an update well i still have had no response from robinson way as far as i am aware they were granted 20 days to reply from the first of october for there case,i was given 14 days for my defense which i did .

stupid me brain not in gear just look at my spelling !!thanks

thanks for that , robbin what do you mean by imo thanks

hi sorry i missed you last night sleeping to early morning shifts i read through thread seems to me that everyone is getting thiese does this mean that they have to restart all court action also it appears that they have added the previous court costs (which was ajourned no costs to them granted to rw )has been added regardless of what previous judge ruled . please bear with me i will try to get on pc this eveing

hi is there anyone out there who knows what the robbers are upto does this mean that the impending court case is still current? as there apparantley is a new assignee and not forgetting i am still awaiting reply of my defense

Re: Robinson Way Court Proceedings - Help urgently needed! IN THE NORWICH COUNTY COURT BETWEEN - CLAIM NO ROBINSON WAY LTD claimant AND defendant DEFENSE STATEMENT OF 1 / On the 27’ of August 1997- I responded to an advert in Auto trader for a loan by telephone, of which I distinctly remember being assured by the person on the other line that the P.P.I policy would pay out even though I would probably be going self employed in the near future. I was told that to get the loan I would have to take out this P.P.I policy in order to help my credit score. 2/ A few months later a family crisis occurred which affected my health and ability to work, with the situation not getting any better I tried to make a claim only to be told that as I was self employed they could not cover me. I was unaware of any legislation as regards to the selling of P.P.I at the time. 3/ I visited the C A B who ran through all my finances and made offers of payment to my creditors which were duly accepted by all, including Abbey, after about a year later. I was contacted once more by outstanding services (Abbey debt firm) and we agreed to raise the monthly amount by 5x as much which I now know I had paid monthly by standing order and still was until March 2009 without missing one payment. Please see proof article 2. 4/ The interest was frozen as was agreed through the C A B, and was agreed to be kept in place around 1999 but I cannot be totally precise to the exact month. 5/ I received no further correspondence until late December 2008 from Robinson Way demanding payment in full. Please note, I had received no notification that the debt had been assigned to the claimant: “it is therefore submitted that the mere fact of giving a notice does not, of itself, create an assignment and that there must be an actual assignment in existence. It is the actual Assignment, not just the Section 136 notice, under which the Claimant derives title to bring the claim and the Claimant is put to strict proof that such Assignment exists. It is further averred that I am entitled, in any event, to view the document of assignment as a matter of law (Van Lynn Developments v Pelias Construction Co Ltd 1968 [3] All ER 824)” The Law of property act 1925, a copy of which is enclosed. “It is further averred that to be valid the alleged notice of assignment must accurately describe the assignment (W F Harrison & Co Ltd v Burke & another [1956] 2 ALL ER 169). It is submitted that the alleged notice of assignment cannot be accurate as it refers to an amount that includes miss sold P.P.I” Which to this date I am still awaiting clarification. Please see statement of P.P.I proof article 3. 6/ On the 14’ February 2009- I received a court summons from the claimant, I requested all relevant documentation under the civil procedure rules i.e. an eligible signed consumer agreement, the assignment, and default notice commonly known as subject to access. I have enclosed copies of requests for this information including recorded delivery and postal order receipts as you can see in proof 4. Please note that I had to send four letters of request as the claimant did not acknowledge or indeed reply to any one of them. 7/ Since I had received no response from the claimant, I defended the claim on the basis that I duly defended on the grounds that I have no knowledge of Robinson Way and the fact that without the requested content of the civil procedure rules pursuant to s.78(1) of the consumer credit act 1974 .I also sent the claimant a letter of notice reminding them of their obligations and that their use of legal action would appear to be in breach of the Consumer Protection From Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the Office of Fair Trading Guidance on Debt Collection. I also reminded the claimants solicitors that the provisions of s.78(6) now apply .The claim was Transferred to Norwich County Court . 8/ On April 25th I received (copy of which enclosed) dated 22nd of April stating that there are unable to locate the agreement (C.C.A) due to the age of the agreement there is also no mention of the original assignment or indeed the default notice .This appears to be a total breach of the claimants legal obligations before starting the legal process as stated above .With the greatest respect the LAW is there for both sides to adhere to and i was amazed that the legal process was started without even the original agreement in their possession .How has the outstanding amount been worked out without sight of the terms and conditions and also the miss sold P.P.I policy terms ? 