WHAT PROCEDURES SHOULD BE FOLLOWED IN THIS AS THEY HAVE STORED THE FRONT DOCUMENT ON MICROFICHE AND HAVE NOT SUPPLIED ANY PAPERWORK REGARDING THIS PROCEDURE OR DISPOSAL.

The POC are: The Claimants claim is for (between 5-6) presently due pursuant to a credit agreement entered into by the parties, full particulars of the claim have been supplied hitherto. By an agreement dated 30/10/2003 the defendant has an account number (blah blah) with the claimant. The Defendant has failed or delayed to adhere to the terms of the default notice issued by the claimant under the terms of the consumer credit act 1974. The balance as at (blah blah) on said account is (Between 5-6)" This was all they submitted on the form. No other documents at the time. Tell me what to look for exactly in the t&C's and I'll check it.

Yes. The request was ignored by the claimant and I advised the court of this. They did not seem interested. Thanks for the help. The arguments that I will need to nail down are: 1) Made a request for docs under the Data Protection Act ‘Subject Access Request’. The claimant failed to produce the documents within the timescales and denied receiving these requests. I made a complaint to The Information Commissioner Office. They have put in writing that it is likely that they broke the sixth principle of the data protection act. 2) Made a request under the Consumer Credit Act for copy of agreement. The claimant failed to send this within the timescale and submitted reconstructed docs, as well as the front copy of the application form a month overdue later. These were in response to concerns I had about the agreement and charges. 3) I do not recall ever receiving a default notice. When challenged about this, the claimant has only produced a template, a computer print out of the date it was alleged sent and no proof of postage. 4) When submitting original defence, claimant failed to produce docs in response to my CPR requests until after the due date of the defence to be submitted. 5) I only received a reverse copy of what they stated would have been on the reverse side, one working day before the allocation hearing, along with a change of solicitor. 6) After the allocation hearing, in response to submitting an amended defence, as granted by the judge, made another cpr request to claimant. Again, they failed to clarify my questions and send info. Made a N244 application. At the hearing judge ordered both parties to exchange documents by a certain date, and then agree what was in the court pack a week later. 7) Claimant failed to produce these by the due date. They did write stating that this would be delayed by failed to produce this by the day they said they would. Court have been notified of this. Docs, as well as witness statement sent the day the court was notified. This is the chain of events. a) Need to nail down what is wrong with the application form/ credit agreement. This includes not complying with the requirements for credit agreements. The A4 t&C’s is the same as the reconstructed, except it does not have my name and top part. They claim this would have been on the reverse of the application bearing my name. b) Need to nail down the Waksman ruling as they have used this a couple of times now in their correspondence. I know the case was set up in response to a section 78 request but how can they use this and what can I do to counter this. I know some of the answers but need to clarify in my mind the response, so any help would be appreciated.

Thanks. I will read through this. I have tried at the allocation hearing and at a n244 hearing to advise the court that the claimant has not complied with Civil Procedure rules. Each time I was left with the impression that these rules do not apply to a small claims court. When the original court notice came through, I wrote to the claimant requesting info. This did not come for when I requested and I had to submit an embarrassed defence. At the allocation hearing I was ordered to amend my defence as the claimant stated that I had all the documents. This was the first time they admitted nit having the originals. In response I wrote to the claimant to clarify what they had verbally stated in court and to supply there documents. This did not happen by the due day and I applied for a N244 hearing. This came, but the judge dismissed my application as the claimant had supplied everything they were going to. The judge however, ordered that both parties exchange documents by a certain date. After the hearing the claimant's solicitor advised me that courts were not looking favourably at people trying the unenforceable route and advised me to get proper legal advise. The claimant failed to supply the document by the date. They had written stating that they could not supply these until a certain date. I wrote back stating that I expect them to follow the judges request. The failed to give the documents on the date that they said they would. This included the witness statement. Can you advise me what is wrong with this agreement and do you have any case histories regarding it being illegible? Will come back with more questions tomorrow, once I have read up on the info you have given so far.

