I didn't know anything about the PPI , so I didn't take a loan for PPI. However, a single premium PPI was added to the total credit, whereas it is really a charge for credit. That would make the total credit wrong. Consequently, when the loan was re-financed, instead of the credit being £5k, it was £7k. Just thinking aloud.

Thanks steven 4064. However, if the amount of credit was mis-stated in the first loan, then surely the credit would still be mis-stated when the first loan was re-financed.

Thanks CitizenB

Can anyone please give me a definitive answer on this question:- If mis-sold PPI in first loan ( single premium PPI also added to total credit and interest charged) is not refunded when second re-financing loan taken out, does this make second loan also unenforceable on the grounds that the amount of credit would be mis-stated.

Thanks CitizenB.

If a DN is issued when the lenders are in default of a request for the agreement on which it is based, would this render the DN invalid?

Thanks for your help citizenB.

Thanks - I will keep you posted.

Just to update: I went to Court this week for the Draft Directions Hearing which took the place of the Summary Judgement Hearing. The Judge was very nice. He didn't award costs to either side. He gave me permission to amend my Defence and for the Claimants to reply with their amended Defence. He virtually ignored their request for Case Management and said it would be best to get the Defences in before taking any further action. I asked for a strike out on the grounds that the Claimants had not supplied the agreement but, as I had not submitted an Application for a strike out, he said that he couldn't consider it at present. (was worth trying!). I am beginning to think that I should have applied for a strike out as soon as the Claimants failed to supply the agreement. This might have stopped them issuing the Summary Judgement Application. Thanks CCM and IHNM for all your help.

Ok - thanks. Will add to letter.

Dear Sir/Madam, Claim No. xxx I write in regard to your letter dated x May 2009. As Solicitors, you must be fully aware that, without the agreement, this case should not have been brought before the Court. Consequently, I cannot agree with your proposed Draft Directions and will be pursuing a strike out of your claim as requested in my Witness Statement. If that should be unsuccessful, I propose the following Draft Directions: 1.The Claimants’ Application for Summary Judgement be dismissed. 2.The Defendant have persmission to file an amended Defence and Counterclaim by 4pm on 28th May 2009. 3.The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of amended Defence and Counterclaim, file and serve a reply and defence to defence and counterclaim. 4.Both Parties shall complete and file AQ's within 14 days from service of reply and defence to counterclaim. 5.The Claimant to pay the Defendants costs of and consequential to the application for summary judgment in the sum of £370.00 Yours faithfully,

Thanks steven4064 and IHNM. IHNM - I like the last letter you suggested because it gives me the opportunity to pursue the strike out and then accommodate the Claimants Draft Directions if it fails. steven4064 - that will be very useful if we get back to the AQ again.

Thanks for your help IHNM. In the N244 I requested that I be allowed to amend my defence - that was because of the SJ Hearing and trying to cover all possibilities. In my AQ Draft Directions I asked for the Claimants to supply information and, if they did not comply, then a strike out. I feel this case has progressed far enough without the agrrement as the law is quite clear. The problem I have at present is that by rejecting their Draft Directions and suggesting alternatives, I will be agreeing with them. In effect, I would like my Draft Directions to ask for SJ on grounds that they have no chance of winning (turn the tables!) and get the case struck out. How can I reconcile both - unless I suggest they ask for their case to be struck out. The Claimants seem to be leading and prolonging matters. I feel a need to attack.

In my Witness Statement, I have asked for the DJ to strike out their claim and, if this was not agreeable, then I requested that I be allowed to amend my Defence. Is the Witness Statement I submitted of no consequence now, as the Claimants wish to withdraw? Can I still ask for a strike out? As the Claimants want to use the SJ hearing for their Draft Directions, can I submit my own Draft Directions?

Thanks for the information regarding the costs argument - at least I can be prepared.

Thanks. If they don't agree with the proposed Draft Directions you suggested, will it then be decided by the Judge?

I didn't have to pay for the N244. A track has not yet been allocated. When they filed their AQ they also filed the SJ Application.

Many thanks IHNM - that's great because I am feeling a bit lost here. I can fax them. Do I need to contact the Court? I have already filed an N244 for permission to amend my Defence to be tied with the SJ Hearing. AQ was submitted some weeks ago - can you file another one?

I am slightly confused. It doesn't seem fair that they have asked for these Draft Directions just before the Hearing. The solicitors want me to write to them acknowledging that I agree with the Draft Directions. Should this be my course of action: I write to solicitors stating that I disagree with the Draft Directions and state the Directions IHNM suggests. At same time I write to Court objecting to the Draft Directions - however, I don't know if their Draft Directions have been filed at the Court.

Many thanks IHNM. Can you suggest what I should write to them. There isn't much time. If I send on Monday they won't receive it until Tuesday.

Thanks to all for your replies. CCM - 'they' are the solicitors. Should I write to the solicitors stating that I do not agree with their Draft Directions and suggest IHNM's directions instead?

My contention is that they have no case based on the fact that they have no agreement, defaulted me and took me to court when in default of my request, mis-sold PPI, etc. On what grounds should I be agreeing to Case Management?

Thanks IGMN. What is S.140 order? Not sure about Case Management - I think I read somewhere on here that it's not a good idea. They are not giving me much time to investigate. Perhaps I should submit Application to get the claim struck out or request a stay. I don't want to give them an advantage by allowing the SJ to be used for their benefit. Regarding Costs, do I need to submit a claim for costs if the Hearing takes place. I have spent 100's of hours on CAG but they obviously will not agree to paying for all my time - any idea what is reasonable. Do I need to have that at time of Hearing or just request that I submit costs?

Help needed. I submitted my Witness Statement for the Summary Judgement, together with an N244 Application to amend Defence. I have today received a letter requesting that the SJ Hearing next week be used as a directions hearing and they want me to agree. The Draft Directions are: 1. Claimant’s application for Summary Judgement, dated 6th April, be withdrawn. 2. Defendant’s Witness Statement dated 4th May 2009 do stand as her Defence. 3. Claimant to file and serve a reply to the Defence by 10th June 2009 4. Case Management Conference listed 2 weeks thereafter 5. No order as to costs. Also, should I have a list of costs for the Hearing. If so how much? The witness statement submitted with the N244 was just a skeleton defence, so I would need to elaborate on it. Furthermore, can I ask for the claim to be struck out at the Hearing as still no agreement and even if they produce it, it would be unenforceable because the sums claimed still include mis-sold PPI from original agreement.

Does this mean all current cases will be automatically stayed?