Hi Martel, glad you got the disclosure list off - one less thing to worry about! I'm sure you will get plenty of good advice from the people on here if you need it. best wishes, Magda

Quote Monty2007:- "I do not present myself as a lawyer, merely someone who was getting stuffed by the banks/DCA's and then fought back. Similar to the majority on here." Exactly. Most of us on here would have CCJs coming out of our ears if we didn't fight back, and although we may not be lawyers, surprisingly, we often have a reasonable amount of success. Magda

Hi AC, nice to hear from you - hope you are well! Magda

No problem - sometimes claimants list all of the corespondence separately and pleadings common to both parties, but you don't need to do that, just the heading is enough - you really only need to list other docs, such as a reconstituted credit agreement for example that you might have received, that kind of thing. If you need any more help, let me know. Magda

Looking at your threads Rhodium, just wondering if you actually work for a bank or DCA? I have seen a number of threads on here where people have won their case due to a faulty DN - Rankine I believe was concerned with such a small sum (de minimis) and the issues raised were considered de minimis, so that the judge did not consider the arguments relevant/valid. Magda

Hi Martel, you can download an N265 Online and type it up, then print off. You will need to do a copy as I don't think you can save it to the computer. On the front of the N265 you need tick the box for Defendant. Beneath this, enter the date of the court order, ordering parties to make disclosure. Then tick the box "I did not search for documents: tick - pre dating the cause of action. tick - located elsewhere other than: in the custody and control of the defendant. tick - in categories other than : those relevant to the issues. On next page: I did not search for the following: tick - documents created before: the cause of action documents contained on or created by the - tick: claimant You don't really need to tick anything else. leave the rest blank. sign and date at the bottom of this page. Next page: I have control of the documents numbered and listed here. I do not object ot you inspecting them/producing copies. enter: please see attached list. I have control of the documents numbered and listed here, but I object to you inspecting them: Either leave blank, or if a solicitor was involved you can enter: correspondence notes momoranda between solicitor and client being privileged from production. I object to you inspecting these documents because: They are subject to legal professional privilege. (You may or may not need to enter the above, depending on whether a solicitor was ever involved in this particular case) I have had the documents numbered and listed below, but they are no longer in my control: enter: The originals of those documents retained as copies. Then you just need to do the list you mentioned above: (type this on a blank sheet of paper and attach to N265) Defendants List of Documents: 1. Pleadings common to both parties 2. Correspondence common to both parties. AMEX Credit card Account (Martel, think it's a credit card is it, without checking): These may include the following, for example, depending on what you have actually received in this case: 3. Claimants accounting statement in relation to the Defendant's account. 4. Caimant's case history in relation to the Defendant's account. 5. Copy credit agreement. 6. Copies of Account statements from xxxxx to xxxxxxx (enter dates as appropriate if this applies) 7. Copy of Notice of Assignement or representation of notice of assignment (depending on whether you have received this document) 8. Sale and purchase agreement covering the Assignment of this account . 9. representation (or copy) of DN. The above is just an idea of the kind of things you need to mention, depending on what you have actually received, so you can amend this to suit. That should pretty much cover it. I would get it off as soon as possible, as it's important you do this. Hope this helps, if it doesn't make sense, give me a shout. Magda

Hi Martel, yes, I have done a disclosure list before so will have a look at your thread later and see if I can help you sort yours out. It's very straightforward, so won't take you long to do. Best wishes, Magda

The trouble with Link is that they never seem to learn - they are certainly gluttons for punishment. Here's hoping you beat them into submission. Magda

Hi Pumpytums, they are unbelievable aren't they! The four claims I was defending didn't actually get as far as an actual trial, although I was in court with them a few times when they tried to get the various claims reinstated, and succeeded on two of them. They then dropped the claims before they ever actually got to trial and discontinued saying it wasn't economical to pursue it. Their other claims were struck out. This is after causing me no end of hassle attending hearings. RE: costs - I did submit costs, and the Judge, on one particular occasion, (during a hearing Link had requested to reinstate their claim) said that he could see I had put a lot of work into preparing for the hearing (I asked for £160, which was fair) but he was going to award me £45. I was really annoyed and asked him if that was a set amount that they paid to everyone, as they did not appear to go beyond this amount. He said "No, but it's what I'm giving you." On another occasion I submitted a schedule of costs to the court for two of the other claims, and again, was awarded £45 (must be the standard rate at my court!) except on this occasion the £45 was for both claims combined, so around £22.50 for each one. Also, Link did not pay up. Here's hoping you have better luck where costs are concerned. I bet Link won't be able to produce the DN as they don't ever seem to have the paperwork that they should. Hope it all goes well for you, best wishes, Magda:)

