately if the claim is settled.

The parties shall each send to the court and to each other by no later than 4.00 pm on 9th October 2017 writtenstatements [preferably typed] of all persons who are to give evidence at the trial. This includes the parties themselves as well as witnesses.

By 4.00 pm on 9th October 2017 the claimant must send to the court and the defendant copies of all the documents he intends to rely upon at the final hearing. These must be in a bundle with each page clearly numbered. The claimant MUST bring the originals of these documents to the final hearing.

By 4.00 pm on 9th October 2017 the claimant must send to the court and to the defendant copies of all the documents he intends to rely upon at the final hearing. These must be in a bundle with each page clearly numbered. The defendant MUST bring the originals of these documents to the final hearing.

Date 11th July 2017

The first question I have is whether it's usual for Lowells not to have to pay a fee until after they've had a chance to see what my case looks like.

The date at the top of the order is 2nd September 2017 and at the end it's dated 11th July 2017??

The order was posted without paying any postage and if I hadn't paid the fee I wouldn't have received it all:!:. This seems very sloppy. Do you reckon it's worth checking if it's genuine?

oops too late to edit the order but I just noticed that those last 2 paras are the same. The second one should read:

By 4.00 pm on 9th October 2017 the defendant must send to the court and to the claimant copies of all the documents he intends to rely upon at the final hearing.

so witness statement time

So only the following for you to concentrate on Patma

The parties shall each send to the court and to each other by no later than 4.00 pm on 9th October 2017 written witness statements [preferably typed] of all persons who are to give evidence at the trial. This includes the parties themselves as well as witnesses.

By 4.00 pm on 9th October 2017 the claimant must send to the court and the defendant copies of all the documents he intends to rely upon at the final hearing. These must be in a bundle with each page clearly numbered. The claimant MUST bring the originals of these documents to the final hearing.

I've started getting my head around the witness statement and have been trying to find some similar ones in other threads, but so far haven't found anything that particularly matches.

I'm thinking the main points are these:

Point 1 in POC states "The Defendant entered into a Consumer Credit Act Act 1974 regulated agreement with Lloyds (Credit Card) under account reference ----------

Well, although I have in the past had financial dealings with Lloyds,

I have never entered into a credit card agreement with them and The account number quoted is not a credit card number.

When I first received a demand from Lowells in May 2016 I wrote to them requesting a true copy of the credit card agreement related to the account in question. I have a copy of that letter, together with proof of postage and proof of delivery.

I also have Lowell's reply in which they state: "The original creditor Lloyds Banking Group plc has now responded ,due to the age of the account the original creditor is unable to provide a copy of the agreement and statements, however we have attached a copy of the default notice."

In point of fact no default notice was included.

In this letter it is also stated that the original account dates from 2004 and the last 4 digits of the account number are ++++.

These four digits do not correspond with the last 4 digits of the alleged account number in the POC.

Could you cast an eye over the outline so far please Andy and team and tell me if I'm along the right lines so far and what else I should be including. Thanks.

Post your initial draft when your ready and we can take a look over it and advise...I have replied to your PM.

Andy

Thanks Andy, I'm working on it.

I've got started on my witness statement and would just like to know if I'm heading along the right lines so far.

I thought I'd lay out the law a bit next because on previous threads I've seen that it can make a difference.

I thought I'd go heavily on the fact that they've twice confirmed in writing that there's no paperwork,

they're in breach of the CCA by attempting to enforce the alleged debt.

If I get the ok so far I'll carry on along those lines and if I'm way off I'd really appreciate being pointed in the right direction.

Thanks so much for all the help and support from you all, Andy, DX and everyone.

HERE GOES SO FAR.......

1. I am the defendant in this claim and I make the following statement believing it to be true.

2. .I have in the past had a Lloyds credit card, but I have never entered into a Consumer Credit Act 1974 regulated agreement with Lloyds under the account reference quoted in the Particulars of Claim submitted by the claimant, nor have I ever applied for a credit card from Lloyds.

3..On 29th April 2016, I received a letter from Lowell Solicitors with the heading “Letter of Claim”. (See exhibit1) Until this time I had been unaware of any alleged claim by Lowells. On 6th May 2016, I wrote to Lowell Solicitors requesting a true copy of the credit agreement relating to the alleged account. (See exhibit 2) I enclosed a postal order in the sum of £1. I saved the proof of posting and proof of delivery (See exhibits 3 and 4) and awaited their response.