I have a court case due in the next few days. This is in a small claims court. The alleged debt is £5800 but it has been agreed that this should be fast tracked. Just need help and clarification on the following: 1) Here is a copy of my application form. The claimant is stating that this is a credit agreement. It is illegible in places. I was given recently a copy of what would have been on the reverse. This was a day before the allocation hearing. This was in a4 format, and is the same as a reconstructed copy they are relying on. a) There is a front copy of the said agreement, which clearly states application form, but is almost illegible in places. http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u.../agreement.jpg B) They have supplied a reconstructed credit agreement, not a copy of the original. The A4 copy that they claim (would have been on the reverse) is the same as this Page 1: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted1.jpg Page 2: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted2.jpg Page 3: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted3.jpg Page 4: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted4.jpg Page 5: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted5.jpg Page 6: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted6.jpg 2) The credit card agreement is no longer in existence. This was taken out in October 2003. They have admitted this and on their witness statement the bank has certified the copy is admissible by virtue of sections 8(1) and 9(1) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995. They have certified for the purposes of section 9(2) of the act that this is a true copy document which forms part of the banks business. They have certified this and dated 21 June 2010. 3) They have also produced a copy of a similar application form which is different to the one I signed and they have stated that the terms are the same. I would appreciate some advice on what is exactly wrong with all of the above and how I can specifically legally argue these faults. I also need to understand why they must produce the original in court and why under Money Laundering regulations why they have not kept a copy or submitted the documents proving of the originals disposal. I have also had issues with the claimant failing to submit documents by a certain time, which was ordered by the court. These were given to me 5 days past the due date. The courts have been advised but I have heard noting. Help! Am beginning to panic and advice to help my defence would be appreciated.

I have submitted my documents to the other side in accordance to a court order stating that both parties must exchange documents today. The claimant has failed to do this and wrote saying that they would not be able to submit these and their witness statement until the 22nd. I wrote to them with my info and stated that I expect them to comply with the court order by the due date. The next part of the the order states that we must then to agree what is in the court bundle between the 21st and 25th June and submit the court bundle. What can I do and what should I do? The case is due to be heard in the small claims court on the 8th July. They clearly are at an advantage as they have had my info now and have time to prepare their own bundle.

Just advice, I have a small claim hearing for a credit card taken out in 2003. Afte a hearing, the judge ordered that the claimiant and myself exchange all documents by tomorrow (18th) I have received a letter from them stating that they are unable to supply these until the 22nd. There has been a long history of them non complieing with my requests for information and now they are seeking to delay things further, despite the court order. The credit agreement does not conform to the 1974 consumer credit act and is not enforceable under section 127 by a court of law. I am going to say to the opposition that I expect their complaince with the court order and ensure that I send them my documents. I am correct by saying apart from my defence, all I have to send is the documents I intend to use in court and I do not need a witness statement. (Will be just the same as the defence) What can I do with the claimants non compliance with the court order? Any urgent advice would be appreciated. I have tried the n244 route but this was not successful. At the hearing they did order that all documents to be exchanged by tomorrow and the court bundle to be agreed by the 22nd.

Just a quick question. I have submitted a defence to the court and after a N244 hearing, the court ordered that all documents related to the case must be submitted by a certain date by both parties. This is due up shortly. I have copies of all the documents I want to submit. Need to know what I need to send with it plus, I have received a letter today from the other solicitors stating that their statement of witness will not be ready until 4 days after this date and asking permission for this to be extended. How should I respond as I have asked on so many occasions for everything?

Have my hearing tomorrow. I urgently need clarification on the previous points, namely: I have a good idea that they are going to use the Waksman ruling as part of their defence as they have already mentioned this in their letters and I noticed they had a copy with them at the allocation hearing. How should I respond to their letter in terms of We are surprised to receive a further cpr31.14 request from you as you are fully aware from the allocation hearing at the county court that you have in your possession all relevant documents to enable you to file a fully particularised defence and it is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise. I am sure that they will try to bring this up and I want to be able to respond to this. I am slightly confused where it states that pre 2006 (or is it 4) cc agreements have to have the original agreement, and why post 2006 agreements don't. Again I want to be able to cover this avenue. In terms of disposing the agreement, which they have only keep a copy, I have thrown the Money Laundering regs at them stating that all originals have to be kept for 5 years after the relationship has ended. Any help would be appreciated.

