Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder

jan78worsfold

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    70
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About jan78worsfold

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. Is this far too long? 1. On 24 October 2014 ARROW GLOBAL LIMITED commenced proceedings against the defendant for £9320.78 plus interest, a debt allegedly incurred under a credit agreement between the Defendant and Citifinancial Europe. 2. However, the Claimant’s statement of case fails to give adequate information to enable me to properly assess my position with regards to the claim. 3. This claim appears to be for a Loanagreement regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 4. Except where otherwise mentioned in this Defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim and put the Claimant to strict proof thereof. 5. It is the Defendant’s belief that the last payment and acknowledgement on this account was over 6 years ago and accordingly considers the debt to be statute barred by virtue of Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980. 6. It is deniedthat the Defendant has previouslyentered intoan agreement with the Claimantfor provision of credit. 7. The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Particulars of Claim as it stands at present, inter alia: - 8. The claimants' particulars of claims disclose no legal cause of action and they are embarrassing to the Defendant as the claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16. In this regard I wish to draw the courts attention to the following matters; 9. The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the written agreement referred to, the method the claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, or any default notices issued or any other matters necessary to substantiate the claimant's claim. 10. The particulars of claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into. 11. A copy of the purported written agreement that the claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim, and which appears to form the basis upon which these proceedings have been brought, has not been served attached to the claim form. 12. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation. Therefore it is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed. 13. A copy of any evidence of both the scope and nature of any default, and proof of any amount outstanding on the alleged accounts, has not been served or attached to the claim form. 14. The Particulars of Claim are vague in that there is no agreement number. Consequently, it is proving difficult to plead to the particulars as matters stand. 15. Further to the case, on 29 October 2014 I requested the disclosure of information pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules, which is vital to this case from the claimant. The information requested amounted to copies of the Credit Agreement referred to in the particulars of claim and any default or termination notices, a transcript of all transactions, including charges, fees, Notice of Assignment, interest, alleged repayments by myself and payments made by the original creditor. Also any other documents the Claimant seeks to rely on, including any default notices or termination notice required to give the claimant a legitimate right of action. 16. On the29 October 2014 the Defendant sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimants statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to Blake Lapthorn Solicitors. The Defendant requested the Claimant provide copies of the Agreement, Default Notice and Notice of Assignment . The request was sent by Royal Mail Recorded Delivery and was received and signed for on the 31 October 2014. 17. To Date the claimant has refused my request under the CPR and I have not received any such documentation requested. As a result it has proven difficult to compose this Defence without disclosure of the information requested. 18. On the 3 November 2014 the Defendant sent a formal request for a copy of the original agreement to Arrow Global Limited at their registered offices the address of which is on the Claim form, pursuant to section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1 fee. The request was sent by Royal Mail recorded delivery, and from the Royal Mail website, this letter has not yet been signed for. 19. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation. Therefore It is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed. 20. At this stage without documentation I am unable to plead fully to the claim. I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case else the Claim should stand struck out. 21. In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment. 22. As things stand the Defendant denies the Claimant is entitled to claim the relief claimed or at all. 23. The courts attention is drawn to the fact that the without disclosure of the requested documentation pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules I have not yet had the opportunity to asses if the documentation the claimant claims to be relying upon to bring this action even contains the prescribed terms required in Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) which was amended by Consumer Credit (Agreements) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI2004/1482). The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following— Number of repayments; Amount of repayments; Frequency and timing of repayments; Dates of repayments; 24. The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable 25. The courts attention is drawn to the fact that where an agreement does not have the prescribed terms as stated in point 16 it is not compliant with section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and therefore not enforceable by s127 (3). The courts attention is also drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the consumer credit act 1974 and the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and Consumer Credit (Agreements) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI2004/1482) the agreement cannot be enforced. 26. Notwithstanding points 16, 17 and 18, any such agreements must be signed in the prescribed manner by both debtor and creditor. If such a document is not signed by the debtor the document cannot be enforced by way of section 127(3) Consumer Credit Act 1974. 