Thanks. I don't know the date of arrival/acknowledgement - just the issue date (Oct 11) of the Notice of Enforcement

Thanks. Debt is rent arrears. Marstons are the HCEO, and I don't know if they enforced possession (tenants left voluntarily before it). Notice of Enforcement issued Oct 11, sent to my address. The CCJ would have been sometime in August. Am I correct in believing that my purchase, after issue of CCJ but before Oct 11, is valid?

Thanks. Without V5/new keeper slip I don't know how to SORN - and have asked DVLA for advice.

Further reading suggests I'll face problems, in not being able to meet the criteria outlined elsewhere (on site). Specifically... 1 V5c/New Keeper supplement. Restoration project, bought with no documents. Cannot notify DVLA, because vehicle identity not known. 2 Proof of Purchase / sales receipt. Payment by cash can be problematic My bank statements show various outgoings - to seller, but not easily verifiable. 3 How the purchase came about. Not a general sale on gumtree, Ebay, etcetera. Purchase via a friend or relative can be problematical. Purchase was to directly offset money owed to me (I'd provided my debit card to my friend, so that he could cover accommodation/food/etcetera), so that I can resell vehicle to recover an amount equal to that provided to the seller. 4 Copy of vehicle insurance. Cannot insure with no vehicle identity documents. 5 Evidence that road fund licence has been purchased / SORN. Cannot SORN with no vehicle identity documents.)

ok, thanks. I separated them because I believe they deal with different aspects of the matter, and hence are more relevant as individual threads. I welcome further clarification, and hope they can be restored to separate threads - with my original title, rather than the replacement.

I'm facing a HCEO visit for a debt not owed by me. I don't intend to let them enter, and want to do what's required to prevent enforcement action. The debtors are my friends, formerly my next-door neighbours until eviction (for rent arrears) on Sept 16 - following which they stayed with me for one day, leaving on Sept 17. They're now homeless, and I have no forwarding address. Belongings of theirs (clothing/keepsafes/bed/etcetera, all of which are of minimal value and/or things which can't be taken) temporarily remain at my address. The Creditor, their landlord, who knows (we've spoken about the issue) the debtors aren't here, and that their possessions are, has provided my home address for service of documents/enforcement in this matter.

Thanks. It's outside my garage, on a communal (including my former neighbour's home) parking area. My garage is used for storing (and full of) my stuff, and moving the car elsewhere (for subsequent restoration/sale) is something I'm currently exploring - but meantime it remains visible and easily accessible. Plus, it's convenient to have it where it is, so that I can easily do minor jobs (replace detatched steering, refit glass, etcetera). I'm aware of the potential for the situation being misinterpreted as a 'fake/contrived/bad faith deal, between friends, to thwart creditors', and hence a determined HCEO taking control of it. Overall, I think it likely a sensible HCEO won't bother - but I want to do what I can to reduce and prevent inappropriate/unwanted enforcement.

I recently bought a restoration-project car (relatively low value, approx £500) from a friend who has debts, including a recent CCJ (in favour of their landlord, following eviction for unpaid rent). The CCJ is subject to forthcoming HCEO enforcement action, and I'm concerned about the situation, particularly because the seller was my neighbour - and after eviction stayed with me for a couple days before moving on. Their landlord is sending mail (including a HCEO notice) for them to my address. I have a purchase receipt, dated after issue of the CCJ, and can show exchange of money from my account. I bought it without a V5 and any registration details - so, because I don't know how to inform DVLA haven't yet contacted them regarding purchase/new keeper/SORN/etcetera.

Thanks. Will do.

There's no mention of lifting the stay. Enclosed are notice of assignment and original digital application, request to clarify defence, offer of discount (and mention of Tomlin order) for agreeing repayment within 14 days.

Thanks. It was digitally signed, relating to an online form. And I'd forgotten this old thread was here - I'd begun a new one and then admin moved it here,

Thanks. It seems odd to me that after such a gap it's being revived - and with an accompanying 40% discount offer it's perhaps more in hope than expectation of payment. From what I understand it's not statute-barred, through it's very unlikely I'll respond, preferring instead to see if it goes back to court. I've always been surprised that things went quiet after sending me a CCA.

I have an old issue with Cabot for a Vanquis credit card debt. I originally received a court claim back in August 2014, which I acknowledged with 'defend in full, don't know anything about it' and then sent the CCA/CPR requests. In October 2014 I received a photocopy of an agreement, about which I did nothing (and certainly didn't respond to anyone), since which the whole thing seemed to have gone dead. Yesterday I received a letter from Mortimer Clarke, wanting to pursue the issue. It included the statement '... agreement was terminated on 31/05/2010.' The only outbound contact from me since 31/5/2010 is responding to the claim with a defence and sending the CCA/CPR requests - neither of which to me are 'acknowledgement of the debt'. My perhaps-misinformed view is that as it's more 6 years since 'my last payment or acknowledgement of the debt' it's now statute-barred. But I'm unsure if the fact that they began the claim before the end of 6 years means they can still pursue that claim. From memory, there was a record of the debt in my credit report, which I think was May 2010, and it's now no longer there (presumably because such things are removed after 6 years) Rarely responsive at the best of times, in the absence of anything which suggests I should act differently, I'll likely just ignore this and wait to see if I receive anything from the court - whereupon I'll notify 'debt is statue barred'. Advice appreciated - please and thanks. Quick update: My relevant question here is whether a claim which began before the end of 6 years can still proceed after such a period. I guess I may eventually find out if I hear more from the court. Further research suggests it isn't statute-barred, because they began action prior to the end of the 6-year period. I just don't know if this is affected by the 18-month delay since previous action from the claimant.

