Hi Andy - not sure if you have read all of this thread but it might help if you can do this (or at least read the threads since beginning of July) as your questions are already covered in previous posts and this is going over ground already covered. - in a letter dated 19th July 2011 (this was LCS's response to my 1st cpr 18 request) - LCS agreed to an extension to the 18th August which I immediately faxed off to the court and called them to let them know that they had agreed to this and that I had faxed the letter. The reason we are making the N244 is that 2 cpr 18 & one 31:14 request have all been ignored and LCS have refused to say what docs they have and no documentation has been provided against which I can prepare a defence, so an extension is needed because of their non compliance I dont know the answer to your last question - that is one for Elsa - Elsa can you help here please.

Hi Andy the defence is due 4pm on the 18th August but I will be submitting a N244 on Mon/Tuesday hopefully and requesting an extension so according to a very nice lady at the court I spoke to a few weeks ago this will then get top priority and a bar on judgement will immediately be in force until a DJ has looked at it which will apparently take a few weeks. Very much appreciate you looking over anything I am about to submit.

Cheers Andy and sleep well - I am turning in too very soon. They never got my signature What I am tryng to turn my attention to now is not only how I can win this case but what compen may I be due to for the way they have dealt with me. - thats another question Thanks again

Also I have just looked back through the file and on the advice of the Fin Ombudsmen I wrote a letter to a Ms Singh Service making a formal complaint and asking why I had received no communication from them re the default notice etc - I have never received any response whatsoever to that letter!!- Here it is I am writing to register a formal compliant against your company and to ask if you can investigate this complaint and write back to me as a matter of urgency. I have received a letter from your company on Friday last week informing me that the outstanding balance and my account has been assigned to 1st credit from the 11th June 2007. I contacted 1st Credit on Saturday to discuss this matter with them and they have informed me that not only has the account been assigned to them but in fact that the total debt has been sold to them and that a default has been registered on my credit file. I have had no correspondence whatsoever from Citi Bank informing me that this was going to happen. I also spoke with one of your managers, Mr David Fell, on Saturday 16th June who admitted that he had no record on my file of any letters being sent out to me from Citi bank to give me notice that a default was going to be registered on my credit file. I have a written agreement with your company to make reduced payments which I have been doing by standing order since November 2006. I have not at any time had any correspondence from your company informing that you were unhappy with this arrangement nor indeed any warning that my account was to be sold to anther company and that a default would be registered on my credit file. I have enclosed a copy of a letter that was sent to me by Citi Bank. I have been in consultation with the CCCS regarding this matter and I have written a number of times to your company keeping you up to date with my circumstances and enclosing my financial overview on CCCS headed paper. As recently as March I increased the amount I have been paying to your company and wrote to Paul Campbell head of collections informing him of this fact. As your company has been accepting my payments and have not given me any indication to the contrary I have assumed that there were no problems. If the arrangement was no longer acceptable to Citi bank then it perhaps would have been prudent for someone from your company to inform me of this. I have been in touch today with both the CCCS and the Financial Ombudsmen to discuss this matter. The FO has also raised a complaint against your company on my behalf and they have written to you requesting that this matter be investigated. I am requesting that a full explanation be given to me as to why this has happened and that with immediate effect that this default be removed from my credit file. Obviously this matter has caused my wife and I a great deal of stress over the weekend and we expect this to be dealt with as a matter of top priority. I do not wish to discuss this matter with anyone from your company on the telephone and request that ALL correspondence is carried out in writing to my home address and also request that any phone number you have on your file for me be removed from your database. I have enclosed copies of relevant letters for you. Yours sincerely xxxxxxxxx

:) - I am not sure I understand what you have just written there - and I have just found the letter so will attach it here too Also I have attached the letter they sent along with the 2 agreements - as its all the way back on page 15 Andy Can you please explain your statement as I am not sure I understand it - particularly the last bit - and also how can I use this against them? Thanks very much. 100421 letter from 1st C response to my letter dated 08-03-10.pdf 1stC undated letter 2 CCA copies.pdf

A..

