Not sure if I am on the right track with this but below is the defence I have put together:
1. On the 14th August 2021( sent by recorded delivery) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR sufficiently and remains in default of the section 78 request.
2. The claimant has not provided a true copy of the CCA despite requests being made but instead I received a response dated 18/09/2021 stating `please find enclosed a copy of the agreement’.
3. No valid copy of an executed consumer credit agreement that complies with the CCA1974 has been received by the defendant.
4. The `so called ` copy of the agreement stated in claimants letter dated 18/09/2021 is in fact stated as an online application and is no more than a log from either the OC`s operating system or one that has been constructed since with details from the account to look like an application.The document has no digital ID to show where the agreement was supposedly signed.
5. Without a valid true copy of the executed Credit agreement that complies with the CCA1974 the claimant has no grounds on which to enforce this alleged debt and has in fact attempted to mislead the courts in to believing that they have the necessary paperwork.
6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by
CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:
(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and
(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for
7. Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.
8. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
9. On the alternative, 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 and Section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
10. 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.
11. It is therefore requested that the Claimants Claim is struck out pursuant to the above.