Help Please Re: CCJ From Northampton CCBC - ***DISCONTINUED***

[citizenB]

It will probably have something to do with your Draft order for Directions, Mrs Z

[caro]

I agree with CB. I'd say the judge wants to hear reasons for and against using the draft directions. This is a good sign that they're being considered IMO. No doubt the other side will view it differently.

 

Can you post exactly what it says please.

[Misterzeus]

Thanks citizenB and Caro, I think you are right that the hearing is possibly regarding Mr Z’s Draft Order for directions.

 

Here is a link to the actual Notification from the Court:

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn216/Misterzeus/NoticeofHearingDone.jpg

 

Thanks again

 

Kind Regards

 

Mrs Z

[caro]

45 minutes is quite a time for the hearing so it looks like you'll be well prepared to convince the judge that he would be right to issue the directions you've suggested.

[Misterzeus]

Thanks caro

 

I think Mr Z was rather hoping that (if) it did go to Court at all, he would only have to go the once!

 

Still, if that's what it takes, so be it!

 

I suppose there is still the possibility that the Claimant could still pull out given they have issued a defunct default Notice and a CCA that doesn't comply?

 

I'm just clutching at straws really!

 

Thanks again

 

Mrs Z

Edited January 17, 2009 by Misterzeus
typo

[caro]

I think you should be preparing for court, and covering as many angles as possible that you think they might come up with. Make your case as watertight as you can, so if you're unclear of any of the legal aspects, use this time wisely. If you and Mr Z understand the legalities thoroughly you'll feel much more confident in court.

 

You've got plenty of time to make sure you're up to speed, so don't waste it.

[Canaan]

45 minutes is quite a time for the hearing so it looks like you'll be well prepared to convince the judge that he would be right to issue the directions you've suggested.

 

My case has been allocated 45 minutes too, the judge who heard my application to amend my defence was very doubtful that it was adequate time for all the points that I had in my defence but I have not heard anything I assume everything will go ahead as planned on Monday

Canaan

[Misterzeus]

Thanks caro

 

Yes we will make sure we prepare in plenty of time, can't take the stress too well when in a rush

 

Any queries we have will find me on here again asking!!

 

Thanks again

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

 

 

Canann, good luck on Monday

 

Mrs Z

[Misterzeus]

Good morning all, Mrs Z here.

 

Today Mr Z has received a copy of an N244 “Application Notice” from the solicitors.

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn216/Misterzeus/CoopN244A.jpg

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn216/Misterzeus/CoopN244B.jpg

 

 

I am feeling quite sick at the minute. I’ve looked at the CCA they provided (links below) and I’m wondering if it is indeed compliant! Can someone please look again for me to see if I’m panicking for nothing or if we have actually got a “compliant” CCA?

 

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/n...Co-op1done.jpg

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/n...Co-op2done.jpg

 

 

Quick Recap so far:

 

Embarrassed defence submitted online via MCOL in July 2008

 

On the 18th November 2008 Cobbetts wrote and they enclosed a “Notice of change of Solicitor” for Mr Z’s records and a copy of the Claimants AQ. Basically, they were asking for the defence to be struck out and they didn’t want to negotiate either.

 

 

On 29th November 2008, Mr Z received a “General Form of Judgement or Order” this morning from our local Court oredring that the claimants comply with all points raised in Andyorche's draft order Mr Z submitted.

 

 

 

An amended defence (obviously a cr*p one going by what we received today) was handed in to the court and a copy sent to the solicitors on the 29th December.

 

Now this N244 today from Cobbetts!

 

Is Mr Z obliged to file more evidence and send to the solicitors or just make sure he has all relevant paperwork for the courthearing at the end of April?? Or are they playing more mind games?

 

The Default Notice (which they failed to supply, they sent a template of what they said would have been a DN, saying that as the letter is automated , the bank is unable to retrieve a true copy of the letter sent to the defendant) Link below:

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn216/Misterzeus/CoopDNTemplate.jpg

 

Any advice really appreciated, I am panicking big style here!

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

Edited February 13, 2009 by Misterzeus
Amendment

[citizenB]

I think this is standard practice Mrs Z, for the claimant to try and get a strike out.

 

 

I am pretty certain you will need to respond to this, however, I dont know in what form.

 

I have hit the panic button for you.

[Misterzeus]

Thanks citizenB A star as always, much appreciated

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

[citizenB]

Good morning all, Mrs Z here.

 

Today Mr Z has received a copy of an N244 “Application Notice” from the solicitors.

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn216/Misterzeus/CoopN244A.jpg

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn216/Misterzeus/CoopN244B.jpg

 

 

I am feeling quite sick at the minute. I’ve looked at the CCA they provided (links below) and I’m wondering if it is indeed compliant! Can someone please look again for me to see if I’m panicking for nothing or if we have actually got a “compliant” CCA?