In a word Andy - NO! They claimed in a letter dated 21-04-2010 they had(which I think I have posted in this thread but cant find it at the moment), however they sent two agreements through in the same envelope which have both been attached in a previous post (again cant remember what post #) and I quote "The copy agreement which was sent to you is a true copy of your agreement with Citi Financial and from your comments it appears necessary to clarify the definition of a "true copy" of an agrement. Where a Creditor receives a request to supply a copy of the executed agreement, the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copies of Documents) Regulations 1983 apply. Regulation 3(1) sets out that "every copy of an executed agreement... shall be a true copy". Regulation 3(2) goes on to state that there may be various information omitted from the true copy. Details which are not required to be in the agreement by law include the signature box, signature and date of signature. Therefore the efect of Regulation 3(2) is that the creditor is only obliged to send out a generic copy of the agreement the debtor has signed up to. The creditor is not obliged to make an actual photocopy of the agreement. Therefore 1st Credit has complied with the obligations of the law and has provided you with a true copy of the agreement. For your records and pursuant to your CCA Section 78 request, your statement of account is as follows:- a) The state of the account = £6,727.12 outstanding. b) |The amount if any, currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor = £6,737.22 c) The amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor = £6,727.12 As the Copy Agreement and Statement of Account has been has been supplied our obligations regarding your request for information under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 have been fulfilled and the default no longer continues.

Hi Andy Yes I would agree and what is even more interesting is that a Mr Peter Cazley from the Office of the Cheif exec of Citi wrote to me on the 12th February 2008 stating the following "THis letter is further to the Final Response issued by my colleague (Mr Ross Derbyshire). Thank you once again for taking the time to contact us about your previously held Platinum Visa Card account from Citi, in which you asked us to provide copies of your agreement with Citi Financial under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. We have to inform you that we are under no obligation to comply with a request for a copy of your agreement under the Consumer Credit Act as we no longer have a contractual relationship with you, now are we seeking to enforce any agreement against you. Your right to be provided with this information from Citi Financial ended with the assignment of your debt to 1st Credit Limited. The above account was passed to 1st Credit Limited on the 31st May 2007 due to the payment history on it, and is now under their responsibility. Blah blah blah etc etc Note that this letter is dated 12 Feb 2008 and Mr Cazley states that my account was "passed" to 1st Credit on the 31st May 2007 yet the 1st NOA was dated 11-06-07!!! If you notice what the 1st NOA actually says it states that "This letter is to inform you that, with effect from the date at the top of this letter, under a written assignment, we have assigned your contract to 1st Credit blah blah blah So we have the NOA saying that as of the 11-06-07 the account was assigned and Mr Cazleys letter saying that as of the 31-05-07 the account was assigned!!!!

OK here are both the NOA's - I have finally worked out how to post the actual images up!!!! Thanks to photobucket - the 1st one has my scribbling on it!!! The last statement I have is dated 11th May 2007 and has a balance of £6787.12 and we made a payment of £6 on the 29th May 07 so the balance on the assignment notice is correct at £6781.12

sorry - made mistake Just got in and wow such a lot of replies so before I get into answering these - I just want to say a huge thank you to everyone who has posted and also Hi to Citizen B - your input is also very much appreciated - Elsa & Andy - thanks v much too - the secateurs have worked very well!!! Ok lets see if I can start to address the points asked. Yes its the same amount before the interest they have added on onto the POC £6727.12 and this is the right amount based on what the amount was then the debt was sold less the extra payments I made to Citi after the debt was sold. Citizen B I had this specific question ready in the letter I prepared this week but taking Elsa's advice I wont send that. Anyway based on the way they have responded to the CPR18 & 31:14 request they probably would have refused to answer it as it having no merit or stating they dont need to answer it. No Idea and I just rang it but it doesnt ring and all you get is a voice saying "the other person has cleared".. There is nothing on the Who Called Me web site either.