Would the missing part be something like 'Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) require that where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount 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.'? Sept 21 is 33 days from claim date.

Having drafted something very simple, ready to be filed, I'm hoping someone can yay/nay what's below. ========================================== In the Northampton CCBC Claim Number: ********* Between Claimant: Cabot Financial (Uk) Limited and Defendant: ****** DEFENCE 1 I do not acknowledge the alleged debt, and have no clear recollection of any such agreement, nor of receiving the appropriate default, assignment, and other notices. 2 On August 26 I sent a Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 request to Mortimer Clarke (the Claimant's solicitors), for information relevant to the claim and including Agreement, Default Notice, Notice of Assignment, Formal Demand. 3 On August 30 I received a response, advising that they were taking client instruction and would respond accordingly. They also indicated their agreement to a 28-day extension of the time for me to file a defence, even though I hadn't asked for one. 4 On August 26 I sent a Consumer Credit Act 1974 (sections 77-79) request to the Claimant, for a copy of the Consumer Credit Agreement. 5 On August 30 I received a response, advising that they 'had requested the information from the original lender and expected to be able to provide it within 40 days'. Statement of Truth I believe that the facts stated in this Defence are true. Signed ………………………………………… Dated .................................................. .... ========================================== When the content is ok, is this what I enter into the 'Please state your defence in a maximum of 122 lines in the box below.' page at MCOL?

Thanks. I'm much clearer now.

Thanks. Does it have to suggest 'many with various', or can it be something like 'Although I've previously had various credit cards, I have no clear recollection of this alleged account, and have requested relevant information from the claimant.'?

Thanks. As noted in the initial post, CCA/CPR requests have produced a response of 'we don't think we can do it within the original timeframe and so agree an extension' (even though I didn't ask for one). Further, the CCA response suggests it'll be very close to the end of any extension.. . hence my view that I should file now rather than wait to see if they eventually did produce anything - because they'd have further time to do so anyway once a hearing had been set. I'll research a bit more and draft a defence, which I'll probably post here before filing. Almost forgot... why the emphasis on plural agreements - to suggest vagueness?

Thanks. From reading and asking I have an overview of the process etcetera, but don't know how bold I can be with a defence. Leaving aside the morality of whether I owe the money, I'm aware that often such cases are brought without following correct legal procedure and in hope/expectation of a default judgment... and that some fail because the appropriate supporting evidence can't be produced by the claimant. That's the focus of my defence. The 2008 date of the stated agreement (and several years since) is during a period in which much of my life has been less ideal, and about which I've less than ideal memory. I've had various cars, wives, bank accounts, utility/other service suppliers, etcetera... details of which are often at-best vague. I'm happy to defend on the basis of this, but simply don't know whether a statement to the effect of 'I have no clear recollection of this, and the claimant hasn't provided any supporting evidence' is enough or simply likely to p**s-off the court and so favour the claimant, even though the onus should be on them to prove their case rather than me disprove it. Of course, if in response to my defence the claimant then produces appropriate supporting evidence, I'll respond accordingly - including a modified defence or possible admittance. But for now though, my uncertainty is about how specific and robust my filed defence should be.

Thanks. Some of that detail is above, and what's below should fill the gaps. Particulars of claim: By an agreement between Vanquis ('VANQ')and the Defendant on or around 27/10/2008 VANQ agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit card upon terms & conditions set out therein. In breach of the Agreement the defendant failed to make the minimum payments due & the Agreement was terminated. The Agreement was assigned to the claimant on 23/02/2011 The claimant therefore claims 1xxx.xx. That was during a less than ideal period of my life, in which various debts accrued and not all of which were settled. For various reasons I've no clear recollection of full events... and specific to this issue what default notices/other correspondence has been received. So, it's too fresh to be statute barred, and my defence is one of 'I may/may not have had such an agreement. I've asked the claimant to provide the paperwork to which I'm legally entitled and they can't do it within the required timeframe, so let's get on with it.'

I recently received a CC claim form regarding a Vanquis card from 2008. Leaving aside the issue of whether I did/didn't have such a card... my view is that they probably speculatively issued the claim, hoping for a default judgment knowing they didn't have the supporting paperwork and might not be able to get it. So far... Claim issued August 19, 2014. MCOL acknowledgment filed Aug 25. CCA/CPR letters sent by me August 26. CCA/CPR replies sent to me Aug 28. Defence due by Sept 21? CPR from Mortimer Clarke states: 'Taking client instructions... will come back asap... our client agrees to the extension of 28 days for you to file defence - please notify Court of this.' CCA from Cabot states: 'We don't have it... requesting from original lender... should be able to get within 40 days.' Looking ahead... The 28 days suggested by MC delays defence due date to Oct 19? Allowing for delivery to me, the '40 days' suggested by Cabot is beyond the original defence-due date, and very close to the revised date suggested by the MC letter. I didn't ask MC or Cabot for an extension - and neither need nor want one. I have other stuff to do, and don't want this dragging on. I'm inclined to file my defence now, basically one of 'I deny the claim; prove it.' Questions... 1 How specific does my defence need to be - I'm assuming I can't just say ' I deny it, prove it' without stating reasons? 2 If Cabot aren't able to produce the supporting paperwork in time, will the case likely be stayed? And if so, for how long, or is it indefinite?