27. The claimant is therefore put to strict proof that such a compliant document exists. 28. It is neither admitted or denied that any Default Notice in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant. 29. Notwithstanding point 21, I put the claimant to strict proof that any default notice sent to me was valid. I note 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. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in 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 2004 (SI 2004/3237) 30. Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but would also give rise to a potential counterclaim for damages where damage occurs to my credit rating (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society - [1996] 4 All ER 119). 31. Without Disclosure of the relevant requested documentation I am unable to asses if I am indeed liable to the claimant, nor am I able to asses if the alleged agreement is properly executed, contain the required prescribed terms, or correct figures to make such an agreement enforceable by virtue of s127 Consumer Credit Act 1974 32. In view of the matters pleaded above, I respectfully request that the court gives consideration to whether the claimant's statement of case should be struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim, and/or that it fails to comply with CPR Part 16. 33. Alternatively, I respectfully request a stay in proceedings until such time as the claimant complies with the requests outlined in paragraph 22 above or until the court orders its compliance with the same. I will then be in a position to file a fully particularised defence and/or counterclaim and will seek the courts permission to amend my statement of case accordingly. 34. In addition it is drawn to the courts attention that schedule 3, s11 of the Consumer Credit Act 2006 prevents s15 repealing s127 (3) of the 1974 Act for agreements made before s15 came into effect since the agreement is alleged to have commenced in July 06 the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is the relevant Act in this case. 35. If the Claimant was not Citifinancial then it is not admitted that there was a lawful assignment. The Claimant is put to strict proof that the assignment was lawful and is put to strict proof that sufficient notice thereof was served upon myself. Without this proof the Claimant has no standing before the court. 36. The Law of Property Act 1925 is the relevant act that deals with the assignment of debts. Section 136(1) requires that for the assignment of a debt to be effective, express notice in writing must have been given to the debtor:- 36.1 Legal assignments of things in action. (a) Any absolute assignment by writing under the hand of the assignor (not purporting to be by way of charge only) of any debt or other legal thing in action, of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to claim such debt or thing in action, is effectual in law (subject to equities having priority over the right of the assignee) to pass and transfer from the date of such notice. (b) However, it is Section 196(4) that prescribes the requirements for giving sufficient notice by post:- 36.2 196. Regulations respecting notices. (a) Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-house, and if that letter is not returned [by the postal operator (within the meaning of the Postal Services Act 2000) concerned] undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered. (b) It is noted that by the Recorded Delivery Service Act 1962 a recorded delivery letter is equivalent to a registered letter and that under the Postal Services Act 2000 Schedule 8 any reference to registered post is to be construed as meaning a registered postal service (eg Royal Mail recorded delivery or special delivery). © For the assignment of a debt to be effective and so giving the Claimant a right of action a valid Notice of Assignment must have been sufficiently served on me using a registered postal service pursuant to s196(4) before proceedings were commenced. The Claimant is put to strict proof that any notice of assignment was sufficiently served on me before proceedings were commenced. Without this proof, the Claimant has no right of action. (d) Further, it is 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) (e) It is further averred that to be valid the the alleged notice of assignment must accurately describe the assignment including the date (W F Harrison & Co Ltd v Burke & another [1956] 2 ALL ER 169). 37. At this stage without documentation I am unable to plead fully to the claim. I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case else the Claim should stand struck out. 38. I respectfully ask the permission of the court to amend this defence and/or counterclaim when the claimant provides full disclosure of the requested documents. In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment. 39. The Defendant also respectfully asks the Court to transfer these proceedings to the Colchester County Court. Thank you!
  2. Yes it certainly is, as I would not pay an odd sum like that. I've had a copy of the signed CCA but no terms and conditions. No assignment from either Brittanica Recoveries or Arrow. Surely, it can't be legal for them to be suing me in another entity name?
  3. Hi, I'm not sure about doing that as looking through some paperwork that Arrow sent, it's all their paperwork and information and it says last payment received on 11/2/2009 for an amount of £13.24. Whether this is accurate or not I don't know as it isn't any kind of statement, just a date on their file. It seems a very strange amount for payment that I would make in any event. I don't want to run the risk of submitting a defence on the basis of statute barred and then I find it isn't. What would happen if I submitted a defence on being statue barred and then I find it is not? I understand what you are saying that they don't know much but Arrow have sent me a copy of the CCA agreement without any terms and conditions other than key information and it seems to me that is all they have on file. I have previously asked for all records, and they sent some information that they hold, including my credit file. I also note from their information records that the owner is Britannica Recoveries S.a.r.l. - Atlas but Arrow are bringing the claim? Thanks for your help and advice.
