JFK On the T&Cs that they have supplied what does it state with regards to defaulting and interest applied until judgment? Regards Andy

The process is as my post 2 Summons (5 +14) Acknowledge , state plea (if defending +14) = 33 During the next 14 days you prepare a defence. But on receipt and if your intention is to defend, request information CPR/CCA/DSAR(optional) which ever applicable to your defence. Compile you defence and submit on the 28 day by 4.00pm Simples !!!!! Andy PS AoS and Defence can be done on line all requests for info using templates via rec del Print name

Excellent Doc Regards Andy

Process is the same and if your claim is issued from CCBC (Northampton) then its a must to complete on line. Yes the DSAR would exceed your defence time but would balance out as the process proceeds.You could request the statements vis a vis CPR but invariably they hardly ever comply.It is possible to request them via the CPR 18 if worded correctly. Have a read of the stickies above the legal forum (shaded) and also the legal successes this will give you a taste of whats involved and what to expect. Regards Andy

Well ring them back and tell them the DCA wont tell you the date and are playing silly beggers surely the Court knows the date and as a duty to inform you by letter of any hearing.Make sure you attend that hearing come what may. Debt Factsheets - Charging orders in the county court DMBM667360 - CCP: Charging orders: Interim charging orders Andy

As far as that WS is concerned it could have been the cleaner that drafted it:roll:

Leave it has is, for now and we can tinker until Thursday. I assume you have never received Notice of Arrears for this debt also look up Notice of Arrears CCA2006 amendments, another reason as to why they cant enforce. Andy

Get to know the cases Waksman http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?272988-Waksman-ruling-and-how-to-defend-against-it and Carey inside out and backwards:-)

Getting there TWW (remove your Account Number point 2) Andy

The secret to a good defence- Attention- Validity- Merit and getting your point across with in the first paragraph:-) Most Caggers dont realise that a defence is not viewed by a DJ until AQ and AQ is not actioned until the Claimant has responded to said defence. So in essence the point of the defence is to refute the Claimants plea, cast doubt and uncertainty and basically make them run for the hills. You are hoping to achieve by way of a good defence that they dont respond within the alloted time and that the claim is stayed.This gives you breathing space and allows for you next course of action, apply pressure and use mind games to convince them their effort is really not worth the cause. Keep it simple keep it fact get the DJ on your side. Andy

I lost interest after from point 4 on wards TWW but the opening is very well wrote. Perhaps the remainder should be reserved for later argument or skeleton.Irrespective of how we view most DJs they dont like being patronised or told case law.I think you only need an intro as you have and then a little expansion as to why reconstituted are not acceptable as enforcement.Reiterate the above i have posted your own DJ words Originals must be produced in Court. Regards Andy

Post it up:-)

Hi Worried and welcome to Cag Have you received the notification from The Land Registry and pack to object to the ICO? Have you received anything from your local CC with regards to an hearing for the ICO? Regards Andy

Looking at their P.O.C they only refer to " An Agreement " no DN or assignment who's name is on the Summons as Claimant? CPR 31.14 would be the way to go normally.But I see you used CPR 18. see here :- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?255329-CPR-part-18-vs-CPR-31.14-Confused-well-read-here With regards to the extension (subject to time constraints) see here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?283443-Embarrassed-Defences-and-the-problems-with-them. Any request for extension can not be denied and if ignored can be advantageous to your case. Andy

And if they do try redetermination same goes to the Court you can only pay what you can afford:roll:

Regards Andy

No thats Notice of assignment a transfer of the debt to the new owner " Marlin" Clydesdale will have off loaded as it wouldn't be in their interest to pursue litigation on a OD comprising of unfair charges. No paperwork and the amount comprises of fictional charges created by the OC. Marlin are probably not aware its an OD either and have bought a lemon. Seek extension on your defence and resend the correct CPR Regards Andy

Hi RtR long time no chat. Return it and write across " No change in circumstances will continue to pay the agreed mthly payment set by the Court ":roll: Regards Andy