..

Thanks Brig Just saw this on my way out the door. Any thoughts on how I can cut this down - I dont want to cut out salient points but on the other hand I dont want it to be too long so that as you say the judge looses interest.

I have just added one last point to the "it may be argued" section wherre the claimants have stated that they are going to be using a recon agreement and have refused to answer whether or not they have an original. I would reall ylike to get this off to the court on Monday as I am not going to be able to do it today so any feedback you have would be hugely appreciated. Having read through the post relating to Waksmans decision on the case that 1st Credit have cited it does seem that this will be a very essential part of my defence and I think by leaving it in there hopefully a DJ will see that they are not playing ball. Big thanks again in advance ladies & gents.

## UPDATE## N244 details OK here it is - I know its way to long at the moment but I am really flagging now so perhaps someone can suggest the best way to make this more concise. I fear I have gone OTT on the Waksman bit and that I need to keep this for the defence. Please feel free to shoot me down in flames. I need to go and eat now as I am worn out - but very thankful for all the help recievied so far. I think I know what my next steps are going to be and rather give the whole game away I will do this one step at a time. N244 Box [3] of the N244 : An order that unless within 14 days of the making of an order upon this application, the Claimant, A) Complies with the two requests made by the Defendant on 4-07-11 and 21-07-2011 pursuant to CPR 18 for full disclosure, by the provision to the Defendant of confirmation of any information that the Claimant possesses in order to pursue legal action against the Defendant, B) Complies with the Defendants further request on 29-07-2011 under CPR 31:14 that in addition to full disclosure under CPR 18, the defendant provides evidence to the Claimant of any and all documents they are relying on in this matter c) Gives full disclosure under CPUTR 2008 of any documentation they hold in relation to the defendant and on which they intend to rely on in court that the claim shall stand struck out and the Defendant shall be at liberty to enter judgment against the Claimant without further order of the court with the costs of this case to be paid by the Claimant to the Defendant, to be assessed on the standard basis and pursuant to the provisions of The Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975. The application is made because of the Claimant's inability to comply with the Defendant's two CPR 18 requests and CPR 31:14 request, thereby making it impossible for the Defendant to prepare a proper Defence.' Box 4 : 'Yes' Box 5 : 'Without a hearing' Ignore Box 6 Box 7 : 'None' Box 8e: 'District Judge' In Box 9 write: 'Claimant' In Box 10 tick the box marked 'the evidence set out in the box below' and beneath it write: 1. Firstly the Defendant takes issue with the Claimants pleadings. The Claim is a Bulk Centre claim, however, the rules on pleading apply even to the Bulk Centre and furthermore the Bulk Centre rules and guidelines state that if a Claimant cannot properly particularise the claim in 1024 characters then they should not use the Bulk Centre to issue the claim. The Claimants pleadings amount to circa 396 characters, leaving at least 628 characters available for the Claimant to plead adequately. The Defendant is embarrassed by the Claim and as the applicant has not sufficiently particularised their claim the Defendant is unable to plead or enter a defence. 2. On 04-07-2011, following service of the Claim Form in this case, the Defendant wrote to Mr Gavin Flynn, Head of Collections at 1st Credit requesting information pursuant to CPR 18. The defendant informed the Claimant that if the information requested was not forthcoming, it would be reported to the court that the Claimant was trying to frustrate proceedings and denying the Defendant the opportunity to file a defence and enter a counter claim. A copy of the defendant’s letter of request, marked "A" is attached to this Form. 3. The Defendant telephoned the Claimant's solicitors, Judge and Priestley, on Monday 18-07-2011 to enquire when he could expect compliance with his CPR 18 request and he spoke with a Mr Chris Ridd. Mr Ridd informed the Defendant that he had been advised by the claimant on the 11-07-2011 that the Claimant was taking the matter back in house and that LCS Solicitors were going to be dealing with the matter. Mr Ridd also informed the Defendant that the Claimant was going to apply for a Notice of Change and that the Defendant should receive notification of this. 4. The defendant received a letter from the Claimants in house solicitors, LCS dated 20-07-2011 as a response to the defendants CPR 18 request dated 04-07-2011. Rather than adhering to the CPR procedures in responding to my CPR 18 request they state in their third paragraph “Rather than take the procedural point, we will respond to the questions raised and will use your numbering to respond”. They also stated stated “We will comply with the rules as to disclosure during this matter”; a. The claimants solicitors have not answered the specific questions asked in my CPR request dated 04-07-2011, which only required yes or no answers; 1, 1A, 2. They have instead given answers to questions I did not actually ask. b. LCS maintain that they are not obliged to answer question 3. c. LCS have ignored question the first part of question 4 altogether which states “I require written confirmation of all records you hold on me relevant to this case, including but not limited to”, and have provided incomplete answers to the rest of question 4. A copy of the claimant’s letter, marked "B" is attached to this Form. 5. In response to this letter the defendant wrote to LCS again