Apologies for the delay. Didn’t see your post. Case was paused and has finally been withdrawn as they were unable to comply with my Section 77 request. Many thanks for your help and guidance. It proved invaluable.

No. Nothing as yet. Apparently somebody will be in touch shortly from the "Mediation Clinic". Until then, the case has been paused by the Sheriff for 6 months.

Hi dx, Apologies mate. I didn't see your posting. The Sheriff has paused the case again pending the outcome of mediation. Haven't received any further updates yet or correspondance yet relating to this, other than the letter confirming the pause.

Apparently my case has been paused again as the Sheriff believes that madiation is the best way to resolve things.

Hi dx First page of document enclosed. SCAN.pdf

It is quite literally a printed copy of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (22 pages in total). Will upload a copy of the first page tomorrow when I get access to a scanner.

Just received a 20+ page document fron Nolans as part of their submission arguing that that "the evidence contained within the First List Evidence, the respondant should not be entitled to absolvitor". The remaining document is simply a copy of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

Hi dx, Apologies - I misunderstood what you are asking. The answer is "YES". in D2 enter: . The claimant avers in its particulars that they hold the signed agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 dated XXXXX A CCA Request section 7? was sent recorded delivery on [date]. To date the claimant has failed to comply & is in default of said request.  2. The respondent is unaware of any default notice served under the consumer credit act by either the original creditor or the claimant in the last XX years I actually copied the info from a previous link you supplied. i.e. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/402263-what-to-do-simple-prodedure-rule-claims-scotland/ in D1 enter the following : [by copy and paste from here] As a respondent i specifically make reference to the Simple Procedure Rules 2016 in so far as my understanding is that: 1.4(2) The Sheriff must ensure that parties who are not represented, or parties who do not have legal representation, are not unfairly disadvantaged... ... i represent myself and are totally at a loss upon how to respond to such a claim & welcome any assistance the sheriff can give me. 1.6(9) When appearing against a party who is not represented, or who is not legally represented, representatives must not take advntage of the party. 1.6(10) When appearing against a party who is not represented, or who is not legally represented, representatives must help the court to allow that person to argue a case fairly. ..i expect the claimants' representative to employ the above. .......... The Claimant is a well known Debt Buyer or Debt Collection Agency that purchases large debt portfolio 'En-Masse' for a discounted Pence to Pound reduced value. These debt portfolios, be them direct from the Original Creditors or exchanged under sales between like Debt Buying Organisations, were placed for sale because the Original Creditor neither wished to litigate against their customer themselves due to bad publicity or are typically related to issues of enforceability under the Consumer Credit Act or are as a result of inflated sums due to penalties and or interest levied upon them that are unfair & unlawful under FCA regulations. 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 which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. They then issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt to maximise profit. According to s.189 of the consumer credit Act 1974 when an assignee purchases debts [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, thereby ensuring that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party. It is admitted with regards to the respondent once having financial dealings with [original Creditor] in the past. I do not recall any precise details or agreements and have sought verification from the claimant who has not complied with my request for further information. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed. The Respondent puts the Claimant to strict proof to provide copies of all documentation they must produce under Scottish law that confirms they are able, legally, to enforce and bring this claim to court . The claimant is also put to strict proof to:- . (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on. (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand/Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment. © Provide a breakdown of the excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification. (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed. (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. The court will be aware that penalty charges and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. in D2 enter: . The claimant has averred on their Claim Form that they hold the signed agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 dated XXXXX A CCA request section 7? was sent recorded delivery on [date]. To date the claimant has failed to comply & is in default of said request. 2. The respondent is unaware of any default notice served under the consumer credit act by either the original creditor or the claimant in the last XX years. .................. Obviously, I inserted the dates, etc where applicable. Hope this makes sense.

Hi dx, I double-checked and none of the below has ever been received by me: The Signed Consumer Credit Agreement The Notice Of Assignment The Default Notice Issued By The Original Creditor Under CCA 1974 Section 87/8 When I submitted the Incidental Application, I enclosed a copy of the letter from Cabot advising that they couldn't comply with the Section 77 request. I also requested the sheriff to issue an "decree absolvitor" as a result. Nolans have ojected to this application. Still hoping that Nolans give up

claimant not ent... can I confirm the following was included in your initial response form None of the below were received by me. The Signed Consumer Credit Agreement The Notice Of Assignment The Default Notice Issued By The Original Creditor Under CCA 1974 Section 87/8 Nolans have sent a number of statements, but not the complete set. A detailed statement of the account and how, with specific reference toward additional interest added because of late/no payment, and any additional penalty fees or interest added, have resulted in the balance now claimed. The court will be aware that penalty charges and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. in D2 enter: . The claimant avers in its particulars that they hold the signed agreement under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 dated XXXXX Can I re-submit my D2 form again? Section 77 request was sent to Cabot and they advised that they couldn't fulfill it. A CCA Request section 7? was sent recorded delivery on [date]. To date the claimant has failed to comply & is in default of said request.  2. The respondent is unaware of any default notice served under the consumer credit act by either the original creditor or the claimant in the last XX years Many thanks for your help re this. It is much appreciated

Hi dx, Latest info is: "The court has received an Incidental Application from the respondant". That will be my letter from Cabot advising that they cannot legally proceed with the case. "The Sheriff has received an objection from the claiment to the Incidental Application". I have now received notification that the sheriff has ordered the case to be restarted.

Checked with the clerk and was advised that the Incidental Application was received ok, but that Nolans had "objected". Stil a couple of days of the window to go, after which it will be reviewed again (?)

