You should now have 28 days and not the 14, acknowledging online that you were to defend the claim in full extends the deadline bya further 14 days. Of course you should act quickly but it is also important that any questions you ask of Cabot are accurate and appropriate to your case, as they have a well earned reputation for taking the pi$$ when it comes to disclosure and will try to either get out of it completely, or will attempt to substitute any old tat or reproduction in response to your request if they think they can get away with it.

In the first instance you can make a CPR 31.14 request based on the Particulars of Claim (POC) this allows you to request any documentation mentioned or referred to in the POC "The claimant is the assignee of a debt from Egg Banking PLC, loan ref XXXXXX, Notice of Assignment having been given to the defendant in writting. Despite demand for payment, 14168.18 remains due. The claimant claims £14458.18 and interest under s.69 county courts Act 1984 and costs" You can also make a CPR 18 request for further information to obtain further information on the material facts of their claim. Are there any charges interest or PPI included in the amount claimed? Is the agreement enforceable has the account been assigned correctly Is the amount claimed accurate and so on and so forth the issue with s69 County Courts act interest is nonsense, they try this with every case and should be shot down immediately, The claimant is claiming interest for which they have no valid legal claim. It is stated in S69 County Courts Act (4) that “Interest in respect of a debt shall not be awarded under this section for a period during which, for whatever reason, interest on the debt already runs”. As they have not provided a copy of the agreement(s) and applicable terms and conditions, it cannot be certain that the T&C allow for interest to be applied after the termination of the account, you might want to include the following "The claimant have provided no evidence of any provision within the terms and conditions of either account which would allow such interest to be applied after the termination of either account. The claimant has no grounds to claim interest under s69 county court Act 1984 . Everything must be in writing, all proofs of posting and proofs of delivery retained, sign nothing!!!

At the end of the day you simply need to be seen as acting in the best interests of the estate and in a fair and even manner with all identified creditors. With all due respect, this really has gone on for long enough, if they had any sort of claim they would have made it and proven it on request, they have failed to do so. Who they going to enforce against? The deceased? I think not The executor? see above. send them your final word, as you have failed to verify your position etc, this matter is now closed etc and so forth cut them loose, they are trying it on

Thun, let's be clear on this. Writing letters asking them to reconsider is not going to alter anything, they have filed a claim, they are seeking a judgement against you. You have three options only at this point. Defend the whole amount Defend part of the amount Accept full liability you have stated that you wish to defend, then you should be using the process to build that defence. There are a number of avenues open to you. Are there charges or PPI added to the amount claimed? Is the amount claimed as a result of a consolodation of other debts Is the amount claimed correct? Is the agreement enforceable Are you actually liable for the debt. and ....you get the gist Making regular payments is not a defence, they would present it as nothing more than an acceptance of liability Any or all of the above could be used to form a defence, you need to look into their case and disect it building a defence out of each flaw in their arguments. It is not straightforward and requires some work on your part. read up on the threads I have posted, ask questions, but do not believe that this is a mistake or that they are somehow disallowed from seeking a judgement. So....the simple question is....do you defend.... or do you concede?

You are ating under two directly conflicting sets of obligations. 1. you are obliged to act in the best interests of the estate and ensure that only valid and lawful claims on the estate are honoured 2. you are obliged to verify whether a creditor has a legitimate claim against the estate, the CCA 1974 allows a simple solution to allow such a verification and indeed a timescale in which to do so. So by paying off this "creditor" to make them go away - would that be in the best interests of the estate? If they decided to bring a case against you personally it would fail, you will simply need to demonstrate that you have offered the alleged creditor every reasonable opportunity to verify their claim, they have to date failed to do so. I can appreciate how this dragging on is causing you confusion and would suggest you take advice on the matter. either they have a claim or they haven't and if they have, then they should be able to prove it.

if you look on the claim form, there should be a password/logon with which you can acknowledge the claim at Moneyclaim online https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/web/mcol/welcome - you will need to register and then logon and you can manage certain elements of your claim/defence from there

if you can do so, in the first instance you should be acknowledging the claim online, this will add another 14 days to the time allowed to defend making 33 in total