Hi Martel, see you're still trying to get ready for the SJ Hearing. I wish I could help more - the only knowledge I have on overdrafts, I have already passed on. Perhaps Andy will look in again shortly or someone else with knowledge on OD's. There is a lot of useful info re: credit cards and loans to be found, but unfortunately O/ds are that much more difficult to defend, as you know. I hope you get the help you need fairly soon, if not, perhaps try one of the site team again, see if they can offer any assistance. I know there are a lot of unlawful charges on the account, so pursuing the s140 avenue seems to make sense as well as the other issues which hopefully you can raise also. Best wishes, Magda

Hi MBNAslayer, I would do a SAR, it won't do any harm - as they have now issued a Default Notice you might be as well to get one off. regards, Magda

Never a truer word spoken! The new government certainly won't be doing anything that benefits any of us - as you say, a lot of people don't remember, or choose not to remember, the last conservative government - now they really did break this country. Magda

That's strange, I clicked on a link to "Egg credit agreement, what do I think is wrong with them, and ended up on your actual thread for some reason - strange... Anyway, I can see now that you have had a letter stating that proceedings actually have been issued, rather than will be issued, so it is possible that they have gone that step further. Magda

Brian Carter are always sending these letters out, I've had quite a few and so have other people I know of, and they don't tend to result in a court claim - it's designed to intimidate you into making a payment. I wouldn't worry too much about it at all. There is a letter around somewhere on the forum that can be used in response - I've used it a few times and BC have then backed down completely. I will have a look later and post it up if I come across it. Magda

Yes, that's quite a bit then isn't it? something to keep on the back burner anyway. glad to see Andy is helping you! Magda

Hi Martel, meant to ask you, did you ever work out how much the 'unlawful' charges + interest amounted to? I know things changed following the Supreme court ruling, but you could still go down the unfair route with it and I believe there are still ways to claim using the new amended POC that have been posted up on some sites - not sure if there are any on here or not? Magda

It beggars belief doesn't it, absolutely crazy - glad you are recording it all though, the DCAs are in for a shock one of these days:D Magda

Hi Martel, how are things going with you? Magda

Hi, yes, they can merge them into one claim. However, there may be a lot of unfair charges/interest included in those amounts which might be worth looking at as this can make a huge difference to how much you owe. Magda

Hope it does the trick Martel! Glad it's all done now - one less thing to worry about:) Magda

Hi Clearhope, how much of the debt is for the loan, and how much for the overdraft? I take it they combined the two into a single claim? Magda

Hi Martel, really not sure about the 14 days: whether or not it can include bank holidays for example - obviously, with a DN it can't. Not sure if the TN is the same though - might be worth seeing if Andy/Car are around to answer that one, although I think Andy is unavailable now isn't he? Best wishes, Magda

Hi Martel, I know with a DN it doesn't include bank holidays, weekends etc, but not sure with a TN, - will try to find out for you and will post something up if I can (if you haven't already found out the answer elsewhere). How is the defence coming along - hope it's all starting to come together. regards, Magda

Hi Martel, I see Andy has answered your query, so that's ok. Glad you are getting the benefit of his wisdom and hopefully you'll have your amended defence sorted now in time to go off on Monday. regards, Magda PS: didn't want to 'butt in' earlier as thought I would give Andy time to reply, as he has a lot of experience dealing with this kind of thing. Glad you are getting on well with it all!

Hi Seriously fed up, I did think the loan would be enforceable and advised the person concerned to carry on paying that one, although at a reduced amount as she has been paying more than she can really afford. Re: the other two, there were t&c's with them, but as you say the cards seem to be a bit less clear cut and they might have a difficult time enforcing those. I will post up the t&c's so that the whole 'agreement' is there for scrutiny and would appreciate your comments on them. One thing though, the t&c's are not very clear, and even with the actual documents in front of me, are hard to read, so legibility might be an issue, something else perhaps to use against m&s. Many thanks for your help, Magda