Jump to content

Plonker1

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Submitted. Let's await their response now. Really appreciate all your help DX, learnt a lot last night after some more searching!
  2. Thanks DX, I'll submit this now: 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. Paragraph 1 & 2 are noted, the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor and the claimant regarding Student Loans. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement nor any debt. The defendant always continued deferment until around 2020 when this was refused. I have never earned over the threshold. The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default. 2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1). 3. It is not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant 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’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. 4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant proves the allegation that the money is owed. 5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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. 6. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief
  3. Am I ok to file the following defence: 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. Paragraph 1 & 2 are noted the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor - The Student Loans Company. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or debt nor do I recognise the agreement numbers the claimant refers to. The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default. 2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1). 3. It is not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant 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’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. 4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant proves the allegation that the money is owed. 5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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. 6. The defendant was in continued deferment until 2020 and has never earned over the threshold. 7. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief
  4. Morning DX, Crashed out last night! I shall submit the following defence today and have added point number 6 as you advised regarding the year until which I was in deferment and never earning more than the threshold. 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. Paragraph 1 & 2 are noted the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor - The Student Loans Company. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or debt nor do I recognise the agreement numbers the claimant refers to. The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default. 2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1). 3. It is not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant 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’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. 4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant proves the allegation that the money is owed. 5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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. 6. The defendant was in continued deferment until 2020 and has never earned over the threshold. 7. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief
  5. Maybe the end of paragraph 1 doesn't apply to me as they have fulfilled my CPR request?
  6. Thanks DX! I have put together what I think is the standard defence in this situation, I hope its correct. They haven't complied with my CCA request, Do I need to add something in my defence regarding this? 1.The Claimant claims £5999.52 for monies due from the Defendant 2. This debt was pursuant to a regulated agreement(s) between the Defendant and The Student Loans Company. Each agreement had an individual account number as follows: 3. The defendant failed to make payments as per the terms resulting in the agreement(s) being terminated. Notice of such is served by a Default or Termination Notice subject to the terms of the agreement(s). 4.The debt was assigned to the Claimant on 22/11/2013 with a notice provided to the Defendant. A new master reference number ***************** was also applied upon assignment. The Claimant has complied with the Pre Action Protocol for Debt Claims 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. Paragraph 1 & 2 are noted the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor - The Student Loans Company. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or debt nor do I recognise the agreement numbers the claimant refers to .The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default. 2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1). 3. It is not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant 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’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim. 4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant proves the allegation that the money is owed. 5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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. 6. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief
  7. I received a letter from Drydens on 1st April 2022 stating they agreed to a further 28 day extension whilst they liase with their client for the relevant paperwork. I now have received what I outlined in my earlier post. The letter mentions they will hold file for 28 days before they approach the court to lift the stay. There doesn't seem to be much information on the MCOL website, it merely states that claim was raised and acknowledgment received. I suppose I need to start working on my defence now. I am hoping to base my defence on the fact that Erudio didn't accept my last deferment and terminated so soon after my deferment was not accepted.
  8. Only just received, I haven't filed a defence. Have Erudio met their obligations with providing me all the paperwork they are required to do so? I have not received a credit agreement between us.
  9. So I have heard back from Dryden Fairfax with regards to my CPR 31.14 request. They have sent me the following documents: 1: Student Loans Company statement's covering 17 Feb 1999 to 1 March 2014. 2: Notice of Assignment dated 4 April 2014 from Erudio including a FAQ and direct debit mandate 3: Letter from Student Loans company explaining the sale of the account dated 4 April 2014 4: Print out of transactions from Erudio covering period 28 March 2014 to 14 March 2022 Their letter states they will hold file for 28 days in order for me to file a defence in accordance with CPR 15.5, failing which they will approach court to lift the stay and enter judgement against me. I have not heard anything back from Erudio regarding my SARS request...... or do the documents already provided, cover this?
  10. I'm with you. Read a few threads, where they have been waiting for this paperwork for ages and eventually the claim being SB. Let's hope they don't find the relevant paperwork! Thanks DX
  11. Hello DX, sorry I am a bit confused by your last post. Am I meant to ignore it?
  12. Ive just had a letter from Drydens stating that they have received my request and are waiting for their client to provide and as a result they agree too a further extension of 28 days to file defence. Do I need to inform the courts or will they? Is it possible they might try and pull a fast one and not inform the courts?
  13. Hello NickyPea, I am still waiting for them to get back to me with my requests for the CCA and CPR. Most of the things I’ve read have based their defence on the debt being statute barred, which will not apply to me so I’m hoping to find something in the paper work to file a defence. Would anyone know, what happens if they don’t respond in time?
  14. I have always been under the threshold. Admittedly in the past I have missed deferment dates but always eventually got a deferment. The months in between the deferment was when they have applied the arrears. The only proof I have of the deferment form in January 2020 (the one they saying they didn't receive) being sent, is a photocopy of the original form I made before sending. I did not use email for any deferments. I am learning now what you mean about these DCA's, they pretend to be something they are not and ordinary people get scared and accept whatever they say. I have managed to read bit more on cases which do not rely on SB. Interesting reading and growing more and more confident that I am going to fight this all the way. I'll carry on.......
×
×
  • Create New...