on the 21-07-2011 with a second formal CPR 18 request asking them to address all of the points raised in his 1st CPR18 in full. This letter was faxed to LCS on 21-07-2011 at 13:50 and then sent recorded delivery which was received at their office on the 25-07-2011 and signed for by a P Bloomfield at 08:20:00 hrs. A response was requested by 13:00hrs on the 28-07-2011. A copy of the defendant’s 2nd CPR 18 letter of request, marked "C" is attached to this Form. 6. As no response was received from LCS by the time and date the defendant had requested, he then wrote on the 29-07-2011 and made a further request under CPR 31:14 to provide evidence to the Defendant of any and all documents the Claimant intended to rely on in this matter. A copy of the defendant’s CPR 31:14 letter of request, marked "D" is attached to this Form. 7. The defendant received a letter dated 02-08-2011 in response to the CPR 31:14 stating 7 times that his requests merited no reply. They also requested confirmation of the defendants 2nd CPR 18 request which they already were already in possession of as detailed in point 5 above. Other main points to note in this letter a. LCS have refused to comply with any request made in the defendants CPR 31:14 request b. LCS have also tried to assert that they have already supplied the agreement they intend to use in court but they have not confirmed whether or not they have the original executed agreement. They have made reference to case of Carey v HSBC plc 2010 & paragraph 119, however, this paragraph refer to compliance with section 78 CCA requests not to enforcement by the courts following default. The claimants must be aware that if the paperwork they have referred to in bringing this case to court is falls under CCA 1974, then it retains the benefit of sec 127(3); which means that the original is needed for re-enforcement through the courts. d. Also in the case they refer to, HHJ Waksman stated that reconstituted Agreements are not in themselves proof of execution. Paras 108 and 234 of Carey states that copies of executed Agreements must be taken directly from the original format; ie, from the original Agreement, including any variation of terms, where applicable. e. HHJ Waksman actually stated that to satisfy Reg 7 (Copies Regs) a copy of the executed agreement in its original form was required "[108]. Accordingly, I conclude that Reg. 7 requires a copy of the executed agreement in its original form ..." A copy of the Claimant’s letter dated 02-08-2011, marked "E" is attached to this Form. It may be argued that: A. the vague pleadings entered by the Claimant B. the failure of the Claimant to comply with the provisions of CPR PD 16 para 7.3, where a claim is based upon a written agreement in which the Claimant should have attached to or served a copy of any contract or documents constituting any alleged agreement with the particulars of claim (and the original(s) should be available at the hearing) and that any general conditions incorporated in the contract should also have been attached C. the Claimant’s failure to respond to the defendants two CPR 18 requests D. the Claimants failure to respond to the defendants CPR 31:14 request and E. the fact that the Claimant changed solicitors without informing the Defendant, F the fact that the claimants have stated that they are going to be relying on a reconstituted agreement and have refused to answer whether or not they have the original executed agreement could be an abuse of the CPR process. Confirmation of what documentation the Claimant holds in relation to this matter is essential for the proper preparation of the Defendants defence and the determination of the claim and CPR 18 affords the Defendant the right of disclosure from the Claimant and CPR 31:14 affords the Defendant a right to inspect any documents which the Claimant has in their possession on which they intend to rely on in court. The Defendant is concerned that the inability of the Claimant to respond to his two CPR18 requests and his subsequent CPR 31:14 request puts him at risk of a default judgement without having the opportunity to defend himself within the deadline agreed by LCS of 16:00hrs on the 18 August 2011. The Defendant therefore requests under CPR15:5 that a further extension of time is granted to allow the Claimant to comply with all of this order and to allow the Defendant sufficient time to prepare a defence should the Claimant provide the information detailed in this order On a separate piece of paper to be attached to your application notice, write this: Claim No: xxxxxxxx Draft Order 1. Unless by 4:00pm on 19-08-2011 the claimant :- A) Complies with the two requests made by the Defendant on 4-07-11 and 21-07-2011 pursuant to CPR 18 for full disclosure, by the provision to the Defendant of confirmation of any information that the Claimant possesses in order to pursue legal action against the Defendant, B) Complies with the Defendants further request on 29-07-2011 under CPR 31:14 that in addition to full disclosure under CPR 18, the defendant provides evidence to the Claimant of any and all documents they are relying on in this matter c) Gives full disclosure under CPUTR 2008 of any documentation they hold in relation to the defendant and on which they intend to rely on in court[/b] that the claim shall stand struck out and (i) the Defendant shall be at liberty to enter judgment against the Claimant without further order of the court and (ii) the claimant shall pay the defendant his costs of this case to be assessed on the standard basis and pursuant to the provisions of The Litigants in Person (Costs and Expenses) Act 1975. 2. In the event that the Claimant shall comply with this order, the Defendant shall file and serve a Defence within 14 days following receipt of all of the paperwork requested and [ii] the Claimant shall pay the Defendant his/her costs of this application.

