Yep indeed. I'm almost glad it took this route as it has cost them more in court fees but it was a pain in the a$$ at the time.

THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU Well I just got off the phone to my family in the UK. After two letters arriving last week from the company referred to as Cabrot and their illegal advisors, stating they can prove I owe them money and that I should consider setting up a payment plan to avoid court action, a further 2 letters arrived Friday from both the Claimant and their solicitors to say they are discontinuing the claim. I haven't read the letter myself but it says the debt will remain etc. etc.etc. however, the O.C is unable to obtain the original documentation etc. so they have decided to discontinue and have duly notified the courts, I will double check with the courts to ensure they have done what they have said and I am sure they will notify me too but this is GREAT NEWS!! I had already checked my credit score a month or so ago and there are no details on my credit file at all. In fact, considering I live overseas, my credit score is 490 which is above average, so I am quite happy about that. Thank you all for your advice and help and it's time to make that donation me thinks.

I spoke to the courts as I made an error on the form. The woman was very helpful and sent me the form by email and said I could submit it by email. She said it probably works a little better that way as the courts have proof I'm overseas too by the IP address and she also told me to submit a proof that I live overseas too. That way I can make a reasonable request to push back any hearing beyond 6 months if I need to. I may actually need to get a lawyer specializing in this involved as I am really tied up until the end of the year. Not ideal but I am a bit stuck.

Bad News - just leaving for the airport this evening to take a project overseas the mail man comes with a letter from the courts with directions for small claims track. I am so busy with work and travel at the mo and this needs to be in by May 4th. So annoyed especially as I called the courts Friday at 4.0pm and they said they had received nothing and that was the last day for them to respond. I haven't had a response to my CCA request only an acknowledgement of my cpr31 request from their lawyers. What to do now!

Oh shame - it can never go SB then. I guess they don't have anything as they'd have come up with it by now but I won't count my chickens.

Quick query really... How long can a case remain stayed for? Is it indefinate or can they apply at any stage to lift it? Ta

just got back from working in New York for a few weeks, I received notification from the courts that my defense had been filed and the claimants have 28 days to respond or the case will be stayed. While I was away April 6th, they sent a letter saying they haven't received any money from me and that I should set up a payment plan for the amount owed but it now includes the amount they said was due plus the court fees. I have checked with the courts, they have received nothing from them, so it is stayed. The letter doesn't even acknowledge they have tried to take me to court, its just a standard computer generated letter. I would imagine, I just ignore this but my reason for posting is this just shows how inept they really are. I will await to see if anything further happens.

no, coop!

yes sorry wrong terminology there. I meant unlawful. Are they difficult to defend dx?

Aha - thanks Andy. It certainly makes for quite an interesting read. There are a couple of solicitors with blogs who specifically defend against cases brought by Cabot etc. and their blogs are an interesting read too. Now, I wish I knew then what I know now back then. I'm so glad I found this site and the subsequent information I have since found out, it's quite enlightening. I am now seeing what their next move will be with regard to that. I am awaiting for one other to surface but they have never approached me about it but that one is complex as it was for a loan and the loan amount was taken from my current account and promptly closed/sold on. I gather that is an illegal move but they can be muddy to defend but until such time as that particular dca writes and I spoke to them in 2015 and they said they had no record of me on their books, I won't loose any sleep over it at all. Thanks again for your help mate.

Thanks mate. For obvious reasons, I hope I do not hear from them as this dates back to 2001 but who knows. Can I just ask what is the relevance in pre 2007 credit card agreements? I was talking to someone I used to work with today he said that a lot of claims brought to court for debts prior to 2007 are very shaky because of the PPI claims but he is a news reporter not a solicitor or banker. Just wondered.

Hi Andy - I called the courts y'day and they confirmed the defense was received Friday (despite website not responding correctly). So what happens now? Is it a case of I await a reply from the solicitors with the information I have requested from the CCA request and CPR31 letters sent to them or do I need to contact the courts if I do not hear from them in order to have the case stayed? I just don't want to sit and wait and then lose the chance to make it a bit harder for them. Thanks, Mike

Oh - Meadow finally took the plunge. Andy has helped me a lot so far.

Filed via email now. I would have preferred to do online knowing that it is all done and complete but if I can't do that til Monday then this is the next best thing. The guy at the court did email me details for submitting online and in his email he states they have planned to have the system down Sunday and in the event it over runs, there is a back up. Other than calling to confirm they have received the email Monday, I guess I can breathe a bit for now and see what they do next. Thanks once again for all your help so far guys.

