Hi! Firstly Happy New Year and hope you are all well! Secondly, having thought that this issue was long dead, and having seen that the default had dropped off at the beginning of this week I was surprised to receive a bundle of documents through today. The solicitors have sent an agreement; t's & c's; CC statements; a notification of account transfer; reconstituted letter from MBNA notifying transfer (undated); log of transactions. They've said claim is stayed (which I already knew) and want to hear in 21 days with a completed i&e form. From what I've read up there doesn't look to be a time limit within which they had to respond but do I have grounds to get it struck out based on the fact that over a year has passed? If not I'm inclined to sit it out and wait for them to reinstate the claim. Does anyone have any thoughts on that/better ideas? Thanks AT

Hi Andy, How are you? Hope the year has started well for you. I have had a hearing date through and need to get my witness statement in by the end of the week so wonder if you could cast your expert eyes over it please? However, I am getting so stressed out about this that I would feel hugely relieved to get it settled before court. I emailed MKDP yesterday to see if their position had changed but they responded to say their offer of £9k payable by Tomlin Order still stood, that they had already paid a hearing fee so I should let them know ASAP if I wanted to reopen negotiations. I replied to offer £8k @ £40/month yesterday and they have not replied since. I will ring them tomorrow to find out if they are going to accept but guess I need to get my WS in in the meantime on the assumption that they won't. Hearing is for early March so I'm guessing if they are going to accept it would be better sooner rather than later so that they can get a refund of the hearing fee? Is that likely to be a consideration for them? In the county Court of Southampton In the case of MKDP LLP V Mr xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx I xxxxxxx xxxxxxxx submit the following witness statement in respect of the above claim. 1. I have previously had an account with Barclaycard but believe that all accounts have been cleared and that there was no account under the number claimed. 2. Upon receipt of the claim form in respect of the above case I wrote to MKDP with a request under CPR 31.14 to request a copy of the agreement for the alleged account, statements and a copy of the default notice referred to in the particulars of claim. 3. The claimant has failed to supply a signed agreement, and has, instead, supplied a reconstituted agreement which I do not recognise or believe I entered into. 4. The Claimant has failed to supply evidence of a default notice having been served. 5. The Claimant has failed to supply statements to evidence what the amount claimed is based upon. 'I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true' Signed xxxxxx Dated xxxxxx I can't help but feel that the above statement is lacking in impact but can't think what else I can say. They have supplied some statements of sort but they don't show any purchases or cash withdrawals that would have given rise to a balance. They just show interest and charges being added and then a couple of payments in from a debt management plan. I believe this is what they will try and use as evidence that the account is mine. Do you think the above is ok to submit? If they did agree to my offer, or if I had agreed to the £9k, I take it they would just need to send me a draft order to sign and return which they would present to the court. Am I right in thinking the main things I would need to see in that are that they must notify me of any missed payments and I must be given 14 days to remedy any default. Is there anything else it should include or exclude? Sorry for suddenly reappearing with a load of questions - I know I'm one of many needing your time!! Thanks and best regards, AT

Hoorah! I'll get it submitted. Many thanks Andy, have a good day. AT

Um, not sure why!! So shall I add something along the lines of Particulars of Claim 1.The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and MBNA and assigned to the Claimant. 2.Notice of the assignment has been provided to the Defendant. 3.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 consumer credit act 1974. AND the claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of the claim. Proposed Defence 1. (i) It is admitted that I the defendant have held accounts with MBNA in the past.The particulars of claim are vague and unsubstantiated with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant (ii) The defendant has absolutely no knowledge of any debt residue and on the 31st October 2014 requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant's legal representative has failed to respond. (iii) The Defendant requested a copy of the alleged agreement from the Claimant by way of a request under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 on 31st October 2014. This letter was signed for as received on the 3rd November. A letter was received from the claimant dated 11th November 2014 in which the Claimant advised they were seeking documentation from "the originating creditor". The Claimant has not advised a date by when they will be able to comply with this request and so is now in breach of this request. The Defendant believes that this shows that their Claim is unsubstantiated and without merit. 2. As 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 and 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and Section 82 (a) of the consumer credit Act 1974. 3. It is denied with regard to the Claimant having served a Default notice and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement or contract with the Claimant; and (b) show and evidence the nature of the breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears pursuant to the CCA1974 © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; (e) show how the Claimant has complied with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 with regard to pre-action protocol. 4. Without clarification of the claimants claim, the defendant is extremely disadvantaged and the claimants claim appears to be unsubstantiated 5. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 6. The claimant has failed to comply with sections 111 AND 1V of the pre action conduct "practice directions". And the defendant has no knowledge of the Claimants assertion that they have complied. 7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. Thank you for your perseverance!! Deadline for submission noted. AT

