Dotty, I would seriously consider taking the Gazbo/John(Vicky) approach

When a person in litigation mentions a document in a statement of case, defence or a witness statement etc they 'disclose it' Any documents that have been disclosed can be relied upon in heir argument - but those not disclosed cannot be (except with permission) Once a document has been disclosed you may request to inspect it or, as long as you are willing to pay reasonable copying charges, to be sent a copy of it. **** have disclosed an agreement statement(s) Default Notice a Formal Demand As this claim was no doubt issued via the 'Bulk Centre' copies of these documents which would normally be attached were not, therefore you can request copies of them via a 'CPR31.14' request together with an agreed extension of time to submit your defence. In the template there is a list, just add or remove items as necessary. and lastly ........ relax ......... we've all been there and although it really isn't nice when it's happening to you, it's not worth getting stressed about - it's only money and there really are more important things in life ..... keep smiling

IMHO, I would wait until at least the CPR request was answered and then you would be able to compare the docs and then any discrepancies between the docs could be be used to rip them apart with CPR 18. Allow them to place their foot and pull the trigger before pointing and laughing There are so many different routes through this and the 'right way' is changing all the time As you know, my approach is usually quite aggressive and proactive, so i would be looking to get the CPR request in, get an extension for as long as possible 28 days would be great (as that would also allow time for a SAR response), submit an appropriate defence followed by a Strike Out or Summary Judgement application before allocation. With that route, by the end of that part of it you will know your case, their case and the thoughts of the DJ. At that point you will have either won by them discontinuing (but having submitted a defence made it harder for a 2nd bite later) won by being successful at your app hearing in the driving seat with an Order from the Court for the Claimant to do something or the claim will be Struck Out or you will have been hammered and that will give you the opportunity to re-group and either sort your case out or negotiate with less exposure to costs than had it gone to trial. all jmho though

Unfortunately the naf agreement sent in response to the S78 request *could* be rectified at any time ...... yes I know ..... grrrr One produced in response to a CPR request is, imho, something different as that is the one they intend to rely on.

They are fully aware of that already - well they should be as they sent it. Default Notices for some bizarre reason are never kept despite these being of such importance as without them they never had any rights to the repayment following a debtor breaching the contract and the creditor terminating it. So if the original DN is around and the recon DN they produce is not identical with reference to the mandatory points then that will cast massive doubts on their procedures and record keeping - which IMHO is the key point that LiP needs to prove......

Hi Popping in as requested by Elsa Advice is excellent already, all I would add is that as they have disclosed statements on their POC I would add those to the CPR request as well In these cases information is power and the more you can amass now the better position you will be in. I agree with Paul in that I would certainly not admit to signing an agreement however you may remember signing an application form .... Do you have the original Default Notice? just a yes or no will do as it you do it may be a document best kept off the forum for the moment. Just another suggestion When you are posting letters you intend to send or ones you have received, make sure you 'pdf' them as it stops Google indexing the wording and enabling a very easy search to pin you down on teh forum. The POC is bordering on being adequately particularised let's see what they produce in response to your CPR request. Good luck

I'm not sure writing to the DJ will help at all - the AQ is for that, and that's been and gone and the DJ preferred Reston's argument for FT over yours for SCT. You need to get a WS together rubbishing Reston's. You need to put over YOUR story, very clearly and unemotionally, the facts and figures and a little bit of why. Why has the envelope not been disclosed already? If you have mentioned it then it has been disclosed so that's fine, if they choose not to make a CPR request to inspect it that's their problem. Get a good WS together - that will be the key. If you can show the WS is rubbish then all the better, copies of comms between you & the OC & Restones that show you were dealt with badly will help as long as it sticks to teh facts. They are determined to make you out as the 'baddy' and you need to turn the tables. I would also mention that you cannot see where the 'complicated legal arguments' have been formed which were the basis for their FT argument. I haven't got time to read the thread - it's 65 pages and it's not easy to follow which doesn't help at all

