Particulars of Claim:
1. The defendant entered into a credit agreement described by the creditor as ONLINE FINANCE having account number 1......
2.The claimant, a UK limited companywith company reg no 3757424 is the assignee and legal owner of all rights previously enjoyed by the original creditor in respect of the account.
3. The defendant is indebted to the claimant in the respect of the account in the sum of 799.88
4.the claimant claims the said sum of 799.88 plus costs.
Account defaulted 27 september 2006 - the cost detailed on the letter from online finance are made up of £217 of letter charges and auction fee's of the car £561.65 giving a total of £779.15 - we were never made aware that them taking the car back would result in an auction cost to us and the letter fee's we were advised would be wiped of the account.
1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.
2. Paragraph 1 is noted and accepted I have in the past had financial dealings with Online Finance.I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant who is unable to comply.
3. Paragraph 2 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served last year from either the Claimant or Cabot Financial UK Ltd
4.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant,
the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14,and remains in default of my section 77 request, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:
(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; 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;
5. On receipt of this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 77/78 request, copies of the documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for.
To date the Claimant has failed to comply to my section 77/78 request and their solicitors, Weightmans, having received no documentation from either.
6. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
7. On the alternative, 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 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82 A of the consumer crediticon Act 1974.