Very good points Elsa and I like the bit about the marker pen particularly as there are quite a few letters to attach. I have just finished drafting the N244 so I will just amend it now to incorporate some of what I had prepared in my letter and then post it up.

##UPDATE## Ok here is a response I prepared last night - till 3am this morning so it may be a bit wordy but feel free to slash it - chop it change it etc etc. I did think of giving them notice that I am going to make a request on N244 but took it out. Let them answer this and then by the time they have done that the N244 will be in action and a bar on judgement will be in place until a jiudge has looked at it. LCS Solicitors, The Omnibus Building, Lesbourne Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 7JP 03 August 2011 Dear Sir, Re: (1st Credit ) v (Wxxxxx : Sxxxx) Case No/LCS REF: xxxxxxx/xxxxxxx/xx I write further to your letter 02 August 2011 received 03-08-2011. Please note that in writing this letter, I am only addressing those points where you have made mistakes or where I require specific answers to questions which have so far been ignored or are unanswered. Any other questions you have asked may be answered at a future point. Please note I do not require you to deal with each paragraph in this letter, I only require answers to the specific questions I have asked. I would request that you refrain from either ignoring my questions altogether or providing evasive answers. You have incorrectly stated that you received my CPR 31:14 request dated 29 July 2011 on 01 August 2011, however, you actually received my letter at 11:33 hours on the 29-07-2011 by fax, which I then sent the same day by recorded delivery, which was signed for by YASS at 08:02:00 GMT on 30-07-2011, not on the 01-08-2011 as you have incorrectly stated in your first sentence. A copy of the proof of delivery is attached with this letter. In my fax I requested confirmation of receipt of my letter, which was ignored. 1) You state that your firm responded to my CPR18 request on the 19 July 2011, however in that letter you stated “in paragraph 3 that “Rather than take the procedural point, we will respond to the questions raised and use your numbering to respond”. I would also remind you that in your letter dated 19 July 2011 you stated “We will comply with the rules as to disclosure during this matter”; By refusing to adhere to CPR procedure and refusing to acknowledge which documentation you have in your possession with which you intend to rely on in court and my subsequent requests to be provided with copies of any and all documentation you seek to rely on in court, you have clearly not complied with CPR rules in relation to both my CPR 18 requests dated 04-07-2011 & 21-07-2011 and my CPR 31:14 request dated 29-07-2011. You have even stated numerous times that my specific points relating to the CPR31:14 request, merit no reply whatsoever, which is a clear breach of the CPR. 4) A second CPR 18 request was sent to you because I had apparently incorrectly addressed my first CPR18 request dated 04-07-2011 to 1st Credit and as was very clearly explained in my 2nd CPR 18 request dated 21-07-2011, I required specific answers to all of the questions in my 1st CPR 18 request so that I had sufficient time to prepare an adequate defence, however these questions still remain unanswered. A copy of my 1st CPR 18 request dated 04-07-2011 was attached to my 2nd CPR 18 request dated 21-07-2011 which was faxed to you on Thursday 21-07-2011 and was received at your company at 13:50 hrs. The same letter was then sent by recorded delivery the same day which was received and signed for at your office by P Bloomfield at 08:20:00 hrs on the 25-07-2011. [ NB: I now require specific answers from you to all of the points asked in 1, 1A and 2 as detailed in in my CPR 18 request dated 04-07-2011. Please note these questions only require yes or no as answers ./B] 1. Do you have a true copy of the original, signed, executed credit agreement and any terms and conditions that applied to the account at the time of default and at the time the account was opened? 1A. Was the agreement in written form and if so was this a regulated agreement under the Credit Consumer Act 1974. 2. Do you have true copies of any default notice or enforcement notice that you, your client, or the original creditor sent me and do you have copies of any proof of postage? In your second sentence of point 4), you have requested that I cease corresponding with your client, however, as you are aware, my correspondence dated 21-07-2011 & 29-07-2011 have been written directly to LCS and I have not corresponded in any way with 1st Credit. I did specifically confirm in my letter dated 21-07-2011 that I would address all future correspondence to LCS. Your last sentence of this point is completely incorrect because you are well aware that I have not been corresponding with 1st Credit since I was informed verbally by Mr Chris Ridd of J&P Solicitors on Monday 18-07-2011 that you were dealing with the matter. Therefore, your view that I am “simply wasting my own time by writing to our client when you know we are instructed and are corresponding with you” is totally incorrect and lacks any merit and as such is rejected and I stand by my original comments pertaining to your time wasting tactics. 