Have my hearing tomorrow. I urgently need clarification on the previous points, namely: I have a good idea that they are going to use the Waksman ruling as part of their defence as they have already mentioned this in their letters and I noticed they had a copy with them at the allocation hearing. How should I respond to their letter in terms of We are surprised to receive a further cpr31.14 request from you as you are fully aware from the allocation hearing at the county court that you have in your possession all relevant documents to enable you to file a fully particularised defence and it is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise. I am sure that they will try to bring this up and I want to be able to respond to this. I am slightly confused where it states that pre 2006 (or is it 4) cc agreements have to have the original agreement, and why post 2006 agreements don't. Again I want to be able to cover this avenue. In terms of disposing the agreement, which they have only keep a copy, I have thrown the Money Laundering regs at them stating that all originals have to be kept for 5 years after the relationship has ended. Any help would be appreciated.

OK. I have grasped the default notice. I have a good idea that they are going to use the Waksman ruling as part of their defence as they have already mentioned this in their letters and I noticed they had a copy with them at the allocation hearing. How should I respond to their letter in terms of We are surprised to receive a further cpr31.14 request from you as you are fully aware from the allocation hearing at the county court that you have in your possession all relevant documents to enable you to file a fully particularised defence and it is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise. I am sure that they will try to bring this up and I want to be able to respond to this. I am slightly confused where it states that pre 2006 (or is it 4) cc agreements have to have the original agreement, and why post 2006 agreements don't. Again I want to be able to cover this avenue. In terms of disposing the agreement, which they have only keep a copy, I have thrown the Money Laundering regs at them stating that all originals have to be kept for 5 years after the relationship has ended.

I have only been sent a photo copy of the original application/ credit agreement form which is illegible in places.

