Jump to content

billywilder

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    91
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

2 Neutral

1 Follower

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'll post it up later as its scanned but not redacted. They didn't offer any explanation as to the reason for the delay in lifting the stay. I'm emailing my response today.
  2. Right, Court went well. Judge was lovely, and fair in my opinion. The judges thought process was first testing the legitimacy of removing the stay before anything else She looked through the bundle and concluded that it was a mess. She questioned why the stay had been implemented in the first place. No conclusion was reached about that from any party. She then questioned the length of time taken to apply to remove the stay The solicitors agent (sa) had no answers in his instruction. He offered to go and ring Leigh ONeill (LO) and get some answers and return. The judge pointed out that he had no powers to provide evidence which he conceded. I think that if LO had been present and had not given the judge a satisfactory answer to this question ( which is likely) then she would have struck the application out. As it was she made an order saying that Drydens have 14 days to provide a witness statement explaining why they left it so long before applying to lift the stay. I then have 14 days to respond. And we reattend to test if the stay can be lifted. It will be interesting to see if Drydens submit anything. They have made so many mistakes on the witness statement I can see now. Just checking other CPR sections that they are quoting has turned up a few. They ask for the Defence to be struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4 (2) (b) What it says is so not true as to be laughable The solicitors agent brought up that Leigh O'Neill had quoted CPR 3.9(1). The judge asked where and it turns out it is near the end. The judge wryly noted under her breath that it was hidden . She then checked it and was incredulous that it was cited as a reason as it is to do with relief from sanctions. She kept reading it and quoting it and questioning it and SA had no answers. She was laughing at it all really . The judge was following this list when looking at removing the stay Neglected Proceedings - Lifting the Stay imposed by r.15.11 WWW.33BEDFORDROW.CO.UK A claim will be automatically stayed under CPR r.15.11(1) where the claimant allows 6 months to pass from the end of the period for filing a defence, From this it is possible to discern that, when applying the test of ‘appropriateness’, Chief Master Marsh considered the following as some of the important factors in the balance: Whether the claimant had an adequate explanation for the delay; Whether the claimant’s claim has (at least) a real prospects of success; The defendant’s behaviour, and including his engagement with the court process, and whether any delay was caused by the defendant’s actions; The nature and extent of any prejudice the defendant would suffer in the event that the stay is lifted; Whether any attempts were made by the claimant, within the 6 months, to ‘revive’ the claim. I don't know if this exists anywhere in the legal procedures? The judge thought so little of their application and application for costs that she asked me what my costs were. I didnt understand what she was getting at at the beginning and said I didnt have any, I caught on and then piped up with missing a day of work. She offered me half a day, asked how much it was and then said that I can apply to have that paid by Drydens. Certainly a good conclusion Thank you everyone for your help. Especially dx and Andyorch. Will see what happens next
  3. Lon2 is just my Witness Statement, apology email for lateness and evidence which I've already sent to the court anyway. I emailed the court the evidence and it said specifically not to send a paper copy also so I didn't. The deferring within 28 days thing from them is a red herring and I shouldn't bother pursuing it? Is it deliberate misdirection or ineptitude do you think?
  4. Great. Thanks for the info. I have a supplementary witness statement back. very efficient she is, the litigator. Seeing as I sent it on Saturday. I'm quite impressed She says this however 7.1 The Defendant’s claim that the Notice of Default (“NOD”) dated June 2016 is void is inaccurate. NOD’s can be issued after the Defendant has 4 months or more of arrears outstanding. The Defendant can stop the further consequences of the NOD if they either (1) pay the arrears accrued under the NOD, or (2) enter into deferment within 28 days of the Notice of Default. In 2007, the Defendant did one or both of these, preventing the account from terminating. For the purpose of clarity, Defendant’s can receive repeated NOD’s over the years. 7.2 The Claimant has confirmed that the Defendant entered into Deferment on the following dates: • 25/04/2006 - 24/04/2007 • 25/02/2008 - 24/02/2009 • 25/02/2009-24/02/2010 • 25/02/2010-24/02/2011 • 25/02/2011 -24/02/2012 • 25/02/2012-24/02/2013 • 25/02/2013-24/02/2014 • 25/02/2014-24/02/2015 Which plays into my hands I think? I did not pay the arrears and the likelihood of me deferring within 28 days of the Notice of Default is slim as I only found out that I had the default when I applied for a mortgage and discovered that I was defaulted. I am just about to go through my file to find my deferment letters to clarify. She offers no proof of the above deferments which surely casts enough question over whether we should go to trial?Supplementary Witness Statement and Supporting Documents redacted jpg merged.pdf Supplementary Witness Statement and Supporting Documents redacted jpg merged.pdf