9/May 10th I received an eligible copy of the consumer credit agreement stating it has now been found i cannot read the terms and conditions and also the payments schedule needs explaining as there is no mention of the alleged miss sold P.P.I policy other than a monthly amount. This in short appears to be a multi agreement which is not in accordance with section 18 of the consumer credit act - 18.Multiple agreements. —(1) This section applies to an agreement (a “multiple agreement ”) if its terms are such as— (a)To place a part of it within one category of agreement mentioned in this Act, and another part of it within a different category of agreement so mentioned, or within a category of agreement not so mentioned, or (b)To place it, or a part of it, within two or more categories of agreement so mentioned. (2) Where a part of an agreement falls within subsection (1), that part shall be treated for the purposes of this Act as a separate agreement 10/ I have never received A DEFAULT NOTICE further i wish to examine the notice if this indeed was served on me ,I also question this as i was always in contact at the time with Abbey and i was paying the agreed reduced amount the relevance of which is clearly stated below____________________ ____________________ Valid Default Notice It is a condition precedent to the issue of Proceedings in respect of a Regulated agreement that certain steps prior to the issue of Proceedings must be taken. Specifically those steps are the issue of a valid default notice complying with the terms of the Act and the issue of a valid termination notice, also complying with the act. It is not admitted that either a valid default notice or termination notice was ever served on me and the Claimant is put to strict proof. It is noted that, to be valid, a Default Notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339). It must also allow a minimum of 14 days following date of service, in which to rectify any such breach. The prescribed format for such a document is further laid down in the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations The Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2006 (SI 2006/3094). The Act also sets out via Section 88 that the Default Notice must be in the prescribed form and must allow the required time from date of service. The use of the word “must” indicates that this is mandatory and that it cannot be dismissed as a de minimus issue. The Law in respect of service is governed by the Section 7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 which indicates that service is deemed to be effectual on the day upon which the letter would be delivered in the usual course of business. I refer to the practice direction, given by J R BICKFORD SMITH, Senior Master Queen's Bench Division, on8 March 1985 in relation to the Interpretation Act 1978, Section 7. It confirms that deemed service of documents sent by first class mail occurs on the 2nd business day after posting. 16. I further refer to CPR Part 6.26 Service of Documents which concurs with the above practice direction that the deemed date of service by first class post occurs:- “The second day after it was posted, left with, delivered to or collected by the relevant service provider provided that day is a business day; or if not, the next business day after that day.” The importance of CPR Part 6 and the Interpretation Act 1978 in determining the delivery of documents by ordinary post is further confirmed by the following Court of Appeal Case Consignia Plc v Sealy [2002] EWCA Civ 878 (19 June 2002). For the avoidance of any doubt, in the event of an alleged breach by the Debtor this is at all times an Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. There is no provision in the Act that allows a large financial institution to terminate an Agreement that is in alleged default or breach simply by giving notice to the Consumer. Section 98(6) makes that quite clear. The Creditor must follow the steps outlined in Section 87 and Section 88 if they are to lawfully Default and Terminate, and enjoy the benefits of Section 87 Also the witness statement of Miram Scott states I was served an appropriate default notice if this was the case where is documentation to prove this? Further if the said document is in their possession why have they not supplied me with a copy as requested many times under the civil procedure rules act ? 11/It is further stated by Miriam Scott that I made payments Direct to Robinson Way which is seen as an open admission of liability ,This statement is not true and i request should be struck out as any payments they received were paid to them from outstanding services who i had a standing order set up with at the sum of £5.00 a month which i have previously stated have always paid up until the account came into dispute .I have never recognised Robinson Way as the assignees and am still awaiting documentation to prove otherwise . This could have been caused by ignorance of their own systems or with the greatest respect a blatant lie to further their claim in their favour of which I take great offense. 12/ I would like to high light the fact that I cannot read the terms and conditions of the CCA and further I have always paid the agreed amount and never defaulted on the revised agreement .Also I never heard anything from Abbey National to revise this amount from 1999 to the point that i had forgotten about this account as it was so long ago. 13/Finally to sum up, as I have never received any of the following, 1/ an assignment notice, AS STATED ON PARAGRAPH 5 2/ A default notice AS STATED ON PARAGRAPH 10 3/ A legible copy of C C A AS STATED ON PARAGRAPH 9 4/ A miss sold P P I policy statement with terms and conditions 5/ An accurate statement of alleged monies owed This statement is true and factual backed up by letters of correspondence and the laws of the consumer credit act 1974 which have clearly not been adhered to by Robinson Way . Based on these facts I feel I have every reason to ask the