Well, if you read the WS carefully they are pretty glaring Look at Para 2 and ask yourself How does the writer know this? Where are the Prescribed Terms and where are they referred to in the agreement Are all the documents mentioned in that Para being produced? Those are the sorts of questions you should be asking yourself as you read it - if those questions are answered fine - if they are not then why not. Big hoo haa about date of receipt of the DN whereas what should actually be being discussed/proved is the date of service as that is what matters NOT date of receipt (as that is impossible to prove without it being RD or SD) and business class with UK Mail - have you checked that out on their website yet?? Same with the 'hardship agreement' if there is an agreement how can they then take action if you are complying with that agreement - it is nonsense the T&C's of the agreement have been modified by contract with the new hardship terms Should there have been a new DN after breaching the hardship terms agreement ....?? There's stuff like that throughout the WS it is not very good at all BUT these arguments need a lot of work and understanding and the ability to understand and argue them against Counsel And don't you think that the methods being used by the Creditor are a bit unfair?? Have a read of the OFT publications for debt collecting Is there not an Unfair Relationship here But again a lot of work and research required

Oh dear - maybe I should have explained that bit. Yes, that's normal. The only place i know where you get same day service is the High Court, but then you don't put papers in you appear before a Master in their Chambers to beg and plead your case (and a very interesting experience it is too....)

Thanks Andy for clearing that up - makes it even more interesting a the the reasoning behind their request then If I were being cynical I would say having had a day in Court already they fancy their chances of being able to treble their money .......

Given time and energy you could rip the WS to shreds as it has clear errors and it a pitiful WS imo full of holes .......

Are you sure it has been allocated to Fast Track DD?? If it is Small Claims and you have all but admitted teh debt and agreed to repay it and all you are fighting over is the repayment schedule then I would be going to Court arguing VERY LOUDLY that the Claimants are clearly wasting both yours and the Court's time !! They should bet no costs other than the normal costs allowed on the SCT - and even that is pushing it IMHO due to their behaviour

My advice would be to review the thread thoroughly and make sure you actually understand the arguments both for and against you. I think I have said this before with one of your previous cases - Remember your big advantage should be that you know your own case better than anyone else in there - use that to your advantage. There are a few recent cases that are being thrown around and quoted - if any of these are sprung on you on the day ask for time to consider them and if necessary ask for an adjournment for you to fully consider them - it is unfair against you as a LiP to do this, but it is a tactic often used and we all know how an 'out of context quote' can seem to mean one thing when in context it means something else entirely - think of all the Carey, Rankine & McGuffick quotes that were being used last year .... Best of luck PH If it doesn't go your way, ask for the Judgement to be explained VERY CLEARLY and ask for permission to appeal. IF they use Brandon against you ask and the DJ looks to be taking it you could go for an adjournment pending the Brandon appeal

Personally I would change #2 to something like the above. There is nothing to stop them selling it on to another DCA though, although obviously any action could be seemed unfair in the FT's eyes and if they took action with similar paperwork I would suggest you would have a good case for another strike out. It's the dreaded 'no man's land' - once it is struck out, you could always make a no prejudice full&final offer of a few % of the outstanding balance if you really want to see the end of it.

To put this into perspective it's the difference between repaying the debt in full over 230 years or 250 years I'm not sure that it really matters does it??? Forget 'the principle of it' just take the offer before it becomes more realistic!!

Had another think about this and the only 'Gotcha' I can see for you (apart from the points raised earlier about your estate etc.) is ensuring the £5 pcm reaches them on time. Ensure you set up a Standing Order NOT Direct Debit straight to Carter or Egg (whoever the payment are to be made to **you need to check that**) If you don't have a bank account then open one just for this as you do NOT want any cheques or Postal Orders to not be received on time as you are admitting your liability to the outstanding balance. IMHO, in reality they (Egg) are not even interested in your £5 pcm they are interested in the fact they now have an admitted liability of £15k on their books rather than a 'worthless' disputed account.

