It doesn't specify, it just says: 'the respondent is ordered to lodge a completed response form on the basis of the information contained in her recent letter to the court'.

Even if the fleecer can produce the original credit agreement, surely the debt purchase agreement (which will no doubt reveal the debt was purchased for peanuts) and the breakdown of the sum claimed will show that a load of unlawful charges have been added and these charges will subsequently be written off by the Sheriff?

ok so we need to p'haps adjust the response form

we'll do that tonight

dx

Great, thanks

please pop up your recent letter to the court

lets make sure you've not shot yourself in the foot

dx

Dear Sir/Madam

Case Ref: xxxxxxxxx

I refer to the above case number.

I received a summary procedure notification regarding the above.

The amount the claimant stated on this was £737.00.

Included in this was a time to pay application.

I received no advice or explanation of procedure, nor did I receive any explanation or breakdown of the amount being requested.

Given that the amount being claimed is vastly more than the original maximum credit limit, I can only assume that fees and/or charges have been added.

Unsure how to proceed and rather intimidated at being presented with court documents

I filled out the time to pay application and returned it to the Sheriff Court in the hope that this would prevent the case from going to court.

I have now received a letter from Shoosmiths LLP Solicitors acting on behalf of the claimant, informing me that the tine to pay application has been rejected

There is no explanation given as to why the offer of repayment request has been rejected, other than a rather vague comment regarding my ability to keep up the payments going forward. (I would not have offered an amount I could not afford).

More concerning,

the amount is now being stated as £945.90.

There is no explanation of why the amount has drastically increased and differs from the figure submitted to the court on the Simple Procedure document.

My understanding is as follows:

1.4(2)

The Sheriff must ensure that parties who are not represented, or parties who do not have legal representation, are not unfairly disadvantaged...

1.6(9)

When appearing against a party who is not represented, or who is not legally represented, representatives must not take advantage of the party.

1.6(10)

When appearing against a party who is not represented, or who is not legally represented, representatives must help the court to allow that person to argue a case fairly.

The claimant is a well-known debt buyer or debt collection agency that purchases large debt portfolio en-masse, at a discounted pound to pence value.

These debt portfolios were placed for sale because the original creditor neither wished to litigate against the customer themselves due to bad publicity, or are typically related to issues of enforceability under the CCA, or are a result of inflated sums due to penalties and/or interest levied upon them that are unfair and unlawful under FCA regulations.

As per section 189 of the CCA 1974, the assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement, ensuring that the essential customer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.

The Respondent puts the Claimant to strict proof to provide copies of all documentation they must produce under Scottish law that confirms they are able, legally, to enforce and bring this claim to court.

The claimant is also 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 the 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.

The court will be aware that penalty charges and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009).

I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.

In reference to the above points, I

would like to make the Sheriff aware that I am representing myself,

I am at a loss on how to respond to such a claim, and would welcome any assistance the Sheriff can give me.

Thank you for taking the time to read this letter.

Yours faithfully

xxxxxxxx

Formatting may have gone to pot a little but this is the letter I sent.

not too bad then well done

as post 19 then

no need to add or change anything.

you did send a cca request

My.date to attend is 3rd nov. If anything else happens in the meantime I will post an update.

did you send a cca request.....................

Sorry, yes.

brill

post 19 is perfect then

dx

FYI:

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?479254-Arrow-Shoos-simple-procedure-claim-Old-NewDay-Aqua-Credit-Card-Debt&p=5058295#post5058295

Hi again. I have resubmitted form 4a and am scheduled to attend court on Friday 3rd. I had hoped that shoosmiths may have dropped the action but no word on that so far. I just have a quick question - is there any possibility that shoosmiths may just not turn up to the court or is that wishful thinking?

yes ofcourse there is

and they've not supplied anything to back up their claim either

probably leave it upto a local rep to try and get the case sisted or paused for several weeks whilst they fake the paperwork

if you get a chance object to that.

stick to what you have said in form 4a when asked to speak.

It is admitted with regards to the respondent once having had banking facilities with the original creditor XXXX. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.

The Sheriff has granted 4 weeks for the claimant to produce the original credit agreement etc. If they can't then the case will be dismissed.

good job

did they turn up?

Yeah shoosmiths solicitor was there.

No documentation.

A number of cases were dismissed this morning for that reason.

Thanks for all your help with this,

very much appreciated.

Well, the plot thickens.

Two days after receiving a letter from the court confirming that the claimants must produce all relevant documentation by 1st December or the case will be dismissed without further notice,

I have received a letter from the claimant stating they are willing to accept a settlement figure and they will even allow me to pay in instalments!

The cynics amongst us may assume that the claimant does not have said documents.

begging letter

dx

Received a letter today notifying me that the claimant no longer wishes to pursue the case and they have filed an abandonment with the court.

I guess they didn't have the original credit agreement as they claimed.

hey 2nd one this week

scan the letter email it to the clerk [put your name and case number in the subject line]

give them a ring and check they are aware

I've an now aware of ONE claim whereby it was a ruse and it was shoos too,

was this abandoned ?

would be nice if you took the trouble to update CAG upon your thread...we helped you ...now help us...

many members helped you get help

CAG relies upon resolution to threads so others like you can find and read about how to solve their like issues...

dx