5) You have requested that I send the second Part 18 request to you, however, I am unclear as to why you have asked me to do this as you are already in receipt of this as detailed in point 4) above. As you are already in possession of this 2nd formal CPR 18 request, I see no reason whatsoever to have to send this to you again, which is wasting even more time and preventing me from being able to prepare an adequate defence, however, as a matter of courtesy; I have attached it again along with the proof of delivery signature and the letter of the 04-07-2011. I am not sure about this underlined bit - should I just refuse to send them what they already clearly have I trust it will not be necessary to waste any more of my time requesting documentation which is already in your possession. 6) You state that my reference to your client is wrong and therefore you have rejected my first sentence in my CPR 18 request dated 04-07-2011. I trust that now that I have addressed the same questions above to you specifically that you will now have the courtesy to answer these very specific questions. In relation to your second sentence, you have not responded in full to the CPR 18 request and have refused to answer questions specifically relating to what documentation you have in your possession which you intend to rely on in court. You state in your third sentence that the remainder of paragraph three are matters for me; however, as I have clearly pointed out to you, your client sent more than one purported “agreement” in 2010 and you have failed to confirm which agreement you have in your possession that you intend to rely on in court. You have also stated in point 12) that the agreement has previously been sent to me and you also repeat point 1 of your letter of 19 July 2011. I have already stated that both sets of paperwork were sent in the same envelope and comprised reconstituted “agreements” bearing no signatures or account numbers and both bear errors which prove their inaccuracy and as such it is therefore impossible to know which agreement you are referring to or indeed if either of the purported “agreements” are actually genuine ones. As it is currently impossible to know which paperwork you are referring to in your correspondence, for the above reasons, I now require you to confirm the following:- A. Are you intending to use either of the sets of paperwork sent in 2010 – yes or no? B. If your answer to A) is yes, I require you to confirm which “agreement” sent by your client are you intending to use in court and provide a copy of that agreement? C. If your answer to A) is no, I require you to confirm which agreement you intend to rely on in court and provide a copy of that agreement. 8) I did not ask for your opinion in my request for a true copy of the alleged default notice that you claim has been sent to me. I therefore request again that you provide me with a true copy of the alleged default notice and/or a copy of the relevant comms log showing issue along with strict proof of postage as proof that the default notice was indeed sent to me. 12) You have thanked me for confirming receipt of the agreements in 2010; however, I wish to correct your mistake and obvious misunderstanding of what you feel I have actually confirmed I received. I have never, in any communication with you or your client, confirmed receiving any agreement that I may or may not have had with Citi Financial. If you read my third paragraph again you will see that I have actually confirmed that what I received from your client was a pile of photocopied papers that your client maintained were my agreements. I would refer you to point 6) above and my specific questions in relation to this matter. In light of all of the above points, your refusal to comply with Civil Procedure Rules and the fact that I have had to write yet another letter to you requesting information I am entitled to in order to prepare a defence statement, bears out my previous comments relating to your time wasting tactics in my 2nd formal CPR18 request dated 21-07-2011 and subsequent CPR 31:14 request dated 29-07-2011, that you are trying to frustrate proceedings by refusing to adhere to Civil Procedure Rules and therefore denying me sufficient time to file a defence and a counter claim. Once again I repeat my request under CPR 31:14 for a copy of all of the paperwork you intend to rely on in court. Yours faithfully Wxxxxxx. Sxxxxx