It's been just over a week since I re-submitted my Incidental Application, this time using the official form. I also stapled a copy of the cabot no cca letter to the courts copy as suggested above. Will check on Monday that all is ok. In the meantime Nolans have sent me some more credit card statements. Will keep you advised, and once again many thanks for your help and guidance on this one. Best regards, Pete

Very true. That was not the form which I completed. Mine was just a simple one page form. I will completed and re-post. Do I need to send a copy to Nolans also? Many thanks, I phoned and the clerk advised that he was unsure as he hadn't dealt with it personality. Will fill in the above form and see what happens Fingers-crossed.

Ok, latest update is as follows: The Sheriff Clark Depute returned my Incidental Application Form advising "I hereby return your Incidental Application Form as this is not in the correct format under the Simple Procedure Rules. Please re-submit in the correct format, together with proof of service on the claimant." The form was downloaded from their site. I have uploaded a copy of the submitted form, having first replaced any identifying data with ********** characters I did not send a copy to Nolans. Not sure what was wrong with the form? I did sign the form. Not sure what to do now. Any ideas? Many thanks, Pete form---incidental-application.doc

I checked with the clerk yesterday and was advised that the documentation which I has submitted hadn't been processed yet as the case was currently "On Hold", and they had a backlog due to staff illness. However, now that he was aware of the contents he would ensure that it was processed this week. The documentation contained the "Incidental Application " + letter from Cabot + email to/from Mediation Clinic. I will check tomorrow that it has all now been logged, etc. Thanks for all your help so far - it is much appreciated Best regards, Pete

Hi, Latest update is that I sent off the "Cabot Letter" advising that they couldn't take any further legal action as they could not meet the Section 77 criteria + a copy of my email to the Mediation Clinic / their response. This was to help show willingness on my part to follow any suggestions of the court. As per the Court rules I also sent a copy of the same info to Nolans. The cheekie buggers then sent me an EMAIL (clearly they lifted my info from the info which I sent them) advising: " We note that you have submitted a letter from our clients confirming that they are not permitted to obtain a judgement or decree against you in court but they can still request that you repay your outstanding balance. There is a well known Authority in the High Court's decision in the case of McGuffick -v- The Royal Bank of Scotland plc (2009) EWHC 2386 where the Court determined the meaning of the word "enforcement" under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and whether during the period of unenforceability any actions taken by a lender amount to enforcement contrary to Section 77 (4) of the CCA 1974. The Court decided in this case that the effect of unenforceability is that a lender's rights and a debtor's obligation existed but were not extinguished. The demanding of payment, issuing of a Default Notice, threatening legal proceedings and bringing proceedings themselves did not amount to enforcement. As you are aware we have already produced a copy of the Credit Agreement. We have also produced and lodged in process annual statements from period 14th October 2013 to 16th October 2014. We are waiting for our clients to send us further statements post 2014 in order to fulfil the second part of the Section 77 to 79 request. At the moment the case has been paused because the Sheriff considers that this matter may be resolved through mediation. We are hopeful that our clients will send us the information to fulfil the Section 77 request and until such time they are happy for the action to remain paused. In the meantime, in light of the documentation that we have lodged in process, we will require a note of your defence to the matter given the agreement has now been produced and statements to period 16th October 2014 have been produced. The terms of the Order of the Court state that both Nolans and you are encouraged to contact each other to settle the case or narrow the issues in dispute. Our clients are happy to accept payments by way of an instalment plan for payments to be made which are affordable to you. Our clients may also accept a reduced settlement if you are able to pay a lump sum payment. In the circumstances we welcome any proposals that you may have. We look forward to hearing from you. " I am pretty annoyed that: A) They lifted my email address from documents supllied to them for information purposes, and proceeded to send me an email. B) They consider that somehow sending me a bunch of statements somehow constitutes meeting the section 77 requirement C) They lifted my email address from documents supllied to them for information purposes, and proceeded to send me an email. Yeah, I know that points A & C are the same, but it's an important point. Mentioning it just once isn't enough I am tempted to complain about the misuse of email for communicating with me + asking the Sherriff to restart the case again. Yes/No? Thanks in advance. Pete

Received a letter today from Cabot advisng that they were unable to comply with my Section 77 request. The letter states "This means that we are not permitted to obtain a judgement or decree against you in Court". Do I do anything, or wait for a "cancellation of the court action" to come through? Best regards, Pete

Will do Fyi: I received a bill this morning from Cabot for £90, for "legal costs". They helpfully included various ways that I can pay!!!! Needless to say, I will not be paying it. Chancing gits that they are. I will be more than happy to send them my bill.

Do I do anything in the meantime, or just wait until the other side reacts?

I suspect that I can complain to the ICO since part of the information they sent me is unintelligible. My very limited understanding is that any documentation which they send must be legible.

Original agreement now uploaded Best regards, Pete scan.pdf

No electronic sign up. 1: Credit Card Agreenent 2: All letters sent by Aqua 3: All letters received by Aqua 4: Statements from 17th Nov 2013 to 18th Jun 2017 5: Account History No sign up agreement. The Credit Card Agreement is simply a generic copy of their terms and conditions which anyone can download from their site.

Finally got my SAR's info from Aqua!!!!

Found a letter from the court when I got home. I also phoned them this morning. Quick summary of the letter: the case has been "paused" as the Sheriff believes that the matter may be resolved via "Mediation". Nothing further will happen unless a re-start request is received. This can be done at any time by either party. A detailed leaflet from The University of Strathclyde Mediation Clinic is enclosed, and you are encouraged to contact them. If no settlement is arrived at it remains open to you to come back to the court to re-start the case and to seek a judicial decision. === I also phoned the court (prior to reading the letter) and was told that if the case is not re-started within 6 months then the Sheriff may contact both parties, and ultimately the case may be cancelled.