An update since since sending the directions. Received the directions from Cohen. Received notification that this is being transferred to County Court Only recently received a court date in September. Then today received a Notification of Discontinuance from Cohen. This is obviously fantastic news that is entirely down to the advice and information from this site. It goes to show that these organisations are trying it on even if they know they are missing vital documentation needed for their success, only giving up when they believe that you know what you are doing! I had no idea of of how to contest this, I'm still no expert but know a lot more now, In the past I just caved in as soon I the claim form arrived, I wished that I had found the CAG sooner. A special thanks to Andy and to DX without whom I would be buried. Needless to say, a well deserved and overdue donation is on its way. Thank you.

That's fantastic Andy, I could never have come up with that, much appreciated

Thanks again Andy, Just 3 questions about the N181 B2 Is there any reason why your claim needs to be heard at a court or hearing centre D4 For all multi track cases: Have you filed and served a disclosure report (Form N263) (see CPR Part 31). .. No is this something that I need to do? Have you agreed a proposal in relation to disclosure that meets the overriding objective?...No

Many thanks Andy/DX didn't realise the time!!

Well, Time for an update, and a plea for a bit more help and hand holding. I have received nothing at all from HPH2 or H Cohen. I have received a Notice of proposed Allocation to the Fast Track and the Directions Questionnaire. This appears to be mainly for the Claimant to complete? This needs to be in next week and I have just read that this must also be served on All Other Parties, does this mean HPH2 and H Cohen? or just H Cohen? I couldn't find the templates on the forum, although there are references to them, The responses to the form are on a draft copy so anything can be changed, so please could you look through the responses below and advise? Many thanks! Section A Settlement. I ticked No on the "do you want to settle at this stage" and gave the reason that I have received no evidence from the claimant that they are owed anything at all respite requesting information under CPR 31:14. and a CCA request Section B Court. I left B1 blank as is not a High Court case as far as I am aware. B2, I am not sure if I need this to be heard in a court or hearing centre, and why, please help! Section C Pre-action protocol. Ticked Yes as I have complied with all pre action protocols, although no documents were requested. Section D Case Management. I am assuming that this is multi track as it is above the £ threshold. D1, I have made no applications. D2, N/A as I have not requested a non normal track ( or any track!). D3, This doesn't appear to be applicable to me as no documents have been requested from me. D3.1 "Have you reached agreement, either using the Electronics Documents Questionnaire in Practice Direction 31B or otherwise about the scope or extent of disclosure of electronic documents on each side?" do I tick "No" ? should I be doing anything else? D3.2 "If No, is such an agreement likely" I ticked No again! D3.3 " If there is no agreement and no agreement is likely, what are the issues about disclosure of electronic documents which the court needs to address, and should they be dealt with at the Case Management Conference, or at a separate hearing?" I would think at the Case Management Conference? but I don't know why! D4 "What directions are proposed for disclosure" Help please! Next question is for all multi-track cases. "Have you filed and served a disclosure report (Form N263) (see CPR Part 31)" Should I have done this? " Have you agreed a proposal in relation to disclosure that meets the overriding objective? No Section E Experts, and section F Witnesses are N/A. Section G Trial, I guessed that the case would take 4 hours Section H costs are N/A Section I other, what should I put down in the "any other information you consider will help the judge to manage the claim" Should Isay that I have received nothing in respect of the CCA and CPR 31:14 requests? Many thanks as always for the advice.

Defence submitted, I guess now lots of reading and wait...?

Thanks, Got it!

Thanks Andy, As mentioned in previous post(s) They have purchased my debt entirely of their volition and so cannot have suffered any loss as a result of any dealings with me. I thought that the whole principle in bringing a claim was that they have suffered a loss? If I caused them no loss then they have no standing? Just trying to find an angle, as I said to DX, "somewhere in the system will be a clause that defeats their profiteering", Will it do any harm? As ever I will be guided by you.

Incidentally, I checked the tracking numbers for the CPR31.14 that was signed for the following day. The CCA request delivery is pending suggesting that the PO is unable to find anyone at the Jersey address, (that is purported to be just an address) to deliver it to, Is this tactics and does this affect the case?

Thanks Andy, I've been back and forth through the threads and didn't realise this was an OD. I've looked at one of the previous defences that you were involved in that seems to cover my case and have taken the liberty of recreating it. How does this look? 1. this claim if for the sum £12xxxx in respect of monies owing under an agreement with the account no **************** pursuant to the credit consumer credit act 1974 (cca) 2.The debt was legally assigned by Barclays Bank PLC (ex Barclaycard) to the claimant and notice has been served. 3. The defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement. A default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to s 87(1) CCA 4.the claimant claims 1. The sum of £12xxxx 2. Interest pursuant to s69 of the county court Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from xx-2-15 to the date hereof 7xx days is the sum of £19xx 3. Future interest accruing at the daily rate of £2.xx 4. Costs Northampton County Court Claim No XXXXXXX Between: Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd (Claimant) And XXXXX XXXXXXX (Defendant) 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. The defendant has had no prior contact and denies entering into any contract with the claimant or its agents. The Claimant therefore has suffered no loss as a result of dealings with the defendant and therefore has no standing in bringing this claim.. Paragraph 1 is noted insofar as the Defendant accepts that he has held an account with Barclaycard in the past. I cannot recall the precise details of the agreement or recall any alleged amounts outstanding. I have therefore sought clarity by way of a section 78 and a statement of account .The claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request. Paragraph 2 is denied the defendant unaware of any legal assignment between Barclaycard and Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd and the claimant is put to strict proof thereof. Paragraph 3 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 and remains in default of my section 78 request dated 14/03/2016 Paragraph 4 is denied as yet the claimant has yet to provide any proof at all. 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. and 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 (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 27-2-17 . This was sent via recorded delivery and signed for on next day basis. The Claimant has yet to comply. 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 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.