In reality @ £60 pa does it really make any difference?? There is no proviso for change in circumstances or anything - it is a staggeringly bad IMHO (for the creditor) agreement I would get proper legal advice re your will & your estate though as you would want to avoid this being taken off it when the time comes I presume ..... I would snap their arm off before they get their act together TBH .....

To be honest, where the alternative is for a CCJ against you with possibly a forthwith order which you then would not be able to comply with, which could then be turned into a Charging Order etc etc and the alternative is £5 a month for the rest of your life and no CCJ against you and technically the default should also be removed from your credit file (as this would be a new agreement in effect which you would be keeping to - although the credit file would still show the balance outstanding) I know which one I would go for ........

That's it - you don't have to contact the Court again now at all The costs go straight to the other side - they are not wasted costs, just normal costs of the action which they are fully liable for. Nothing to stop you getting some quotes from local solicitors and then pitching your costs at 2/3rd of that. Remember, these are not 'wasted costs' these are the costs the losing party pays to the winning party for no other reason other than they have lost, so there is no need to prove any vexatiousness or anything like that. If they refuse they will generally come back with an offer, then negotiate an agreed settlement - if that doesn't happen then you can apply to Court for a detailed assessment which will give the Court the opportunity to show their displeasure at their time being wasted by the Claimant as well. cant's help with the other though. NGEddie's case has got good detail - I think he got £650 - another recent discontinued case got a 4 figure settlement of costs for a LiP but also a gagging order so I can't say more, but you get the picture. The latter case was more complicated than yours I think NGEddies was similar although even that had progressed a little further.

you send it to the solicitors - and yes, very much so - Google it

In your letter you need to make it quite clear that they have merely submitted further copies of the paperwork already made available to DJ ### at the hearing of ##/##/#### when the Order was made. You then need to ram home the fact that they have therefore NOT complied with the Order and therefore the claim should be struck out. Otherwise, at first glance it may appear that they may have complied IYSWIM I would fax the letter to the Court Monday @ 4pm to make sure it goes on the file before the file goes before the DJ again Get rid of it next week and then the Limitation Act kicks in for you

Time isn't up yet I think they have until 21st and it won't be wasted costs, just ordinary costs under CPR38.6(1) - wasted costs is only needed if allocated to SCT

Ok, so that was what hey were supposed to produce. Have they produced *any* credit agreement at all? If not then, yes, write in on the 22nd and ask for the claim to be struck out. If they have produced *an* agreement but that agreement is not the one required by the Order or is otherwise duff, you will need to write in and explain that, although it *may* not be struck out if there is an agreement of some sort. IF, it is accepted and then I would make a further application for the Claimant to submit a fully particularised POC - without that you cannot defend as you will allow yourself to be drawn into no-man's land at any hearing. As the POC still stand there is still no agreement nor was there ever between you and the Claimant. You still have a letter confirming that AG are not the creditor So they have to PROVE they have a right of action through a proper POC, not a Carter special designed to allow them to make it all up on the day (as I think may have happened at teh SO application hearing ....)

If you have no idea what it is about (and do not have any old debts), write to them making a formal complaint and report them to the OFT as they are in breach of the OFT's rules If you may have old catalogue or mobile phone or Egg debt (that's what they deal with mainly) then follow the advice already given There is lots of info on these forums about Fredricksons, Freds, Fredpay, Bryan Carter etc (all the one and the same)

Strictly speaking (well not even strictly actually) they are liable to your costs under CPR38.6(1) It is not a wasted costs application which is something else entirely and is only really needed if the claim had been allocated to Small Claims Track as then CPR38.6 doesn't apply So you just write to them asking for your costs under CPR38.6(1) detail your 'reasonable' costs Assure them, that if they refuse your reasonable costs then you will not hesitate to make an application to Court for your full costs to be assessed on an indemnity basis