Yeah I am not going to wager you on that!

I will ask if they will reduce the amount if I pay it off immediately. They can only say yes or no. Can't hurt to ask.

How likely are Lowell to reduce the amount if I offer to pay within 30 days so I do not get a CCJ on file?

Judge told me pay in full within 14 days. I asked for a payment plan of Lowell's representative. I was told I am paying Lowell direct and must contact them and ask if they will allow a payment plan, Judge agreed. Going to call them now.

Judge was satisfied the contractual agreement was clear between Vodafone and Lowell. Satisfied it was assigned. Satisfied there was an agreement. Breach of agreement and took no notice of the Early Termination fee recommendation Used some case law as an example like Nicole v Promantier (spelling probably all wrong) at high court. They went in hard and fast and my WS was not much use unfortunately, there's was of great use to them. Cannot think of much more due to shock. I need to find the contact details of Lowell's to make payment. I will have to ask for a payment plan, otherwise screwed.

Unfortunately I lost the case and now have to pay just over £1800 to Lowell's within 14 days!

Will do, the court received my WS but not one from Lowell. Could also argue they may not have followed procedures. We are now emailing WS to the right people.

Judge is considering giving case to lowell as my WS was late by 2 days. Lowell's was on time. Not sure how to counter this. Maybe back on phone for hearing at any time.

No changes on MCOL so at the moment still have my telephone hearing on Tuesday. Any advice on how to handle it if the hearing takes place? I will call the court on Monday afternoon and first thing Tuesday morning to see if Lowell drop the case. Thanks.

Thank you so much Andyorch and dx100uk I will add the correct statement of truth and post the WS to court and Lowell

Added about CPR PD 16 (7.3)(1) in into and ending In the County Court at xxxxxxxxxx Claim No. xxxxxxxx Between: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd (Claimant) And Jasonaaa (Defendant) Witness statement of Jasonaaa I, Jasonaaa, at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, will say as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. I am the Defendant in this case and will be representing myself. The facts contained in this statement are known to me, save as where expressly stated and are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. 2. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed 10p to 15p in the £1 and to which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. Lowell Portfolio I Ltd issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt with costs to maximise profit. 3. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debt (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. 4. With regards to paragraph 4 in the Claimant’s Witness Statement they claim: ‘The original agreement is not exhibited because: a. A copy was provided to the Defendant at the outset; b. There is no legislation requiring the Assignor to retain a copy of the original Agreement; and c. The Claimant does not now have access to a copy of the Agreement. DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT 5. The Defendant states that no letters have ever been received from the Claimant (including any Notice of Assignment), with the first contact from them being this claim. Therefore, the Claimant is to put strict proof to their claim by providing proof of delivery for these letters. If the Claimant cannot provide this, then the Defendant invites the Court to strike the claim out based upon a failure to adhere to Paragraph 6 of the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Practice and Protocols. 6. The Defendant claims that his request of November 2019 under the CPR 31.14, of which the Claimant has confirmed receipt, for the disclosure and production of a verified and legible copy of the Agreement has not been adhered to, by way of the fact that a Service Contract is entirely missing from the Claimant’s evidence. 7. It is accepted that the Defendant has in the past had a contractual relationship with Vodafone. 8. A Default Notice is a technical notice required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in certain circumstances in relation to credit agreements. The Claimant will argue that the debt does not arise from a credit agreement, and is therefore not regulated by that Act, no Default Notice would have been sent. Whilst this might be the case, this does not exempt the Claimant from following Contract Law, where it is stipulated that where there is an official contract in place and there is an alleged 'breach of contract', the Claimant is lawfully obliged to send notice of this breach, and to have given a reasonable amount of time for the breach to be remedied. The Defendant argues that he has not received any correspondence, in line with Contract Law, to notify him of the alleged breach. As such, the Defendant argues that the Claimant has not behaved properly, both in Pre-Action Protocol, nor have they followed the official guidelines set out by Contract Law in the issuing of the Default. The Defendant invites the Court to strike the claim out, on this basis, and argues that the Default is unlawful and should be immediately removed from the Defendant’s credit file. 9. Considering the above, the Claimant has failed to provide evidence of assignment/balance/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered a Contract; and (b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. 10. As per CPR 16.5(4), the Defendant alleges the Claimant has not proved their allegation that the money is owed. 11. As the Claimant alleges to be an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act. 12. The alleged amount claimed includes an early termination charge amounting to the entire balance of the remaining contract. OFCOM guidance states that any Early Termination Charge, which is made up of the entire balance of the remaining contract, is unlikely to be fair as it fails to take into account the fact that the provider no longer has to provide and pay for their service. ORDER SOUGHT 13. As the Claimant has been unable to disclose any agreement upon which this claim relies as per CPR PD 16 (7.3)(1) Where a claim is based upon a written agreement: ‘a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should be attached to or served with the particulars of claim and the original(s) should be available at the hearing’ the Defendant respectfully invites the court to strike out the Claimant’s statement of claim. STATEMENT OF TRUTH I believe the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. Signed: Jasonaaa Dated: 27 July 2021