This now has happened at least 10 times. I have taken several screen shots for proof. Is there a way of submitting via email?

So, from getting home yesterday evening I have tried to submit my defense. I get as far as pasting the details and then hit submit and get the following ... "We are sorry, but your request has been rejected owing to one or more technical reasons. Please check your input and try again. If you continue to get this message then please contact the Money Claim helpdesk". The number to call has been discontinued with no alternative number provided to call. This is a joke, right?

Great, that is kind of what i had thought. I will wait until the mail comes today not that I expect anything.

Oh thank you for that. Not that I'm glad this has happened, but I have found it all very interesting how this side of the banking/dca industry operates a nd how very close to fraudulent it is. The industry clearly makes its money on fear and bullying tactics, much like a controlled mafia operation in many ways.

Just a quickie - I called the courts just to clarify filing dates, they confirmed as the date due is a Sunday that I have until Monday. Would you recommend filing today or leave until Monday? Also, I have not had a reply to my CCA request. I sent it w/ proof of postage - is this normal not to receive any acknowledgement? I did get an ackowledgement to my CPR31 request though. Just curious.

Great - thank you for that Andy - it makes more sense now. I will go over again with a fine tooth comb tomorrow make sure all the figures etc. are correct and so it's ready to submit next week. I've been up since 5 am and am totally whacked and falling asleep in front of the computer. Cheers all I really do appreciate your help and hope to be able to reciprocate to others. Also, I shall make a donation when i get paid as the site is invaluable and will potentially save me a tonne of money in solicitor and litigation fees etc.

Thank you for that. I have amended/added in the top part you have suggested. When you refer to the embarrassed defense parts.. "Therefore this claim is neither admitted or denied" s hould I just delete that whole paragraph or change it to ... ... ... "Therefore this claim is denied with regards to the Defendant entering into an agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim. The Claimant is put to strict proof as to the existence, execution and terms of any alleged agreement". The rest I'll await Andy to double check as suggested.

Also, do you recommend sending via mail guaranteed next day delivery or file online?

OK that makes total sense. Thank you. Would this work instead... Particulars of Claim 1.Claimants claim is for debts arising from CCA 1974 agreements. 2.The claimant is the Assignee of the following debts, notice of the assignment having been given to the defendant in writing. MBNA Account No.1234 £4,156. Despite demands for payment, the above sums remain due. The claimant therefore claims the sum of £4,156 interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 and costs Proposed Defence Paragraph 1: is noted I have in the past had financial dealings with Original Creditor but deny any monies being due as alleged by the claimant Cabot. Paragraph 2: is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or provision of a Notice of Assignment between Original Creditor and Cabot Financial and the claimant is put to strict proof thereof. Paragraph 3: is denied the claimant has not provided a default notice as alleged, has failed to respond to a CPR request to verify any breach nor has it served any Notice of Sums in Arrears since their alleged assignment of £XXX and remains in default of my section 78 request dated XXXX. Paragraph 4: is denied as yet the claimant has yet to provide any proof at all. Therefore this claim is neither admitted nor denied with regards to the Defendant entering into an agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim. The Claimant is put to strict proof as to the existence, execution and terms of any alleged agreement and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show that they have served a Notice of Sums in Arrears (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; On receipt of this claim, I sent a CCA 1974, Section 78 request to the Claimant dated XXXX. This was sent via recorded delivery and signed for on the XXXX. The Claimant has yet to comply to this request. Furthermore, on the XXXX, I requested copies of the documents referred to in the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim by way of a Civil Procedure Request 31, PD 14. This was also sent via recorded delivery and signed for on the XXXX. The Claimant has yet to respond. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 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 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. The Defendant has no recollection of receiving a notice of assignment. Until such time the Claimant can comply with my request for a copy of the agreement and other documents relied upon in the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim, the Claimant is prevented from enforcing or requesting any relief as pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 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.

OH OK. I did think it was unnecessarily long but then I guess most legal documents seem to be. I just looked at one defense on the list and it is substantially shorter. I just wondered if I should admit to having financial dealings with the bank or ommit this. Also having been in a dma, does this make it easy for them to prove as there has been a history of payment albeit indirectly and as I said, from what I remember the agreement was set up with a different DCA?

The one I adapted this from was won in 2014 I believe. Out of curiosity, can I ask why it is wrong? Is it too long or are the points not relevant as this dates back to a cc agreement back in 2001/2?