I Have Edited The Text Now With A Little Help Please See post 88 thanks

hi i did not realise that this had happened as you can tell i am not very good at pc skills . will ask my good friend tinnud to correct

removed to thread 94

removed

hi looks very interesting this will take me a while to read and understand thanks lilly white also looks like i am getting another judge next time but i will send your regards on thanks martin

court order has arrived

wow thanks lillywhite without making myself sound stupid does that mean that RW have to now provide evidence from Abbey that this was served correctly if at all. and also does this mean that the current alleged assignee R W have to also follow this course ,which there have not ?. The PPi is also an issue that helped me get this case ajourned as i do remember being told that if i take it ,i will get loan (misselling).i cannot remember receiving any documentation on ppi and total breakdown of cost etc. the dj tried to work out a figure less ppi and suggested that the figure would be applicable to be struck of . I pointed out to her that the agreement CCA is unenforceable in law . she also could not come up with any figure anyway .

hi after reading some threads i have just realised that i have not received a default notice from rw and as far as i am aware from abbey . there is nothing on my credit history about the loan or any asscoiation with abbey or rw .is these worth mentioning this in my defense

hi after reading some threads i have just realised that i have not received a default notice from rw and as far as i am aware from abbey . there is nothing on my credit history about the loan or any asscoiation with abbey or rw .is these worth mentioning this in my defense

i am not really sure i guess i have to wait for court papers although the dj said 14 days and the rw 21 days to respond

thanks 42 man for the links makes interesting reading

thanks will keep bumpingg

hi i beleive 14 days the dj said but i am pretty sure that will be from the letter postmark from court the lawyer rw asked for 21 days to respond

hi all i am back you were right about lawyer trying to coherse me before hearing ie he would like to have a chat and what my intentions are i told him noooooo . i got into hearing and mam asked me for my reasons to defend my case and i produced above posted letter .and i mentioned no proof assignment ,multiple agreement and ppi i was shaking abit because i had not stated any of this inthe orignal defense ie court order . i asked for ajournment and and my defense was so nearly not allowed . so i mentioned that i had been willing to go to mediation which was offered robs solictors were not then after alot of nerve racking mins and discussion the claim was ajourned for me to correctly state my case and provide copies etc to claimaint . the lawyer tried to get rws costs back but were struck of due to not going to mediation . so a cost to rw . i have to now create a real defense and clear this up . any solictors out there i am useless at this sort of thing !!!! a battle is won but not the war thanks cags any help really appriciated

thanks for that cymruambyth i am taking 2 copies in as you kindly suggest really nervous as never been to court before and due to my complete breakdown in late 97 and relapse 02 my nerves can let me down .these dms are total leaches and the goverment should act to clear up this industry .even in there statement of proof they lied i have never paid them a penny and will prove this point through my bank statements which will show £5 a month on standing order going out to outstanding services the of shoot DM to abbey national as i remember 10 years ago . also the figures do not make sense and the cca appears to be a multi agreement ppi and loan amount will post today with news of case once again thanks to cag i have hope

hi thanks caggies for your help so far and a special thanks to tinnud. i have been away the last two weeks and tinnud was helping me .i have read through the thread and some but still not sure what way i should defend claim .

hi you are right i am not sure how to make larger

i received this letter a couple of days ago .there have completely ignored my previous requests for cca default notice etc assignment letter , i am ringing court today to check my defense got there and in time .i will let you know what court says tonight .i have not used statue barred as my defense but i can now 100% say i have received no notification or letters statements for over 8 years is it to late to use this in my defense ?? any help would be appreciated ps i will not be back on till evening thanks

for those that are interested i have just got a letter from robbers offering a reduction of half for final settlement and there would clear the rest !!! this was sent by there solicitors horwich farrelly i sent a shortened version of #41 but did not mention staue barred yet as my defense thanks