Thanks I just want it to be over......... I have other battles ahead so will be glad to know this one is done with Betty

Thanks Andy Yes the DJ said he could not be sure the DN was ever sent. Don’t think he was impressed the author of the WS did not attend. Plus a few of the points I made in my WS were not responded to in their SWS. I think that legal judgement helped as its rather curious how the defendant in that case also got a copy of mbna DN off PRA and it referred to breach of the wrong conditions when comparing to the CA. The same conditions that was in the one they sent me. And it was a 2012 DN on FCA paper. I have one question. Can PRA issues a new DN? I thought it was only the OC who can. I think the DJ said something to their rep along the lines of “well unless you can issue a default notice start again with this ....” I wasn’t sure if he WAS being serious

Great thanks jon I was lucky to get a good DJ. Straight away he seemed to have a grasp of the errors in case I got the feeling the rep knew too. Came straight to me when I arrived and asked if I’d like to make an offer for repayments Rep was a barrister and knew his stuff

Yes special thanks to dx and Andy Another donation just made I didn’t hear the rep ask for appeal "............but I was a bit distracted by nerves. Will a copy of the result be sent to me?

Oh yeh and I’m sure their costs were listed as about 2k. Think I went into the wrong job!

Really? I didn’t know if they were able to appeal it or have a second go.......it was nerve wracking but the DJ was good. It was listed for a whole day but was done in less than 2 hoursas he just tried the one issue

Thank you. I think they may try again though which is a worry but I’m just so glad that I went through with it. I will have to wait see what happens next but they definitely do some creative documents. A case that helped me as had some similar issues was PRA v Segal ......same DN issue

Well I had 2 main arguments. There was no evidence that I got a copy of the agreement at time of signing as 2 of the conditions were on the envelope you post it in and were difficult to read and the agreement was not linked to the account number of claim in either the documents or claimant WS. The 2nd thing was the Default notice provided by the claimant. This was never served on me and the one they provided referred to a breach of the wrong conditions so not compliant with s88. The judge decided the dn issues should be dealt with first as if that part of the claim failed there would be no point looking at the rest. In relation to the dn the thing was printed on paper referring to the FCA when the FCA did not take over the regulation of consumer credit until over a year after the date on the DN. I argued that there is no way that dn could be a an actual copy or photocopy of a Valid DN . The claimant had not accounted for these issues in their SWS despite me raising them in my WS. There was no evidence the dn was sent. The judge said if the person who had written the statement was there and a witnesss from mbna then they may have been able to explain the systems for sending DNS and how they are copied. I said I questioned the provenance of the DN. plus there was a significant difference in the monetary demand on the dn and a statement I had dated a few days later. I think the DN was cobbled together either by the OC or PRA hence the errors made on it. Someone dropped the ball on that piece of fiction

Thanks Shamrock I’ve buried myself in the paperwork for the last few few days and Even up until the last minute wasnt sure I could do it but I did it, and the case was dismissed Yaaaaayyyy Have a feeling it’s not the end of it and they will be back but it’s done for now Support of everyone on here has really helped, another donation on its way

Thanks Andy Yes I have some thinking to do. It’s a gamble on the DJ. If I lose with costs and interest it will end up well over 20k on what was originally just under 13k. Part of me wants to fight it all the way but it is stressful. On their DQ asking how many witnesses they intend to have they put a zero. Was kinda hoping they may stick to it and not show up!,

Yesterday I received a notification that the trial is on the 21st August and will last 1 day! After coming this far I am now having second thought about continuing. The main (or only) thing I think have to defend myself is the so called “Agreement” provided by the claimant. I would appreciate an honest opinion from anyone as to whether anyone thinks it is worth the stress and taking time off work to prepare/attend if I don’t have a great case. I can’t imagine why it will take a whole day and with it being fast track I think the claimant is planning to hammer the costs too.

Thanks dx. Yes I did search and saw the £19. Will add on the day loss of work for the trial too.

Thanks dx I have read through all of those links where n170 is mentioned but no one discusses costs. I’m assuming it’s for me to say whether I am applying for costs (I imagine the claimant will apply for thousands). Im not sure whether to bother or what kind of figure a defendant would put in (probably moot anyway as will probably lose)

Anyone ever completed an n170 pre trial check list? Not sure what to put on it for costs or leave that blank?

it’s fast track dx. I’ve got to do a pre trial check list thinks it’s n170 and it asks if claiming costs. I’m assuming the claimant does one also

Thanks Andy I have no idea what the CA is supposed to look like only it seems the T&Cs are a mess I know 100% that the DN has been ‘produced’ by the claimant I’ve got to get the n170 in post tomorrow. Trial will be in August. date to be confirmed. I’m still not sure if I will get that far. Not sure I can win and don’t know if I would be better trying to get a TO rather than a huge CCJ I think they will hammer the costs

Would really appreciate any opinions on the credit agreement provided by the claimant. The first 5 pages were initially provided but the T&Cs were missing conditions 1&2. Along with their WS they have now provided the last 2 pages which they say are a copy of the reconstituted copy of the agreement. Apart from the first page, the application form, it all looks like a mishmash to me. Conditions 1&2 are on what looks like the front of an envelope and text so small I can barely read it with a magnifying glass. I know that post Carey reconstituted agreements are acceptable but this agreement was 2002 I also wanted to see if anyone has any experience with comparing figures on DNs with NOSIA and statements. The DN the claimant provided is dated 04/02/13 and states that £1555.00 must be paid by 23/02/13 to remedy breach. I got a NOSIA dated 08/02/13 saying total due £671.40 and total areas £1891.00. I also got a statement dated 08/02/13 asking for minimum payment of £2,230 by 24/02/13. I don’t understand why the figures are all so different? New Document(2).pdf

Hi all I have received a WS from claimant. I had argued in my WS that they had not provided a proper CCA as not all the prescribed T&C were present. I’ve attached what they have sent as claiming to be the CCA and would appreciate any thoughts? Hope this is ok, but I think the 1st page is on twice New Document.pdf

Thank you Shamrocker & Andy I will make sure to mention these cases and I suppose once introduced can be expanded on in any future WS or in the hearing

Thanks Andy I will add those points and refer to those cases. Just reading Carey. Not as exciting as a Jack Reacher book that's for sure

Yes due Monday but I'm not sure that there is guaranteed next day delivery if you post on Saturdays. The directions were very clear that the WS had to be provided to the court an the other party by 4pm Monday.

Sometime in early August, date TBC. I just have to get my WS in the post tomorrow to arrive by Monday. Hopefully by August my obsession with footnotes in documents will have passed

Thank you Shamrock I really appreciate your help and know you are all busy It’s my own fault I’m in this position as I wasted my time on the wrong things. I will fix it the best I can and either way will have to post the thing tomorrow otherwise it’s over anyway. I’ve come this far might as well carry on

Thank you Shamrock. think I will need to start again with it really as most of it now seems irrelevant. Would the court allow me to submit late or is the deadline set in stone?

But the FCA did not take over the regulation of consumer credit until April 2014 an all prior was OFT which is on all 2013 stuff I have. I was trying to prove that the DN not only refers to clause 1that doesn’t exist in the ca and clause 8 that is irrelevant but that it has been put together much later than feb 13 an more like 2014. I think the DCA made the DN from its cabinet I’ve put my WS but think I’ve messed it up and focused on wrong things In the Xxxx County Court.pdf Can anyone please check my WS to see if Any of it is ok. I fear I've been sidetracked clutching at straws that aren't even there and have ended up making a pigs ear of my WS that I have to post tomorrow and will end up getting ripped a new one by the DJ