Thank you Andy, yes CCA section 78 request sent to Arrow on 31/10, signed for on 3/11, had a letter back dated 11/11 saying that they received it on 10/11 and are requesting documents from the original creditor and will be in touch. As I have proof that the request was signed for on 3/11 and they haven't given me a timescale for when they will respond, are they in breach of this request? Do you think I should submit the defence now or wait until Friday to see if anything else shows up? The claim was issued on 21st Oct so I calculated that I have until Sunday to file it but don't want to wait until the last minute. AT

7 was from the MKDP one but I have removed it, and I think I see where their 3 wasn't being addressed properly. Do the changes I've made work? I took the point out regarding cleared balances - is there a danger that by including it I assume some of the burden of proof? Particulars of Claim 1.The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and MBNA and assigned to the Claimant. 2.Notice of the assignment has been provided to the Defendant. 3.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 consumer credit act 1974. AND the claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of the claim. Proposed Defence 1. (i) It is admitted that I the defendant have held accounts with MBNA in the past.The particulars of claim are vague and unsubstantiated with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant (ii) The defendant has absolutely no knowledge of any debt residue and on the 31st October 2014 requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond. 2. As 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 and 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and Section 82 (a) of the consumer credit Act 1974. 3. It is denied with regard to the Claimant having served a Default notice and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement or contract with the Claimant; and (b) show and evidence the nature of the breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears pursuant to the CCA1974 © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; (e) show how the Claimant has complied with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 with regard to pre-action protocol. 4. Without clarification of the claimants claim, the defendant is extremely disadvantaged and the claimants claim appears to be unsubstantiated 5. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 6. The claimant has failed to comply with sections 111 AND 1V of the pre action conduct "practice directions". And the defendant has no knowledge of the Claimants assertion that they have complied. 7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. Continued thanks!! AT

Ok, have re-jigged it to what I think is the right order.... Particulars of Claim 1.The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and MBNAicon and assigned to the Claimant. 2.Notice of the assignment has been provided to the Defendant. 3.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 consumer crediticon act 1974. AND the claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of the claim. Proposed Defence 1. (i) It is admitted that I the defendant have held accounts with MBNA in the past but will contend that all balances have been cleared. (ii) The defendant has absolutely no knowledge of any debt residue and on the 31st October 2014 requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond within the deadline set. 2. 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 and 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and Section 82 (a) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 3. The particulars of claim are vague and unsubstantiated with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement or contract with the Claimant; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and © show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; (d) show how the Claimant has complied with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 with regard to pre-action protocol. 4. Without clarification of the claimants claim, the defendant is extremely disadvantaged and the claimants claim appears to be without merit. The defendant asks to be allowed to submit a complete defence should the claimant provide copies of the original documents he will rely on. 5. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 6. The claimant has failed to comply with sections 111 AND 1V of the pre action conduct "practice directions". And the defendant has no knowledge of the Claimants assertion that they have complied. 7. For avoidance of doubt, the defendant is unable to plead effectively, or at all, to the particulars of claim Without further clarification/disclosure 8. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. Have I cracked it? Thanks Andy, AT

