Thanks for putting me on the right path
Is this OK then?
1.By an agreement between Egg Banking plc (EGG) &t he Defendnt on or arround 20/03/2006 ('the Agreement') EGG agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit card.
2. The Defendant failed to make the minimum payments due & the Agreement was terminated.
3.The Agreement was assigned to the Claimant on 31/01/2013.
THE CLAIMANT THEREFORE CLAIMS
2.Interest pursuant to section 69 of the county court Ace 1984, namely 1045.32
& contuning until Judgment or sooner payment at the rate 0.45
I contend the particulars of claim as they are vague and generic in nature. I accordingly set out my case below and rely on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.
1. I have held an account with Egg Banking PLC for credit card services however I do not recall the particular account number referred to and have requested a copy of the alleged agreement pertaining to this claim. This was sent recorded delivery and signed for on the 2nd June 2015. As of this date the claimant has failed to comply with my section 78 request and therefore remains in default of s78.
2. I deny having received statutory notices in the form of a Default Notice required under s87(1) of the consumer credit Act. I also deny having received statutory notices in the form of Notice of Sums in Arrears as required by the Consumer Credit Act.
3. I deny receiving any Notice of Assignment Pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925 and the Claimant is required to prove they are able to bring this claim.
4. The Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31.14 which was sent recorded delivery and signed for on the 5th June 2015, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:
(a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and
(b) Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and
© Show evidence of service of a Default Notice and Notice of Sums in Arrears
(d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;
5. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed by providing full accounting of the amount they have claimed.
6. On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the Act 1974.
7. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.