Very true DX, and I do understand that they buy the rights of the OC, but ssomewhere in the system will be a clause that defeats their profiteering, I'll continue to dig. Please have a look through the defence below. I have left the discussed clause in as I'm told the words do have a legal meaning and may make the judge think, in any event, I don't think it can harm the defence, but I'll go with your / Andy's advice; Northampton County Court Claim No XXXXXXX Between: Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd (Claimant) And XXXXX XXXXXXX (Defendant) 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. 1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant having held a credit card in the past, referred to in the Particulars of Claim ( the Contract ) with the original creditor Barclays Bank. 2. The defendant denies any liability for any alleged balance but is as a result of unfair and extortionate penalties being applied to the account. 3. The Defendant denies the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the unfair terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety. 4. The defendant has had no prior contact and denies entering into any contract with the claimant or its agents. The Claimant therefore has suffered no loss as a result of dealings with the defendant and therefore has no standing in bringing this claim. 5. 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 Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon. 6. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion. 7. As per Civil Procedures Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated 27-2-16 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request. The claimant is therefore put to strict proof to:-. (a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on. (b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment. © Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification. (d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed. (e) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. (f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct. 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.

Thanks DX, I see the same question on another thread. I'm ready with the standard defence that I shall post next, and with all the research and help from Andy and yourself I think we're in control. I can’t help thinking though that as I've had no contact with Hoist or any of their agents, I cannot have entered into any contract with them. They have purchased my debt entirely at their own discretion and so cannot have suffered any loss as a result of any dealings with me. So, can they sue me if they've suffered no loss? I thought that this was whole principle in bringing a claim? So is it worth including the following paragraph in the defence? The defendant has had no prior contact and denies entering into any contract with the claimant or its agents. The Claimant therefore has suffered no loss as a result of dealings with the defendant and therefore has no standing in bringing this claim.

Thanks DX, I will do but there is some interesting stuff out there, could I possibly run this past you; CCA s40 states "A regulated agreement is not enforceable against the debtor or hirer by a person acting in the course of a consumer credit business or a consumer hire business (as the case may be) if that person is not licensed to carry on a consumer credit business or a consumer hire business (as the case may be) of a description which covers the enforcement of the agreement." It therefore stands to reason that IF HPH2 have purchased my credit agreement, than they ought to be licensed, but they're not. FCA search shows Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd(Postcode: JE2 4YE) Consumer Credit Interim 652220Cancelled On the face of it this would show non compliance by them on a point of law?

Thanks Andy, Am I correct in understanding that CCA 127 (3) still governs an agreement taken out prior to April 2007 (mine was in the 1980s), and as such the claimant has to provide the actual signed agreement without which the court are unable to enforce?

Thanks as always for the advice DX, The CPR31.14 and the CCA (complete with the £1 PO) were sent just over a week ago and have not received any response. The next step is the defence that I have been thinking about. First I will argue about the interest that they say is owed, It's not as this interest (iaw s69 of the County Court act) can only be awarded by the court and as we haven't been to court they cannot be owed this as stated on the POC. Second, the claimant will have to prove that they own this debt. As I have had no interaction with them nor made any payment to them I therefore have no contract with them. As I see from another thread the judge insisted on a Deed of Assignment not a Notice of Assignment. Please see below the quote, I can't post a link to the thread as I have too few posts; From thread by Tommieboy 27-2-17 post 1 (I scanned this forum and got some good advice but the advice was split regards the deed with some saying it does not need to be shown and others saying it should. Well today the judge rather slapped down the Lowell solicitor who told her she had no need to see the deed as the letter of assignment was proof enough. The judge came back with a raft of legal points before dismissing the case stating without the deed Lowell could not prove they owned the debt ) Question, Should I quote the Judge and this case in my defence to show the reason why the claimant should provide the deed? Would I need to know "the raft of legal points"? The next question concerns the assignment. I understand that the 1926 property act and the CCA (under s86A) defines how the debt is assigned, but I read somewhere that my agreement for the debt to be sold is also required, which is why it is included in the Ts&Cs that are agreed at the time of making the arrangement. I have found the original Ts&Cs from the early 1980s when my agreement was taken out and it does not mention anything about assignment. Is this a point for the defence? As ever your continued advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks DX, the advice is always appreciated.