Thanks very much Babybear - any thoughts on a suitably worded letter?? - Or perhaps it can be slipped into my letter I have prepared. Ok I will post that one now and take comments/advice etc.

AS I cant seem to answer in the bodyu of the text I have just listed the numbered points - No 16 Re the assignment is prob the main one I need to work on right now as well as all the other stuff 3) - totally agreed - no intention of answering this 4) OK I will ignore this but I will leave my comments in my letter and see what you think - I will take them out if you feel they are unneccessary 6) 1&2 dealt with in my letter. 7) Not sure whether to include anything about this in my letter. Also TVM for the link to the thread. Very interesting. 8) dealt with in my letter 9, 10, 11) I agree with you too 12 - 15) agreed 16) - not sure if it was accurate. What I do know is that the date of the assignment was the 11-06-2007 but they actually sold the account to 1st Credit on the 31-05-2007(its in post# 163) and this is the date that the default was entered against my credit file by 1st Credit!! Also the DN came on copied paper not an original coloured letterhead Copy of post #163 for easiness I have just checked the last credit report I had which shows that my account was in fact defaulted on the 31-05-07 and I wasnt informed by Citi that they had assigned my account to 1st crud until 11/06/07. I was never informed by Citi or 1st Credit that a default was going to be registered on my account. - I am wondering if I can use this in any defence I put together 1ST CREDIT LIMITED Unsecured loan Default £6,727 Name: MR xxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx Address: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x Date of birth: xx/xx/xx Company name: 1ST CREDIT LIMITED Account type: Unsecured loan (personal loans etc) Default Balance: £6,727 Current Balance: £6,727 Defaulted On: 31/05/2007 File Updated for the Period to: 23/12/2007 17) OK 18) - full details of why a contract is important can be found on the get out of debt free forum - its fairly complex and detailed so its best to have a look there.