Evening, I've had no response to my CCA request to Arrow, or my CPR to Blake Lapthorn. Both signed for the letters on 2 weeks ago. I need to submit my defence in the next couple of days, Andy, am I being lazy using the one for MKDP (with some tweaks and the addition of a note re proof of pre-action protocol) or should I start from scratch. PoC's and amended defence below: Particulars of Claim 1.The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and MBNA and assigned to the Claimant. 2.Notice of the assignment has been provided to the Defendant. 3.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 consumer credit act 1974. AND the claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of the claim. Proposed Defence 1. It is admitted that I the defendant have held accounts with MBNA in the past but will contend that all balances have been cleared. 2. The defendant has absolutely no knowledge of any debt residue and on the 31st October 2014 requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond within the deadline set. 3. Without clarification of the claimants claim, the defendant is extremely disadvantaged and the claimants claim appears to be without merit. The defendant asks to be allowed to submit a complete defence should the claimant provide copies of the original documents he will rely on. 4. The particulars of claim are vague and unsubstantiated with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement or contract with the Claimant; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and © show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; (d) show how the Claimant has complied with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 with regard to pre-action protocol. 5. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 6. Furthermore, 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 and196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and Section 82 (a) of the Consumer CreditAct 1974. 7. The claimant has failed to comply with sections 111 AND 1V of the pre action conduct "practice directions". And the defendant has no knowledge of the Claimants assertion that they have complied. 8. For avoidance of doubt, the defendant is unable to plead effectively, or at all, to the particulars of claim Without further clarification/disclosure 9. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief. What do you think? AT

Hi all, After going back with an initial offer which was rejected, they proposed a lower (75% of the claim) F&FS amount but kept the same figure for a Tomlin order settlement (not even a 20% reduction in the amount claimed). I went back with a final offer of an increased monthly payment towards a total settlement amount of just shy of 50% of the claim. Just prior to my last offer they submitted further directions to the court (I called to check my request for an extension had been received and was told they had sent the directions in). I asked for a response to my last offer by the end of the week and heard nothing so it looks like they want to press on. I did make it clear to them that I could only offer what I was because my sister was going to help me out with the payments. She won't do this if I get a ccj so if they are successful, having worked the figures through, I don't think the court would be able to award more than £20/month so it would take them 44 years to get the money back!! My payment offer with my sister's help was more than double that so I'm surprised they didn't accept. The guy I spoke to seemed to think that the payment showing on the statements from the DMP meant their case was really strong. He did say they are still waiting for the default notice from b/card. I'm as sure as I can be that they never sent one in the first place. As negotiations have failed (my sis doesn't see the point in committing to help agree a Tomlin order that's for such a high settlement amount so I couldn't accept even if I wanted to) do I now also need to submit another directions questionnaire? Either way looks like this will go to hearing. Hope you're all well. AT

They are definitely open to further negotiation and I get the feeling it is because they know their case isn't watertight. I pressed them as to why their F&FS lump sum offer was not significantly lower than an amount that they are prepared to wait 20 years for and they as good as said they just can't go any lower until I make an offer, which stands to reason. I'll go back tomorrow with an offer that makes it very much more worthwhile settling and see how loud they laugh!! In the meantime I'll put together my effort at an order and post it up. Thanks and best regards, AT

Thanks Andy, and yes, sadly you are right!! Still a lot to learn though!

I have had a conversation with the DCA. Am worried as I forgot to state that I wanted the discussion to be without prejudice and at one point the person I was speaking to suggested that is wasn't mediation but a discussion. Their offer for F&FS was only a couple of thousand under the claim, they were initially reluctant to discuss a Tomlin order but I think realised that agreeing a payment plan based on a judgement holds no value to me and will result in them getting v little based on my financial situation. They then talked about a hypothetical Tomlin Order for £40/mth over nearly 20 years - again, of little value to me. We agreed I would take some time to consider a counter offer as it was clear the person I was speaking to was limited as to what he could or would volunteer. They did admit that they still don't have the default notice from B/card, and as I don't believe I received one I'm guessing that helps my case but, if I can agree something at no more than £40/month but for a much shorter time then I would go for it. Andy, are you able to advise on the terms that I should insist are in the order? My understanding is at the least it should agree the total amount repayable and the monthly payment; a clause that requires them to notify me if a payment is missed and gives me some time to remedy this (14 days??). Is there anything else? Last question (for now!!), and this is likely to be a non issue but I am trying to keep some sense of optimism - if circumstances changed a few years down the line, or if I came into some money (i.e. Inheritance) can the balance of the money agreed under the order be settled early without any increase in cost? Thanks, AT