Hi Ben One reason for no response is that you didnt head your CPR request with the correct CPR number. Secondly as this is an OD there will be no paperwork to disclose anyway apart from a recall note (like a Default Note but different heading) check your files and look for :- Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98 (1) of the CCA 1974. That is your OD recall notice. Regards Andy

Andy

TTS the above clarification is my opinion only, should you wish to settle beforehand is your choice, you must remember the only negative point of pursuing is the costs element. Lets see what transpires. Regards Andy

Practice Direction 27 - Small Claims Track

TTS you can agree a TO the day of the trial and still settle this amicably.That trial date may be next year at the rate the CCs are performing at the moment. If you file a holding defence in the event of nothing furnished and they still dont respond after 28 days then the claim is stayed.If they do respond then there will be guidance from the Court and an AQ will be sent to you and the case transfered to your local CC. Within the AQ you can again request documents pertaining to their claim if they fail to supply again more than likely the DJ will strike out the Claimants claim. There is a process to playing this game dont fold at the first hurdle. Andy

Hi and welcome to Cag Costs on the small claims track 27.14 (1) This rule applies to any case which has been allocated to the small claims track unless paragraph (5) applies. (Rules 44.9 and 44.11 make provision in relation to orders for costs made before a claim has been allocated to the small claims track) (2) The court may not order a party to pay a sum to another party in respect of that other party’s costs, fees and expenses, including those relating to an appeal, except – (a) the fixed costs attributable to issuing the claim which – (i) are payable under Part 45; or (ii) would be payable under Part 45 if that Part applied to the claim; (b) in proceedings which included a claim for an injunction or an order for specific performance a sum not exceeding the amount specified in Practice Direction 27 for legal advice and assistance relating to that claim; © any court fees paid by that other party; (d) expenses which a party or witness has reasonably incurred in travelling to and from a hearing or in staying away from home for the purposes of attending a hearing; (e) a sum not exceeding the amount specified in Practice Direction 27 for any loss of earnings or loss of leave by a party or witness due to attending a hearing or to staying away from home for the purposes of attending a hearing; (f) a sum not exceeding the amount specified in Practice Direction 27 for an expert’s fees; (g) such further costs as the court may assess by the summary procedure and order to be paid by a party who has behaved unreasonably; and (h) the Stage 1 and, where relevant, the Stage 2 fixed costs in rule 45.29 where – (i) the claim was within the scope of the Pre-Action Protocol for Low Value Personal Injury Claims in Road Traffic Accidents (‘the RTA Protocol’); (ii) the claimant reasonably believed that the claim was valued at more than the small claims track limit in accordance with paragraph 4.1(4) of the RTA Protocol; and (iii) the defendant admitted liability under the process set out in the RTA Protocol; but (iv) the defendant did not pay those Stage 1 and, where relevant, Stage 2 fixed costs. (3) A party’s rejection of an offer in settlement will not of itself constitute unreasonable behaviour under paragraph (2)(g) but the court may take it into consideration when it is applying the unreasonableness test. (4) The limits on costs imposed by this rule also apply to any fee or reward for acting on behalf of a party to the proceedings charged by a person exercising a right of audience by virtue of an order under section 11 of the Courts and Legal Services Act 19901 (a lay representative). (5) Where – (a) the financial value of a claim exceeds the limit for the small claims track; but (b) the claim has been allocated to the small claims track in accordance with rule 26.7(3), the small claims track costs provisions will apply unless the parties agree that the fast track costs provisions are to apply. (6) Where the parties agree that the fast track costs provisions are to apply, the claim and any appeal will be treated for the purposes of costs as if it were proceeding on the fast track except that trial costs will be in the discretion of the court and will not exceed the amount set out for the value of claim in rule 46.2 (amount of fast track trial costs). Regards Andy

Morning TWW Having had chance to do a quick scan through your thread I picked up on the above.Says it all really have you retained this order? Regards Andy