Have a look at the following post by PT, I know it's a little long but with good reason and it will give you a good overview of the process as laid out by PT and explains what each step requires you to do, it is not to be taken as a gospel guide to everything, just as a general advisory on the process. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?241827-Legal-Action-how-to-start-off.-IMPORTANT-IF-YOURE-BEING-SUED Template letters have been getting something of a bad press lately, for several reasons, firstly the DCAs look at forums like this and now virtually know in advance what letter is going to land on their doorstep, also many people are sending these letters without any editing and without fully understanding either the relevant rules they are using, or the reasons for requesting information/documents. Basically, in absence of any documentation, and with a vague claim you really need as much information from them as you can get which: a. proves that they have a right to bring the claim in the first place, this would and should include - assignments, agreements etc, b. proves that the Particulars of claim are correct, the agreement number, the amount claimed, the dates etc c. proves that they have followed the rules and processes. Letters which can be edited to suit your needs can be found below, please read through the threads before "lifting" the letters, you will find there are many others in the same boat as yourself http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?52239-RBS-Claim-CPR-Part-18-request http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?97124-New-strategy-v-Abbey-CPR-Part-18-Requests http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?287153-Aplins-claim-issued-urgent-help-needed-please You would need to send this directly to the claimants, or their "solicitors" or whatever lowlife is representing them, make sure you obtain proof of posting and proof of delivery, sign nothing

Thun1965 this is all down to following the procedures set out in law - this is what they will try to bamboozle you with and this is what you can beat them with. Try not to get too hung up on the fact that these w@nkers aren't playing "nice" and the rules aren't very clear. they need to lay out their claim in a certain manner and this is not it. CPR31.14 allows you to request copies of any documents as stated or referred to in the POC, and as you can see, they don't refer to any documents in their POC, so any CPR31.14 request would quite legally allow them to tell you to sord orff!!! their POC are rediculous and vague and show no real case - their behaviour is completely wrong and as annoying this might be, these are the rules of the game you now find yourself playing. so what we need to do is ask them to provide you with further information on their claim and this is where CPR 18 comes in, which allows you to ask for further information. http://www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/parts/part18.htm

Debbbbsy: Sending such a 31.14 request might be a little previous without knowing what is stated in the POC, since the 31.14 can only be used with regards to any documents mentioned in the POC. If the POC mentions no such documents, then they are under no obligations to fulfill your 31.14 request. Thun1964: can you please advise exactly what it says in the Particulars of Claim (POC) on the claim form, from there it will help to decide what step you should be taking next

I would look to see if the garage have a case to answer as stated above. Unless your daughter signed some kind of undertaking or disclaimer, allowing them to sign the vehicle over to this gentleman. they would certainly need to explain their position

As effectively he was legally allowed to take possession, and the car is in effect in his name, then it would be down to your daughter to prove ownership bit of an odd one by all accounts, the garage should have their hand smacked for allowing a third party to take ownership/possession of the vehicle as his name on the V5 would have an effect on future resale values (no of owners) but I would presume your daughter was so keen to take possession of the vehicle that it "seemed like a good idea at the time"

You need to provide a little more information to enable folk to assist you. Who has provided you with a Capquest bill and what costs have been applied? Who told you the case was being struck out? - once a case is struck out - that's it - it cannot be easily resumed. Who sent you the letter saying it had been reinstated (and at an earlier date)? Just as an aside, Don't panic about paying this just yet, if you are genuinely unable to pay this then it should be relatively straightforward to apply to the courts for a redetermination to allow time to pay

I know it's slightly different but my G/F was initially contacted by Iqor and then directly by DWP for what they referred to as an "overpayment" unable to provide anything by way of evidence or explanation first Iqor and then DWP vanished after nothing more than a simple "prove it" letter, however my G/F did receive what I took to be a threat from the DWP advising her that if she was ever on benefits, then she might have her benefits tapped to claw this "overpayment" back. It seems that these govt departments simply make it up as they go along - so good luck with this one

creditor as defined in the Consumer Credit Act s169 means the person providing credit under a consumer credit agreement or the person to whom his rights and duties under the agreement have passed by assignment or operation of law, and in relation to a prospective consumer credit agreement, includes the prospective creditor; only the creditor may bring a court action, if they are not the creditor, then yes, they would need to be joined by the creditor