4. .On 25th Oct 2016, I received a response from Lowell Solicitors (See exhibit 5). In this letter Lowell Solicitors stated the following: “The original creditor Lloyds Banking Group PLC has now responded, due to the age of the account the original creditor is unable to provide a copy of the agreement and statements however we have attached the default notice for your attention”

5. In point of fact there was no default notice included.

6..The letter goes on to state that the alleged account was “taken out on 19th January 2004”. I dispute this as I took out no credit card agreements in 2004. They furthermore state that the alleged account was defaulted on 3rd November 2011.

Again this is disputed as I have no knowledge or recollection of such an event, nor has any evidence of such been provided.

They then give the last four digits of the alleged account number as

++++. I would like to direct the court’s attention to the fact that these last four digits do not correspond with the account number quoted in the claimant’s POC.

7..As Lowell Solicitors had admitted that they could not supply an agreement, they were then precluded from attempting to enforce the alleged agreement by the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and in particular Section 78 (6) which states “If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;”

8..I heard nothing further from Lowells until I received the Claim Form issued by The County Court Business Centre dated 3rd May 2017.

9. I was surprised and dismayed that Lowells had issued proceedings against me when they had already informed me the previous year that they could not supply a copy of a Consumer Credit Agreement, or any statements pertaining to the alleged debt.

Hopefully it will finish up something like the following.....you still have a time yet to submit patma and you may receive the claimants witness statement before the date and end up redrafting the whole statement...just so you are aware.

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?477490-Lowell-claimform-old-Creation-Finance-loan-debt/page4

Thanks for the great link Andy that's very helpful. I know there's plenty of time and things could well change, but I was starting to feel really stressed about the whole thing and thought if I get stuck in it will help. I think it has helped actually too.

I can't believe it but a letter has arrived from Lowells and says the following:

Dear Patma,

We refer to the hearing listed for November 20th 2017..

We are instructed to discontinue the above Claim and accordingly enclose a copy of the Notice of Discontinuance today filed at Court. Our client has taken this decision on a commercial basis without prejudice to it's position that the Claim was properly issued in respect of a legitimate debt.

The Notice of Discontinuance brings all legal proceedings to an end. Our client may contact you directly to discuss alternative ways forward.

We trust that this is satisfactory but do please contact us if you wish to discuss the matter further. If in any doubt over this letter or the enclosed Notice you can seek independent legal advice from a solicitor of your choice or your local Citizens Advice Bureau.

Yours Sincerely,

Lowell Solicitors

Along with the letter is a Form N279 Notice of Discontinuance. there's a scrawled signature and in the box for Position or office held it says COMPLEX LITIGATION ADMIN

I've called the court but they haven't had a notification yet. The clerk said I should check again in a day or two.

If they have genuinely discontinued it's got to be down to the brilliant CAG defence I submitted and all the great advice. I'm trying hard to keep feet on the ground but I keep breaking into and:cheer2:

yep you've won.

dx

If it's really over then it's down to all the help and expertise here on CAG. Huge thanks DX, Andy and everyone here. First instalment of donation already made btw.

Delighted for you Patma...good news.

Thread title amended to reflect the outcome.

Regards

Andy

I'm wondering whether it's worth making a complaint to the FSA or whoever about Lowells conduct in issuing a claim when they'd already admitted to not having paperwork both before and after issuing the claim. They cause so much distress to people and shouldn't just get away with it.

If they were an individual not a company you could apply to have them declared vexatious litigants. Wouldn't that be something LOL:madgrin:

not at this stage

happens 10'000 of time every day patma all across the country

800'000 speculative claimform are issued every year

85% are not contested

so no human ever sees or checks anything

rubberstamped default auto judgement.

Just a quick update.

I'm still waiting for the court to confirm that they've received the Notice of Discontinuation from Lowells.

I've called twice.

The first time I called I was asked to call back a couple of days later, but the second time I was told not to phone again because they were extremely busy and every time someone called to chase up something about their case it slowed them down and made things worse.

I've emailed now to request confirmation.

Don't know if this is typical of courts up and down the country or whether we're a particularly litigous lot here.

I wouldn't worry about checking with the court Patma...they wouldn't dare send you a NoD and not inform the court also

Ah thanks Andy, I've got carried away with distrusting Lowells and didn't think it through.