  5. OK Thanks It would be really useful if you could show me where it says in CCA s87/8 that you cant be defaulted more than once in case that comes up. I just can't see it. I have searched extensively for other threads to plagiarise the knowledge but haven't found any.
  6. Whats DQ? Hearing Wednesday. WS should have been filed by Thursday. I filed it by email to court and Litigator on Saturday. By post to arrive tomorrow morning to litigator
  7. Claimants agent is OK (the litigator for Drydens in this case)? I would hope that even if they didn't agree to settle then that may go in my favour if we go in front of the judge as I am trying to compromise. I would have to do it by email due to time constraints so they may not respond. I thought that perhaps I can take it into the court room if I make it that far.
  8. Fair enough. Looks like it might be an expensive mistake. Nurselayers case seemed to go well and their first WS was just a few points so I took hope from that. To answer every paragraph would have taken me too long. Like I say I would pay someone to have done it for me as it is well outside my understanding let alone skill set to execute. From the sounds of it their case took 100s of hours of reading and writing, and they lost at least a week of work to it. I have probably in its entirety from 2006 when I first tried to fight this lost at least a week of work in time and again spent many 10s if not 100s of hours trying to understand and action what I gleaned to be what was needed from the help here. This week it has already impacted my time with my kids massively and I havent been able to work at all. I know that this doesnt come across in the documents I have posted but like I say, it is something that takes me a long time and doesnt come out particularly well So to clarify if I lose then I will be deemed to owe the total amount that they are claiming in their original claim at least. And then if I dont pay it within a month then it will show up on my credit file? Can I arrange a payment plan? I am thinking to offer to clear my arrears of around £727.85 as I am making an offer and trying to avoid court. Also that is the only reason that according to The Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1998 12. The lender will cancel the borrower’s liability to repay the loan if the borrower— (a) dies, (b) is not behind on any repayments under any agreement for a student loan and— (i) was under the age of 40 when his last agreement for a student loan was made and he reaches the age of 50 or when the last agreement for a student loan has been outstanding for not less than 25 years, whichever is the sooner. That the debt would not be written off unless the termination is upheld as I was under 40 in 1996 when my last loan was taken out. Has anyone got any ideas how I should go about offering to clear the arrears tomorrow. Do I write to Drydens and to the court?
  9. I understand it is the hands of the judge now, and that I shouldnt have left it so long. I need to understand the potential outcomes Is worst case scenario The judge can decide that because my documents were late they lift the stay, find in Erudio/Drydens favour and pass SJ. I then am liable for the full amount that they are claiming for? I received a statement of costs today which comes to around £1k. How likely is this to be added on if this is the case?
  10. Just out of interest how are you removing the editing done with a pdf editing program? I cant see how to do it on mine which is pdf24 For what its worth here is what I submitted to the court. I sent my WS via email to the court and Drydens litigant yesterday. I will have to send recorded delivery a hard copy to Drydens tomorrow as I missed post on Saturday.
  11. Right. Got a friend to go and dig out the deferment from 2014 and the Default from 2007 and send it to me .Going to send it all off today Can anyone link the legal documents that say that once you have been defaulted for a debt then you cant be defaulted again. Ive been through the CCA 1974 and cant find it. I'd like to make the argument a legal one so that it is stronger if possible. 2014 Deferment agreement. Shows arrears of £727.85 so I think that makes the write off argument weak as it specifically says that writeoff only occurs with no arrears. Happy to be corrected The defult from 2007 is a mock up with explanation as to why. Looks weak knowing what I know now but is what it is. I didnt get the original which is why I was defaullted as I didnt live at that address. I will only include the Default notice I think for the court and not pages 4 and 5 Defendants WS exhibits.pdf