At the end of the day what you do and how you do it are solely down to you, only you can decide. Sillygirl the OP stated in post #1 that they were living with their parents If you did inform your parents it would remove one of your concerns from the equation and reduce any shock caused if the police turn up at your door, of course if the police don't turn up then you may have caused them concern for nothing. as I said, it's really down to you. none of us know your parents or how they will/wont react, although as a parent myself I would always side with my own, and would rather be forewarned regardless of the issue - but that's me and not your parents. These certainly don't seem like the actions of what I would call "a friend" however, your main concern at this time should be yourself. you have not been charged with anything, you do not have to prove your innocence to anyone, this person needs to put up or shut up, either involve the police and have "their case" investigated, or stop making accusations of this nature, until they do this they appear to be as Sillygirl says rather spiteful.

There isn't really much you can do until someone (ie the police) are involved, at the moment, only your friend is accusing you, there is nothing official and it's really quite problematic to deny something to the police when they aren't actually involved if you haven't already informed your parents I would suggest you do so as soon as possible and remember it is down to your friend to prove that you took the money. you have nothing to be scared of if you weren't involved Where were you when the card was lost? there is a good chance if you were say, shopping, that the police will be able to check cctv to see if you used the atm where the monies were withdrawn, or not, as the case may be.

Just to clarify, the CPR 31.14 is to request documents referred to or mentioned by the claimant in their POC, since they haven't mentioned any of the important documents, then the CPR31.14 is not the way to go as they would be well within their rights to say "no" Since what you need at the moment, is clarification of the contents of their POC, then a part 18 request would seem more appropriate - the relevant information can be found here - have a good read http://www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/practice_directions/pd_part18.htm I appreciate that this seems a little long winded and perhaps counter productive and you are wondering why someone doesn't just tell you directly what it is you need to do. The purpose of forums like this isn't to do it for you, it's to assist you and guide you, so that you learn and understand what it is you need to do If this goes all the way, you need to understand what it is you need to do and why, quoting parrot fashion what you have been told on here will get you nowhere. The only way you know for certain that the advice you are being offered is to check it out and confirm it for yourself. Once you are clear in your head, you can make an informed choice over your next steps CPR31.14 is the wrong route for the reasons already stated.

My interpretation of this is under s.69 county courts act 1984 and costs. (4) Interest in respect of a debt shall not be awarded under this section for a period during which, for whatever reason, interest on the debt already runs. As mortgages normally have the interest applied up front and are applicable until the mortgage is redeemed or paid off, it would seem correct to assume that s69 (4) applies in your case as the interest stipulated in the agreement would still be applicable If the Terms and Conditions of the agreement you signed make no mention or allowance for the paying of s69 interest as per the claimants POC then it looks like they have no contractual right to apply interest either and since the statute that they are relying on actually states that they aren't allowed to apply S69 interest

When a CCJ is ordered it is normally for a set amount, there can be no variance of this amount by anyone other than the courts. so if the original amount was say £500, they would need to clarify on what authority the amount has been increased, they would also need toexplain to the courts why they have not attempted to enforce before now, although a CCJ is never statute barred, there have been many cases where a judge has simply said "too late" and ten years is certainly "too late" How much is it now? Do you have a copy of the original judgement? Did it mention anything about adding charges and or interest?

Sounds like a plan then, make sure you keep everything safe, just to make sure they don't forget

No mention of removing the defaults from your record, if you are happy with this then you would carry no liability for the account, so IMHO it looks like you are clear

And of course they have provided you with a copy of the agreement and the applicable Terms and Conditions which specifically allow an (at ther time of signing) an unidentified third party to arbitrarilly apply charges to the account? No? Didn't think so

did the original CCJ state that interest should be allowed after judgement?

at least it's nice to know that Cabot/Morgans have been spanked for costs for over 20k everyones a good one, even the little ones. And please try to remember folks (and that means YOU!!!) IT'S ALL ABOUT THE CONSUMER IT'S ALL ABOUT DEFENDING ONESELF IT'S ALL ABOUT EMPOWERMENT Nothing to do with politics or oneupmanship. One more for the little people Can those that have the power to remove posts, please only do so when necessary and have the good grace to explain when they do? Otherwise it just looks childish