Yes Andy you right in saying the claim can not be stayed... Family and civil service court confirmed today that there will be a further hearing date on this case. The receptionist (Susan) also confirmed that the court will get in touch but wouldn't give me a time frame. The above email still stands since the defence was filed on time. She also confirmed that the tomlin order is not an order of the court and that in this case the court is not aware of the claimant wanting to use the tomlin order approach!

Thank you. Is "ignore" the best course of action so far and does this sound like a hot air to you? Do you think they will try to negotiate their tomlin order next? I am deeply grateful to your continued support. You can rest assured that I will be donating to CAG once this is all over.

How come...Sorry I don't understand. what do you mean ? I've never admitted any liability and I don't owe them any money to begin with...

Thank you for your patience Andy. Lowell Solicitors Ltd have finally responded and here I am enclosing their response. Just to let you know that the letter was received today through the post. Any advise please Andy? lowell letter.pdf

Thank you Andy, After chasing the court for an email confirmation of the next course of action, I have now received this: "Thank you for your email with the Defence enclosed. The file will be referred in due course as you have complied with the deadline". Also I've had no correspondence from Lowell since 22nd of May 2019.

No Andy. no correspondence from the court since filling my defence...

Just wanting to be practical here. Since I haven't seen or heard back from you...have I a missed anything here dx? Look forward to hearing from you again.

Thank you for patience dx. I have uploaded bank transactions as shown in my bank- statements. This is proof of payment and when adjustments were made, it resulted in negative numbers shown in red. As you can see they messed up my direct debit and then issued a late payment what for? Summary of Transactions.pdf

I entirely agree dx. Now I think I should get supporting evidence to substantiate my counter claim. Hence there is still unresolved dispute with the original creditor.. In other words I believe my contract with Vodafone ended in December 2014. I think it is about time Lowell accept responsibility for something their client refused to acknowledge nearly 4.5 years ago. What do you think people? should I give them a call tomorrow to discuss this further?

Yes dx it was a letter posted thanks...

I received a reply this afternoon from Lowell solicitors. Here is the full text: "We refer to the above matter and acknowledge receipt of your defence dated 15 May 2019. As the agreement is a telecommunications account, it is not regulated under the consumer credit act 1974 and as such copies of the credit Agreement or Default Notice are not available. Copies would have been provided to you when you entered the contract on 9 December 2011. The original Creditor, Vodafone has confirmed the last contact was on 09.02.15 where you had enquired about cancelling the second handset. No resolution was recorded on the account. Please find enclosed copy bills as provided by the original creditor detailing the outstanding amount of £303.89. Our client is keen to resolve the matter and will consider any reasonable payment or settlement proposal you wish to make. We look forward to hearing from you". I have gone through the bills and it looks like they've applied an earlier termination fee of £105.87 + outstanding call charges/line rental of £198.02 (total: £303.89) I am still confused as to why they've issued me with 2 Pac codes in December 2014? Also, there was no second handset purchased from Vodafone!!!

Thanks Andy, can I also file my bank statements as the only evidence I have to strengthen my case...

Oh Great! thanks for that dx Standard Paragraph added in at the top and Will email a copy each to the court and claimant first thing...

1) The defendant entered into an agreement with Vodafone under account reference ……. ("the agreement). 2) The defendant failed to maintain the required payments and the service was terminated and notice given to the defendant. 3) The Agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29/01/2016. 4) Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of £303.89 remains due and outstanding. And the claimant claims a) The said sum of £303.89 b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.067, but limited to one year, being £24.31 What is the total value of the claim? £435.20 Proposed Defence The Defendant contends that the original 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. Paragraph 1 is accepted. I have, in the past, entered into a contract with Vodafone, however I do not recall the exact details, nor do I recall any outstanding balance. I have requested the claimant verify the exact details of this claim by way of a CPR 31.14. The claimant has refused to provide me with a copy of the agreement, stating he is not obligated to do so by virtue of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. To date, no statement of the alleged account has been received. 2.Paragraph 2 is noted, again I do not recall any breach and I have never received the stated Default Notice. The Claimant has stated, by letter, that he is not obligated to provide a copy of the Default Notice, again by virtue of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant is to provide strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into a Agreement/ Contract; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and termination (c) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 3. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is required that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 4. If 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. 5. Regardless of the above, should the alleged amount claimed include an early termination charge(s) amounting to the total balance of the remaining contract, OFCOM guidance clearly states that any Early Termination Charge, that is made up of the entire balance of the remaining contract, is unlikely to be fair, as it fails to take into account the fact that the provider no longer has to provide and pay for their service. 6. 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. Any advise will be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. can I submit my defence now?

Thanks Andy. Still I'm really confused as to what exactly I need to do next... Any assistance would be greatly appreciated. I must submit by 4 tomorrow and I will certainly donate to the site...