Win some lose some. Judge spent 40 mins finding a case to help the solicitor!

Lost Judge said the default notice was invalid but he spent 40 minutes finding a case Brandon Vs American Express (as the solicitor they sent said he has no defence for the invalid notice) he said the agreement is valid Jurisdiction issue he said isn’t valid as it says valid in English Law

But the judge will surely say xxxx what do I say to the whole although not having two days I mean having been shorted two days they did receive the secondary and third notices. So the additional notices are invalid end of

But I mean counters to their counters

But what is the legal arguments

But how do I say that in legal speak

So it’s court next week…

I’ve had a claimant witness statement come through today.

My main arguments are the Background Information: I am the Defendant in this case, and I am disputing the validity of the Default Notice and the alleged Paypal credit agreement provided by the Claimant, Lowells. I believe the Default Notice is invalid and the credit agreement is not properly executed, as detailed below. On 18.01.2020, I received a Default Notice from the Claimant, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 14 days. According to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach. The Default Notice was dated the 15th, with an expiry to remedy by the 29th. Assuming it was posted on the same day it was written, it could not have arrived to me until at least 2 days later. As a result, I was not given the full 14 days required by the Act to remedy the default, since at least 2 days were used for postage. Therefore, I argue that the Default Notice is invalid. Improperly Executed Credit Agreement: The Claimant has provided a copy of the alleged credit agreement, which I believe is not properly executed pursuant to Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The copy of the agreement provided lacks any signature, IP address, or tick box verification, as required by Section 4 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 for electronic agreements. Due to these missing elements, I argue that the agreement is improperly executed. Jurisdictional Issue: Furthermore, the alleged credit agreement provided appears to be a PayPal EU agreement. As a result, the agreement is not a UK credit agreement and could have been taken out in any country and I argue that this agreement falls outside the jurisdiction of this court.

Received a new court date. 3rd August now. So ....

Following

Still not heard anything... is this typical?

ok I'll sent that off. Fingers crossed. Thanks for your support. Appreciate it

this better? In the county Court at Brighton Claim No. xxxxxx Mr xxxxxx -AND- Lowell Portfolio I LTD Witness Statement of: xx xxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx 11/04/2023 Witness Statement for PayPal Credit Agreement Dispute I, XXXXX, hereby declare that the following statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Background Information: I am the Defendant in this case, and I am disputing the validity of the Default Notice and the alleged Paypal credit agreement provided by the Claimant, Lowells. I believe the Default Notice is invalid and the credit agreement is not properly executed, as detailed below. On 18.01.2020, I received a Default Notice from the Claimant, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 14 days. According to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach. The Default Notice was dated the 15th, with an expiry to remedy by the 29th. Assuming it was posted on the same day it was written, it could not have arrived to me until at least 2 days later. As a result, I was not given the full 14 days required by the Act to remedy the default, since at least 2 days were used for postage. Therefore, I argue that the Default Notice is invalid. Improperly Executed Credit Agreement: The Claimant has provided a copy of the alleged credit agreement, which I believe is not properly executed pursuant to Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The copy of the agreement provided lacks any signature, IP address, or tick box verification, as required by Section 4 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 for electronic agreements. Due to these missing elements, I argue that the agreement is improperly executed. Jurisdictional Issue: Furthermore, the alleged credit agreement provided appears to be a pre-Brexit PayPal EU agreement. As a result of Brexit, the jurisdiction of such agreements has changed, and I argue that this agreement falls outside the jurisdiction of this court. Statement of Truth: I, XXXX, confirm that the contents of this witness statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signed: XX XXXXXXX 13.04.2023

Shall I send it anyway and see if it is accepted it won’t do any harm. shall I upload my witness statement and would you take a look? I know I’ve been a bit doodoo so far. should I just quote legislation or do I need to include the actual legislation in the witness statement like quote the actual bit.

Any tips ? Do you have any cases to quote for the PayPal jurisdiction the case has been postponed. The court emailed yesterday to say they might delayed the case as they have double booked and they called this morning to say they will post out a new date for the case to be heard. Do I have extra time to correct witness statements?

this is their WS crap, hope I don't lose the chance to defend the case.... such an idiot...### My WS ... I basically sent what I had above - feel a bit embarrassed to post it now... Claimants WS.pdf

Oh… I did submit it already … will I find out on the day?

I’ll carry on reading up on this. Hope it goes well on the day Can I upload the witness statement? Would you still have any time to help?

Shall I send this off? Email the claimant and post to the courts? Invalid Default Notice: On 18.01.2020, I received a Default Notice from Paypal Europe SOrl & Cie SCA, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 14 days. However, according to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach, and this period should also account for the additional time needed for postage, which would be at least 2 days. In this case, the Default Notice provided me with 14 days to comply but did not include the extra 2 days for postage. Considering the postage time, the effective period provided for me to remedy the breach should have been 16 days, making the Default Notice invalid. Improperly Executed Credit Agreement: The Claimant has provided a copy of the alleged credit agreement, which I believe is not properly executed pursuant to Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The copy of the agreement provided lacks any signature, IP address, or tick box verification, as required by Section 4 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 for electronic agreements. Due to these missing elements, I argue that the agreement is improperly executed. Jurisdictional Issue: Furthermore, the alleged credit agreement provided appears to be a pre-Brexit PayPal EU agreement. As a result of Brexit, the jurisdiction of such agreements has changed, and I argue that this agreement falls outside the jurisdiction of this court.

I can do it now working on it asap Ok sk dn invalid due to postage time prebrexit rules need to find that’s the main points?

I can’t seem to find this allocation can I access through the MoneyClaim gov site?

You want all the WS evidence? Quite a lot is that ok? 2023-07-07 N157 NOA.pdf

Shall I upload the other n document?

Also attached the Paypal signature box Paypal Signature.pdf Did you want the N157 too? Claimants ws.pdf