Hi I have had an on going dispute with Sainsburys bank and need some advice. I have had the orginal court papers, submitted an embarrassed defence as the claimant failed to observe pre court protocols, had the allocation hearing and I was requested to submit a new defence. I have written a CPR 31.14 request again and they have failed to produce this. I have now had to submit a new defence, however, I have sent in a N244 request and copied the claimant in. The court have granted a hearing next week. My N244 claim and draft orders were: An order (a draft of which is attached) that the Claimiant do search for and disclose the documents listed in the Schedule attached to the draft Order ("the Schedule") because without production of the requested documents, I am at a disadvantage and am unable to serve a proper defence. Failure of the claimant to supply the requested documentation will make the case much harder for the court to deal with as without production of the requested documentation will inhibit the courts ability to deal with the case. The respondent's duty of disclosure in those proceedings would extend to the documents listed in the Schedule and disclosure is desirable in order to dispose fairely of the anticipated proceedings . If the court is in agreement, the defendant respectfully requests that special directions may be given as per the attached draft order. The defendant proposes these directions in mind of the Overriding Objectives, and in particular the duty of the parties to help the court further them. The issues outlined below are the crux upon which this claim rests, and the proposed directions identify these issues and will allow them to be assessed in advance of the hearing so that this claim may proceed justly and expeditiously; The House of Lords in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) made it clear in paragraph 29 of LORD NICHOLLS OF BIRKENHEAD judgment 29. The court's powers under section 127(1) are subject to significant qualification in two types of cases. The first type is where section 61(1)(a), regarding signing of agreements, is not complied with. In such cases the court 'shall not make' an enforcement order unless a document, whether or not in the prescribed form, containing all the prescribed terms, was signed by the debtor: section 127(3). Thus, signature of a document containing all the prescribed terms is an essential prerequisite to the court's power to make an enforcement order. The second type of case concerns failure to comply with the duty to supply a copy of an executed or unexecuted agreement pursuant to sections 62 and 63, or failure to comply with the duty to give notice of cancellation rights in accordance with section 64(1). Here again, subject to one exception regarding sections 62 and63, section 127(4) precludes the court from making an enforcement order. The claimiant has sent a reconstructed copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement and an illegible copy of an application form, neither of which are enforceable and therefore would waste the courts time. A copy of the original credit agreement has been requested on a number of occasions. It is also a requirement of the Money Laundering Regulations Act 2007 that documents must be kept for 5 years after the relationship has ended. The attached proposed direction deals with this should a copy not exist. The courts attention is drawn to the following: The full particulars EG: Copy of the credit agreement, default and so on, were not supplied with the particulars of claim, of which was vague. The particulars of claim were also vague. The claimant has not followed pre court protocols and have not responded within the sipulated timescales. They have continually breached this both prior to submitting my original defence and prior to my allocation hearing. In response to the allocation hearing I have written to the claimiant to request documents and clarification. They have once again failed to comply with pre court protocols and I am disadvanateged as I am unable to submit a proper defence. They are contining to frustrate proceedings and I respectfully request that the court considers my N244 request. They have also shown a disregard for the correct procedures. Prior to this coming to court they have frustrated proceedings. On the 27th April 2009, I made a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998(Data Protection Act). I again sent a copy of this letter, along with a reminder on the 13th May, of which I retained proof of postage. The Claimant failed to comply within the required 40 day period, therefore broke the Sixth Data Protection Principle (that data is processed in line with the rights of the individual) I wrote to the Information Commisioner to complain. He responded by saying: “As you have provided proof of postage it is now my view that it is likely Sainsburys Bank failed to comply with the sixth data protection principle (that personal data is processed in line with the rights of the individual) in this case. This is because it now seems reasonable to assume Sainsburys Bank would have received your subject Access Request and therefore would have failed to comply with it within the required 40 day period. Therefore it is now my view that it is unlikely Sainsburys Bank complied with the Data Protection Act in this case” I also made a consumer credit agreement request which they failed to respond within the 12 plus 2 day period and have they have defaulted on the consumer credit act. Therefore it stands to reason that this document must be disclosed before this case can proceed any further. And here is the draft order: Draft Order for Directions 1. The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of this order send to the Defendant and to the Court: a) a copy of the executed agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for the account. This is the original Credit agreement which was signed by the defendant and in its original form, including the original terms and conditions. b) a statement signed by or on behalf of the Claimant Sainsburys bank showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,-- (i) the state of the account, (ii) the amount, if any currently payable under the agreement by the Defendant to the Claimant Sainsburys Bank. c) i) copies of Default Notices issued pursuant to s87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 by the Claimant Sainsburys Bank to the Defendant. ii) The Claimant is also put strict to proof that such a document was sent. e) if copies of any of the above documents are to be relied on in court rather than originals, a copy of the Notice of proposal to adduce hearsay evidence required under s2(1) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 together with proof of the authenticity of the document(s) as required under s8(1)(b) of the Act, including but not limited to: (i) a copy of the procedure(s) used for copying, storing and retrieving documents (ii) a copy of the relevant log entry showing the time and date of the scan or copy, the name of the member of staff making the copy, the method used for copying, storage and retrieval and time and date of destruction of the original document(s)(iii) copies of internal and external audit reports covering the entire period from the date of the copy to the present to demonstrate that the procedures have been complied with (iv) copies of Quality Assurance accreditation certificates covering the entire period from the date of the copy to the present to demonstrate that the procedure(s) and audit process(es) comply with the appropriate quality standards v) In pursuant to the Money Laundering Regulations Act 2007, an explanation why the originals have not been kept for the required legal period. If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order. However, the day after the defence was due (Seems a familiar pattern) I received this from the solicitors. The deadline for my CPR request had expired. Thankyou for your letter, the contents of which have been noted. We are surprised to receive a further cpr31.14 request from you as you are fully aware from the allocation hearing at the county court that you have in your possession all relevant documents to enable you to file a fully particularised defence and it is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise. We note that you are also asking for a copy of the default notice when again you are fully aware that the claimant has not retained a copy of the default notice and is not obliged to do so and does not due for practical reasons, due to the large numbers of such notices issued. For the avoidance of doubt we enclose further copies of the following: (Copies of my letters requesting info under CPR) Solicitors letter of 16th April (This letter enclosed a copy of the terms and conditions. They stated that this is what is would have looked like) Claimant’s computer records showing the default notice was issued on the 12th May 2009. Copy of the template used to generate the default notice Signed Credit Agreement and terms and conditions overleaf. (First time they have said the terms and conditions overleaf- before is what it would have looked like- This is a contradiction of what they have said in the past. In addition the document is illegible in places) The claimant does not have to produce the original document, which is no longer available (First time they have put this in writing). The copy held on the claimant’s computer systems and exhibited here is admissible by virtue of sections 8 (1) and 9 (1) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995. The claimant will certify for the purposes of section 9 (2) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 that the copy Application Form/ Agreement is a true copy document which forms part of the records of the claimants business at witness evidence stage if necessary. A reconstructed version of the original agreement A copy of the current terms and conditions of the credit agreement. We re-literate that you have all the relevant documents in your possession to file a fully pleaded defence and we trust that you will do this as a matter of urgency. With this in mind, in simple terms, what will I need to prepare at the hearing, what do I need to avoid and how should I respond to this. Here is a copy of the things they have sent which I do not beleive are enforceable: 1) There is a front copy of the said agreement, which clearly states application form, but is almost illegible in places. http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u.../agreement.jpg 2) This is the reconstructed credit agreement, not a copy of the original. The copy of the t&C's of what would have appeared on the back is identical to this reconstructed version, except it does not have my personal details on copy and is condensed to A4. Page 1: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted1.jpg Page 2: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted2.jpg Page 3: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted3.jpg Page 4: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted4.jpg Page 5: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted5.jpg Page 6: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted6.jpg The issues that I can see them raising are the Waksman ruling and their agruement that they do not have to produce the originals, that I am fully aware that I have everything needed to make a defence, they do not have to provide originals and they do not have to keep a copy of the default notice. Instinct says that as they have admitted that they do not have the originals is that at the hearing I should apply for a strike out. I have limited time so any help would be appreciated.