Should I quote that CPR PD 16 (7.3)(1) has not been adhered to in regards to paragraph 4 of the Claimant's WS?

Thanks dx100uk. Here is my second draft of WS (.docx as well), not a lot changed. Advice much appreciated. In the County Court at xxxxxxxxxx Claim No. xxxxxxxx Between: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd (Claimant) And Jasonaaa (Defendant) Witness statement of Jasonaaa I, Jasonaaa, at xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, will say as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. I am the Defendant in this case and will be representing myself. The facts contained in this statement are known to me, save as where expressly stated and are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. 2. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much-reduced cost to the amount claimed 10p to 15p in the £1 and to which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. Lowell Portfolio I Ltd issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt with costs to maximise profit. 3. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debt (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT 4. The Defendant states that no letters have ever been received from the Claimant (including any Notice of Assignment), with the first contact from them being this claim. Therefore, the Claimant is to put strict proof to their claim by providing proof of delivery for these letters. If the Claimant cannot provide this, then the Defendant invites the Court to strike the claim out based upon a failure to adhere to Paragraph 6 of the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Practice and Protocols. 5. The Defendant claims that his request of November 2019 under the CPR 31.14, of which the Claimant has confirmed receipt, for the disclosure and production of a verified and legible copy of the Agreement has not been adhered to, by way of the fact that a Service Contract is entirely missing from the Claimant’s evidence. 6. It is accepted that the Defendant has in the past had a contractual relationship with Vodafone. 7. A Default Notice is a technical notice required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in certain circumstances in relation to credit agreements. The Claimant will argue that the debt does not arise from a credit agreement, and is therefore not regulated by that Act, no Default Notice would have been sent. Whilst this might be the case, this does not exempt the Claimant from following Contract Law, where it is stipulated that where there is an official contract in place and there is an alleged 'breach of contract', the Claimant is lawfully obliged to send notice of this breach, and to have given a reasonable amount of time for the breach to be remedied. The Defendant argues that he has not received any correspondence, in line with Contract Law, to notify him of the alleged breach. As such, the Defendant argues that the Claimant has not behaved properly, both in Pre-Action Protocol, nor have they followed the official guidelines set out by Contract Law in the issuing of the Default. The Defendant invites the Court to strike the claim out, on this basis, and argues that the Default is unlawful and should be immediately removed from the Defendant’s credit file. 8. Considering the above, the Claimant has failed to provide evidence of assignment/balance/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered a Contract; and (b) show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. 9. As per CPR 16.5(4), the Defendant alleges the Claimant has not proved their allegation that the money is owed. 10. As the Claimant alleges to be an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act. 11. The alleged amount claimed includes an early termination charge amounting to the entire balance of the remaining contract. OFCOM guidance states that any Early Termination Charge, which is made up of the entire balance of the remaining contract, is unlikely to be fair as it fails to take into account the fact that the provider no longer has to provide and pay for their service. ORDER SOUGHT 12. As the Claimant has been unable to disclose any agreement upon which this claim relies the Defendant respectfully invites the court to strike out the Claimant’s statement of claim. STATEMENT OF TRUTH I believe the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true. Signed: Jasonaaa Dated: 27 July 2021 Witness Statement 2nd draft.docx

Just arrived, Lowell's WS and evidence. Seems a little longer than some I have seen. I will see how much of what I have written can be used to answer it. Any help will be much appreciated as I am now late getting this to the court and Lowell. Thanks. Lowell WS - redacted.pdf

Thanks Andyorch, I believe my WS should reach the court and Lowell by tomorrow as the court date is 10th August. This means Lowell's should reach me by tomorrow. What penalty could I incur for late presentation? What is the latest you think I should post my WS? Thanks.