Hi Baby Bear - thanks for that but can you please decipher the UCPD bit and the CPUTR - would also welcome comments on my letter when its up. Cheers

[Hi Elsa - what a star you are - I am so humbled at the time you have taken to respond to this. Believe it or not I was up till 3am this morning writing a response to them as I was so mad at their attituide. You may advise me not to send it but I will post it up anyway and see what you think. I have answered in the body of your comments as I can now do thi sin mulit colour but I will use This lovely colour for my commetns Ah well that hasnt worked - I wanted to comment in the text you had inserted - I dont know how to do that mmmmmm

Hi Elsa - Thanks very much. I do take your point about making too many demands and overcomplicating the CPR letters, however, having now read this through half a dozen times today it is clear that even if I had sent a very simple CPR 31:14 they would still have responded that none of it has any merit. They have used that phrase 7 times on all points and they have been very pedantic in informing me that it wasnt their client that answered the CPR 18 but them and so if you notice they have doen everything they can to not actually answer Q 1, 1A & 2 with a yes or no answer. I am very tempted to write to them and put them on the spot by asking them specifiaclly if they can just answer yes or no to questions 1, 1A & 2 as well as sending off the N244. To keep the N244 succinct - thats a challenge and a half but I will have a go - we almost had it done before in post # 252 0n page 13 and I have stored that as a separate doc so it shouldnt take too long to amend it. I will definately make a complaint that they seem to be abusing CPR procedure in the way they are responding to my correspondence. As a matter of interest do you know what the general view is from the judges of any company that deals with the CPR requests in the way LCS has done? I only ask because it seems that some Co's are walking all over LIP's by utilising the services of very experienced lawyers who can run rings round any LIP? I have no idea how experienced Mr RD Marr, Principal Solicitor of the legal division of 1st Credit, is but he seems ery good at totally avoiding questions.

Hi Brig I understand - I would really value your help in this one as I think they are going to be a difficult bunch to deal with. I will PM you my details. thanks very much again.

Cheers Brig Do you have any copies of the letters you have sent that I could have a look at. I am happy to give you my email address - I will PM this to you if you are willing to let me have some of your copies or just post them in this thread with personals taken out of course.

Thats a really good question actually. I assume that they hope that if they are evasive for long enough then this will mean that the LIP runs out of time. I have now managed to scan their letter along with a few comments of my own but I think the text in my previous post should be good enough as its exactly the same thing. OK so as far as I see it I have a few choices now and its a question of which is the best one to take as I now only have 15 days to enter a defence. 1) respond to their letter addressing some of the points they have got wrong and also asking them not 1st credit for a response - play them at their own game. - not sure if this is necessary apart from self satisfaction and requesting again that they comply with CPR 31:14 2) apply to the court on a N244 for full disclosure as well as making a formal complaint if that is possible 3) do as Brig suggested and make a formal complaint to their own internal compliance dept 4) All of the above 5) Another route? What is the best one for me to take me wonders? THEIR ORIGINAL LETTER 110803 lcs reply to my letter 29-07-1.pdf

Well I need to do something Brig as they have totally disregarded the whole of this CPR 31:14 request as having no merit whatsoever; a phrase they have used 7 times in their response. Having just read their response again I find it incredible that they can make such basic errors when they state twice that I should cease writing to their client and correspond with them instead. they are also taking issue with my statement about having a copy of a signed agreement using the Carey vs HSBC plc 2010 case. This says to me that they definately dont have the signed original otherwise why would they even bring up this case from 2010 relating to a reconstituted document. My whole contention with the paperwork they sent me is that this was something that anyone could have put together and then have simply inserted my details. It does not prove that it was my actual orignal agreement. Surely our legal system cannot rely on any old pieces of photocopied papers as proof that they are the orignal agreements. The more I look at this the more angry I am getting but as I am only a humble LIP I really need some good solid advice in this matter now as to exactly what the next step is I need to take. UUURRGHHHH - not very happy at the moment.