Hi I submitted my N244 request and copied the claimant in. The court have granted a hearing on their non compliance, however, they wanted a defence based on what I have been given to be submitted. However, the day after the defence was due (Seems a familiar pattern) I received this from the solicitors. The deadline for my CPR request had expired. Thankyou for your letter, the contents of which have been noted. We are surprised to receive a further cpr31.14 request from you as you are fully aware from the allocation hearing at the county court that you have in your possession all relevant documents to enable you to file a fully particularised defence and it is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise. We note that you are also asking for a copy of the default notice when again you are fully aware that the claimant has not retained a copy of the default notice and is not obliged to do so and does not due for practical reasons, due to the large numbers of such notices issued. For the avoidance of doubt we enclose further copies of the following: (Copies of my letters requesting info under CPR) Solicitors letter of 16th April (This letter enclosed a copy of the terms and conditions. They stated that this is what is would have looked like) Claimant’s computer records showing the default notice was issued on the 12th May 2009. Copy of the template used to generate the default notice Signed Credit Agreement and terms and conditions overleaf. (First time they have said the terms and conditions overleaf- before is what it would have looked like- This is a contradiction of what they have said in the past. In addition the document is illegible in places) The claimant does not have to produce the original document, which is no longer available (First time they have put this in writing). The copy held on the claimant’s computer systems and exhibited here is admissible by virtue of sections 8 (1) and 9 (1) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995. The claimant will certify for the purposes of section 9 (2) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 that the copy Application Form/ Agreement is a true copy document which forms part of the records of the claimants business at witness evidence stage if necessary. A reconstructed version of the original agreement A copy of the current terms and conditions of the credit agreement. We re-literate that you have all the relevant documents in your possession to file a fully pleaded defence and we trust that you will do this as a matter of urgency. With this in mind, in simple terms, what will I need to prepare at the hearing, what do I need to avoid and how should I respond to this. Here is a copy of the things they have sent which I do not beleive are enforceable: 1) There is a front copy of the said agreement, which clearly states application form, but is almost illegible in places. http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u.../agreement.jpg 2) This is the reconstructed credit agreement, not a copy of the original. The copy of the t&C's of what would have appeared on the back is identical to this reconstructed version, except it does not have my personal details on copy and is condensed to A4. Page 1: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted1.jpg Page 2: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted2.jpg Page 3: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted3.jpg Page 4: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted4.jpg Page 5: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted5.jpg Page 6: http://i663.photobucket.com/albums/u...onstrcted6.jpg The issues that I can see them raising are the Waksman ruling and their agruement that they do not have to produce the originals, that I am fully aware that I have everything needed to make a defence, they do not have to provide originals and they do not have to keep a copy of the default notice. Instinct says that as they have admitted that they do not have the originals is that at the hearing I should apply for a strike out. I have limited time so any help would be appreciated.