  12. Hi. Yes it is poor. I didn't realise that I had left it so late. I tried to post the Claimant witness statement a couple of times. Failed and then got on with life. I would like to say thank you firstly for your continued help with trying to get it sorted. I appreciate greatly that you are volunteers and give up your time and experience trying to help people to fight these issues. That is partly why I have tried to carry on fighting it for so long as I can see your distaste for the DCAs With regards the witness statement. Sorry for the delay in replying. My kids have been off school this week with illness so I was with them all day yesterday until late. I have tried to adapt a statement for days from that one posted mostly . It is so detailed and I don't have the timeline readily available of what happened to me and when. It seems I need to counteract each paragraph one by one with reference and timelines and I don't have the knowledge or understanding to know what I'm doing to write much at all I have found with trying. I have read and reread the threads that seem similar to mine but none have the same arguments and situations. Maybe it is better just to post something quick in layman's terms just to provide a defence. I genuinely don't know what my defence is. I have been provided with all the documents. The agreements are legible if not badly. I signed them. They have provided assignation and termination letters. Reading other people's experience with judges they seem to rightly question the validity of the no documents argument if you knowingly signed the agreement and it is legible. I thought that because I was defaulted in 2006 by slc that it couldn't happen again but it appears that now that the account has been passed onto other companies that doesn't stand. I thought that they had messed up by trying to default me on one agreement rather than two and that was going to be my defence but it appears that the issue there would be if they had referenced two defaults in their WS but only provided one. That seems to not be the case for me as they have assigned their own single account number and are trying to default me on that. I genuinely don't know what I am trying to say in my defence. The more I read over two days the less close I seemed to end up with answers until I realised that I'm not sure I could do it. I will quite happily pay someone to help me if that was an option. I hoped that because the debt should be written off due to time that would be a defence. It appears that Dryden's have made it so that I have arrears now it. Having rung National debtline to try to understand things better and they said that it wouldn't be written off because of this. Even if I can just supply something simple if that would work I would go down that route but it seems the requirements are to do everything within the legal framework. Thanks again and I really appreciate the time and experience that has been shared to help me. I have a meeting/assessment this morning but will have another look at lunch time to see what I can do Bit of respite. Assessment cancelled. Looking at this now Just writing it now. Hope that it is accepted Notice of assignment 21/03/2014 shows xxxxxx as being issued at 20th November 1995 for £1385 and the balance as at 1st Jan 2014 as being £1999.88 xxxxxx as being issued a t 10th October 1996 for £1645 and the balance as at 1st Jan 2014 as being £2305.78 12th April 2019 Letter of Claim states xxxxxx as being issued at 14th November 1995 and the amount outstanding as being £1998.25 xxxxxx as being issued at 4th October 1996 and the amount outstanding as being £2280.78 Letter of Claim contains inaccuracies and is therefore invalid? Can I add this as its an added defence? It uses the evidence they've provided for the case N244A Court date 25 Oct 2023.pdf
  13. Having spent all day yesterday until late and starting early today reading around and trying to prepare to write my witness statement im realistically not much further on. I have missed the 7 day deadline which was today to email let alone post a witness statement and required documents. What happens now? I assume with no defence the claimants wishes are met in court. From what I can see if I don't want another default against me I then have a month to clear the balance?
  14. Ive been going through all the posts in order to construct my WS. I am trying to understand where I stand especially as I will poetentially have to go in front of a judge to explain my reasoning Can anyone clarify whether my loan qualifies to be written off under The Education (Student Loans) Regulations 1998 as it states that you must not be behind on any repayments under any agreement for a student loan. Is the view that we are now under different agreements since the assignment? (a (b) "is not behind on any repayments under any agreement for a student loan and—"
  15. Thank you DX for sorting through the pdf I posted. It is much appreciated. Ive been reading as much as I can today and am sorting what I can by tomorrow to send to them by email. I shouldnt have left it so long I know. Poor time management but I'll try to do my best to get a defense to them in time. From reading around my best argument seems to be that the default is invalid because it is only one for the assigned account number and I have not been sent two separate default notices for the original accounts? Is this correct? I have looked at the included link but I dont understand it well enough to see how it dictates the need for a default for each separate agreement. Section 87 (1) CCA1974 https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/87 Because my account should now have passed natural writeoff. How can I present this information to the court to hopefully end their claim and be done with it? I cant find any precedence of this. i cant ever see them winning with this What so I need to reply in order to reiterate this point. A lot of this is going well over my head. there is nothing new in their statement.
×
×
  • Create New...