  4. Hi, yes the Particulars of Claim state nothing other than "the Claimant's claim is for the sum of £9320.78 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and Citifinancial Europe plc and assigned to the Claimant. Notice of the assignment has been provided to the Defendant. The Defendant has failed to make payments in accordance with the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served pursuant to the CCA 1974. AND the claimant claims the sum of GBP9320.78 TOGETHER with COSTS OF THIS CLAIM. Claimant Arrow Global Limited, Address for sending documents, Blake Lapthorn. No account number in the POA whatsoever. I am not confident in submitting a defence on SB basis as I can't be 100% of when I made the last payment, although I would recall 2008 but I don't have statements. Arrow Global Limited are the ones who are bringing the claim, but according to Citifinancial the debt was assigned to Britannica Recoveries S.a.r.l. How would this affect the claim, as it is another party who are bringing the claim. I have received a copy of the CCA agreement, uploaded earlier but have no terms and conditions. The only information on the CCA is key information and data protection stuff.
  5. Ok, I understand re SB. There is no account reference anywhere in the claim. Its at work and will double check tomorrow
  6. I wished I could find my old bank statements from the last statement I had from Citi was showing a payment no late 2006 before I lodged a claim about the PPI. I'm worried if I submit a SB defence, if and when it goes to court they can show it wasn't statute barred and as I'm a litigant in person it would be harder for me to defend this as I don't have the last statement. if I lodge a defence no NOA could I ask to re-amend defence and then change to statute barred. Also do these debt purchasing companies issued summons without the account number? Really feeling confused and don't know what to do
  7. I have looked into the limitation act and pinsent masons definition of statute barred Contract l Within six years of the date of breach l The cause of action occurs as soon as the contract is breached. By contrast, in tort, no cause of action arises until all elements of duty, breach and damage are present l Unlike tort, the limitation period cannot be extended on latent damage grounds. I haven't made any payments to citi since 2007. I know from my credit record that CitiFinancial defaulted me in August 2008 and Arrow on the same date as Citi for the same debt about 3 years ago. the default came off my credit record in August this year as its now passed the six years. I would like to submit my defence on the debt being statute barred and if I do so, would I then be able to defend on other grounds too. I only ever had a letter from Citi saying they assigned the debt to Britannica recoveries S.a,r.l. in Luxembourg but arrow are saying it was then assigned from Britannica to arrow, no notice of assignments having ever been received. I would like to submit my defence next week. Thank you for your help
  8. Would I have a defence for statue barred. I have not made any payments to this Citifinancial loan since 2007? thanks
  9. Yes, and according to CitiFinancial assigned to Britannica recoveries but have never received any notice of assignments. No t&cs only that small piece of key information and data protection information. Is anyone able to help with my defence. Thank you
  10. Tried again and have managed to upload. Thanks for your help
  11. I notice that is says "I understand that I am purchasing the product(s) ticked above on the credit provided by you and that the terms relating to the credit for the products can be found in clauses 1(a) and 5(a) in this agreement. I have never had, nor have they provided any terms and conditions other than the key information on the CCA.
  12. Hi, shall I upload the agreement. To be honest, I am not sure if they have included all the T&C's. There is a section of key information after the breakdown and at the bottom it say's important - read this carefully to find out about your rights, (1) - (3) and then on the next page says if you want to know more about your rights under the Act, contact local trading standards department. The rest is Data protection, and the other pages are for the insurance they sold me and notes with that too. I have never had any separate terms, just that small section of key information. I will copy and upload
  13. Hi, I received a copy of the CCA agreement yesterday. I did ask for loan A, B and C as they were ordered by the Ombudsman to re-write each loan as every time a balance was carried forward , it was incorrect in that the redemption included the PPI. I only received the current loan agreement from Arrow. No statements, no default notices and no assignments. From a letter from Citifinancial in 2008 they say the account was assigned to Britannica Recoveries S.a.r.l in Luxembourg and from the Arrow letter received yesterday Britannica Recoveries in Luxembourg have assigned to Arrow. I have never received any Notice of Assignments from either. I have received no statements or breakdown of payments made to the current agreement, and as the Ombudsman ordered Citifinancial to re-write the current agreement (plus the other 2 agreements) to ensure that the correct figures were carried forward, which they never did. I have a few days more to prepare a defence can anyone help and on what basis and I feel I want to make a counterclaim. I have spent so many years in correspondence Citifinancial and the Ombudsman on this. Also, when the ombudsman ruled about the PPI, as Citifinancial had sold me 5 different up front policies in total, they only paid up for 3 of them, and I have them to write to the Ombudsman again to re-open the case to have the other 2 dealt with, even though in their original decision they had to refund every single one. I have so much paperwork and it has taken up so much of my time and they do not want to seem to recalculate the loans to which the current agreement would have been a different amount. I haven't made any payments since late 2007 to Citifinancial. Thank you, your help is appreciated.
×
×
  • Create New...