Ok. Looks straight forward. I will add with the cover letter: According to Carey V HSBC s78 HHJ WAKSMAN QC sitting at The High Court in Manchester late last year stated that copies of Consumer Credit Act 1974 agreements only satisfy information purposes only and do not go to PROOF OF EXECUTION. Therefore I require the original in its unaltered form. I have stated 14 days for them to comply, however, can I shorten this to 7 days as I have given them more than enough time to comply?

I have not heard from anyone for the last few days. I need to submit a N244 tomorrow and I am unsure what to do. I am going to submit the following, but please correct me if I am wrong, or if you can thinj of other stuff to put in/ take out. Letter to go with draft order An order (a draft of which is attached) that the Claimiant do search for and disclose the documents listed in the Schedule attached to the draft Order ("the Schedule") because without production of the requested documents, I am at a disadvantage and am unable to serve a proper defence. Failure of the claimant to supply the requested documentation will make the case much harder for the court to deal with as without production of the requested documentation will inhibit the courts ability to deal with the case. The respondent's duty of disclosure in those proceedings would extend to the documents listed in the Schedule and disclosure is desirable in order to dispose fairely of the anticipated proceedings . If the court is in agreement, the defendant respectfully requests that special directions may be given as per the attached draft order. The defendant proposes these directions in mind of the Overriding Objectives, and in particular the duty of the parties to help the court further them. The issues outlined below are the crux upon which this claim rests, and the proposed directions identify these issues and will allow them to be assessed in advance of the hearing so that this claim may proceed justly and expeditiously; The House of Lords in the case of Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) made it clear in paragraph 29 of LORD NICHOLLS OF BIRKENHEAD judgment 29. The court's powers under section 127(1) are subject to significant qualification in two types of cases. The first type is where section 61(1)(a), regarding signing of agreements, is not complied with. In such cases the court 'shall not make' an enforcement order unless a document, whether or not in the prescribed form, containing all the prescribed terms, was signed by the debtor: section 127(3). Thus, signature of a document containing all the prescribed terms is an essential prerequisite to the court's power to make an enforcement order. The second type of case concerns failure to comply with the duty to supply a copy of an executed or unexecuted agreement pursuant to sections 62 and 63, or failure to comply with the duty to give notice of cancellation rights in accordance with section 64(1). Here again, subject to one exception regarding sections 62 and63, section 127(4) precludes the court from making an enforcement order. The claimiant has sent a reconstructed copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement and an illegible copy of an application form, neither of which are enforceable and therefore would waste the courts time. A copy of the original credit agreement has been requested on a number of occasions. It is also a requirement of the Money Laundering Regulations Act 2007 that documents must be kept for 5 years after the relationship has ended. The attached proposed direction deals with this should a copy not exist. The courts attention is drawn to the following: The full particulars EG: Copy of the credit agreement, default and so on, were not supplied with the particulars of claim, of which was vague. The particulars of claim were also vague. The claimant has not followed pre court protocols and have not responded within the sipulated timescales. They have continually breached this both prior to submitting my original defence and prior to my allocation hearing. In response to the allocation hearing I have written to the claimiant to request documents and clarification. They have once again failed to comply with pre court protocols and I am disadvanateged as I am unable to submit a proper defence. They are contining to frustrate proceedings and I respectfully request that the court considers my N244 request. They have also shown a disregard for the correct procedures. Prior to this coming to court they have frustrated proceedings. On the 27th April 2009, I made a Subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998(Data Protection Act). I again sent a copy of this letter, along with a reminder on the 13th May, of which I retained proof of postage. The Claimant failed to comply within the required 40 day period, therefore broke the Sixth Data Protection Principle (that data is processed in line with the rights of the individual) I wrote to the Information Commisioner to complain. He responded by saying: “As you have provided proof of postage it is now my view that it is likely Sainsburys Bank failed to comply with the sixth data protection principle (that personal data is processed in line with the rights of the individual) in this case. This is because it now seems reasonable to assume Sainsburys Bank would have received your subject Access Request and therefore would have failed to comply with it within the required 40 day period. Therefore it is now my view that it is unlikely Sainsburys Bank complied with the Data Protection Act in this case” I also made a consumer credit agreement request which they failed to respond within the 12 plus 2 day period and have they have defaulted on the consumer credit act. Therefore it stands to reason that these documents must be disclosed before this case can proceed any further. Draft Order: 1. The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of this order send to the Defendant and to the Court: a) a copy of the executed agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for the account. This is the original Credit agreement which was signed by the defendant and in its original form, including the original terms and conditions. b) a statement signed by or on behalf of the Claimant Sainsburys bank showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,-- (i) the state of the account, (ii) the amount, if any currently payable under the agreement by the Defendant to the Claimant Sainsburys Bank. c) i) copies of Default Notices issued pursuant to s87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 by the Claimant Sainsburys Bank to the Defendant. ii) The Claimant is also put strict to proof that such a document was sent. e) if copies of any of the above documents are to be relied on in court rather than originals, a copy of the Notice of proposal to adduce hearsay evidence required under s2(1) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995 together with proof of the authenticity of the document(s) as required under s8(1)(b) of the Act, including but not limited to: (i) a copy of the procedure(s) used for copying, storing and retrieving documents (ii) a copy of the relevant log entry showing the time and date of the scan or copy, the name of the member of staff making the copy, the method used for copying, storage and retrieval and time and date of destruction of the original document(s) (iii) copies of internal and external audit reports covering the entire period from the date of the copy to the present to demonstrate that the procedures have been complied with (iv) copies of Quality Assurance accreditation certificates covering the entire period from the date of the copy to the present to demonstrate that the procedure(s) and audit process(es) comply with the appropriate quality standards v) In pursuant to the Money Laundering Regulations Act 2007, an explanation why the originals have not been kept for the required legal period. If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