Hi all, Me again Name of claimant: Arrow Global Date of issue – 21/10/14 Date of issue 21/10 + 19 days ( 5 day for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 8th Nov + 14 days to submit defence = 22nd Nov (33 days in total) - What is the claim for – The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and MBNA 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 Consumer Credit Act 1974. AND the Claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of this claim. What is the value of the claim? 8,000 Is the claim for a current or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? credit card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? Feb 2007 Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Debt purchaser Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I remember Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I remember Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? Not that I remember Why did you cease payments:- 2009 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? DMP entered into in 2010 but failed after 2 months I'll get the CPR and CCA letters off this weekend. Thanks in advance, AT

Only just seen the above, the lack of own computer is a challenge!! Thanks for the additional input - Alloyz I can definitely see your point and there is a big part of me that wants to draw a line under this and move on but I am not overly optimistic that we will arrive at a figure that they will accept and I can afford. They have refused to pay for an independent mediator so I am going to be speaking to them this week myself. They have also agreed to an extension to the stay so as soon as I can print their email off I will send it with a request to the court. In the meantime they have also re sent the same reconstituted and unsigned credit agreement that they sent in the beginning, a supposed NoA but it's not even on headed paper from B/card, and a year's worth of old statements.none of the statements show any purchase activity or balance transfers to the account so there's no proof it was used, but they do show a couple of payments in from a DMP. I was planning to open the mediation conversation with an adaptation to the suggestion you made in another post Alloyz, i.e. You claim that I owe you this money but as yet you have failed to provide any proof that an agreement exists or that I owe any money to MKDP. Do you think this is the right tactic given what they have sent me so far? If they ask for an offer from me I have no choice but to make it a low one, paid monthly, and I assume my argument is that "if we go to court you are going to be hoping the judge accepts your scant paperwork and is ok with you having brought a claim without actually having any of the documents in order (I have it in writing that they didn't have it initially when I sent off my CPR 31.14) and I am going to hope the opposite. As neither result is 100% certain, while I dispute the claim I accept there is a risk of it not going my way in court and so have a certain motivation to settle but only if the amount is low enough. Equally, my house is in negative equity and I have very little disposable income so even if they do succeed in getting a ccj, they will get the money over an incredibly long time" Again, any thoughts on this as a stance would be appreciated. Andy, you're link to the no-show thread gives me hope given my concern about not being able to stretch to a figure they would accept (and, if I'm honest, the fact that I would rather it went the same way as BC/Lowells!)!! I'm about to start a new thread as Arrow have now issued a claim which, if that goes badly, is going to further reduce what I can give to this lot. It's all such a mess! It would be a lot worse and a lot harder without all of your help and support though so thank you. AT

So I read through the above thread, thanks for flagging it up as it gives me a better idea of what to expect in mediation. However, I had been working on the basis that I was aiming for a similar outcome to my previous one, where the case was discontinued due to lack of valid docs. Is this less likely this time? I was reading through a number of other threads as well last night and think I have confused myself further!! (Easily done in my case) I thought that a lack of a valid credit agreement and key document s such as NoA etc was sufficient to make it unenforceable. However, from reading several Threads, including the lengthy one about HSBC and lots of comments stating that by trying to get them to prove their claim the burden of proof shifts to the defendant but putting them to strict proof does not. What are the main differences with these points as I'm struggling to get my head around it? So that I am absolutely clear my aim is to get the DJ to put them to strict proof, which they cannot fulfil and therefore I can get the claim struck out? Whereas, if it gets as far as court there is a chance the DJ could find in their favour even without all the documents? Is that right? Sorry to be repetitive but to get the claimant's approval for an extension to the stay do I just ring them and ask and then if they say yes quote that conversation in my letter to the court?