april 2009 and to the new company in feb 2010. Just had the new compnay send me statements but not deed of assignment or proof that they legally own the debt. I have now written to the information comissioner.

Thanks. It is very much appreciated with everyones advice. Its helping me to not get too stressed about the situation. Next question. What is the best way to fill in the form and draft order?? RGB

Will do. I have to apply for help with costs as I am on a low income. Still can't work out how much its going to cost me to do the N244.

I have had no reply from the solicitors regarding my letter for copies under cpr, and the deadline expires tonight. I have also had a note from the court. It states; Deputy Judge **** has considered the statements of case and allocation questionaires filed and allocated the claim to the small claims court. The hearing will take place on a date to be fixed at the court... Defendent permission to file an amended defence by 4 on 12 may 2010. All parties not less than 14 days before hearing date must send to the other and to the court office. Typed and signed statements setting out evidence of all the witnesses on which each party intends to reply. This includes the evidence of the parties themselves and copies of all documents, invoices, letters or estimates that relate to the case. Does this effect my letter and defence if I go for a strike out before, as I the party has not responded???

Nothing apart from a couple of computer print outs and a screen shot showing the date of 30th Sep. The default notice was sent on the 7th October and should have finished 14 (plus 2) days after that. I received a letter dated 14th October stating that it had been sold to Experto. The default notice did not comply with the regs.

If I write to MBNA again, this will be the third subject access request I have done. Like Experto, they were late in giving me the info and they did not supply all the information. What to stop them from doing so again?

m2ae In case I have to do this, if they do not return the items requested or ignore these (As they have done before), I would have to go for a court application to obtain these docs. a) Its an N244 application notice? b) I can pass the costs onto the claimant in filing this? c) Been trying to work out the fees on this? Any idea. I am also on a low income and I understand that I can apply for reduced costs. Can this be applied whilst serving an N244? d) Do you have any examples of what to fill out?

M2AE Thanks for that. Will keep you posted. RGB

Surely the new debt company should have the deed of asignment and proof that they are the rightful owner. They should have some documentation proving the sale to them and on which date??