 

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/n...Co-op1done.jpg

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/n...Co-op2done.jpg

 

 

Quick Recap so far:

 

Embarrassed defence submitted online via MCOL in July 2008

 

On the 18th November 2008 Cobbetts wrote and they enclosed a “Notice of change of Solicitor” for Mr Z’s records and a copy of the Claimants AQ. Basically, they were asking for the defence to be struck out and they didn’t want to negotiate either.

 

 

On 29th November 2008, Mr Z received a “General Form of Judgement or Order” this morning from our local Court oredring that the claimants comply with all points raised in Andyorche's draft order Mr Z submitted.

 

 

 

An amended defence (obviously a cr*p one going by what we received today) was handed in to the court and a copy sent to the solicitors on the 29th December.

 

Now this N244 today from Cobbetts!

 

Is Mr Z obliged to file more evidence and send to the solicitors or just make sure he has all relevant paperwork for the courthearing at the end of April?? Or are they playing more mind games?

 

The Default Notice (which they failed to supply, they sent a template of what they said would have been a DN, saying that as the letter is automated , the bank is unable to retrieve a true copy of the letter sent to the defendant) Link below:

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/nn216/Misterzeus/CoopDNTemplate.jpg

 

Any advice really appreciated, I am panicking big style here!

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

 

Okey dokey, having read this again, I think this is just Cobbetts advising they have applied for the strike out and not that the court is allowing this application.

 

Your reply when/if the court asks for your response, should be a a rebuttal in that THEY did not provide you with the paperwork you requested.

 

I am sure someone will be along to advise further. Is there a copy of your amended defence on here ?

[Misterzeus]

Hi citizenB

 

Sorry did I give the impression that I thought that the court had allowed a strike out already? No, I didn’t think that but am concerned as to whether or not we need to respond to the last sentence on Cobbetts N244:

 

The Claimant draws the Defendant’s attention to CPR 24.5 (1) and the Defendant’s opportunity to file evidence on which he intends to rely at the hearing.

 

After reading it (yet again) I am wondering if it’s their way of putting the frighteners on to a LIP and making Mr Z show his hand this early on (bear in mind the hearing has been set by the court for the end of April) so they can have the advantage?? I really don’t know what to think!

 

I’ve brought the amended defence forward from the thread.

 

It consisted of the statement below and supporting evidence was copies of the alleged CCA, so called DN template letter, Claimant’s witness statement, Claimant file notes on Mr Z.

 

In the NAME OF County Court

Claim no XXXXXXXXXX

 

 

Between

THE BANK – Claimant

V

MISTER ZEUS – Defendant

Supporting Documentation

 

On 26th November 2008 District Judge xxxxxxx sitting at xxxxxxxxx County Court, xxxxxxxx Combined Court, xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxx issued a General Form of Judgment or Order (copy attached at Annex A), as stated below:

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT

 

1.The Claimant shall, by 4:00 pm on 29th December 2008, serve on the defendant and file with the Court copies of the following:-

 

• Compliant copies of the Credit Agreement and any documents referred to within it which comply with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and all subsequent regulations, which the Claimant seeks to rely upon.
  

 

 

• Default notice compliant with Section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended.
  

 

 

• Document, Contract or Deed of assignment (if applicable).
  

 

 

• Notice of Assignment, with proof of service.
  

 

 

• Copies of any statement or other document relied upon.
  

2.In the event that the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim shall be deemed struck out forthwith.

 

3.The Defendant shall, by 14 days after service of documents in accordance with Paragraph 1 of this order, serve on the claimant and file with the Court an amended defence, sufficiently particularised in response to the documents supplied by the Claimant. The Case will then be referred back to a District Judge.

 

4.In the event that the Defendant fails to comply with this order, the defence shall be deemed struck out forthwith.

 

5.This order has been made by the Court’s own motion. Any party affected by this order may apply to the Court within 7 Days to ask for the order to be set aside, varied or stayed (pursuant to Part 3.3(5) (a) of CPR.

 

On 18th December 2008 I received by Special Delivery a packet containing the following:

 

• Covering letter from XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX. (Copy attached at Annex B)
  

 

 

• Witness Statement of XXXXXXXXXXXXX (Copy attached at Annex C).
  

 

 

• Copy of Incorrect Credit Agreement (Copy attached at Annex D).
  

 

 

• 116 pages of incomplete statements (some unreadable) (Will be made available at hearing).
  

 

 

• Copy of Template Default Notice used by the Claimant, rough draft with no detail (Copy attached at Annex E).
  

 

 

• 4 Pages of File Notes (Copies attached at Annex D).
  

 

My Response (amended Defence) in accordance with Paragraph 3 of Judge XXXXXXXXXX’ Order is as follows:

 

The claimant has failed to submit “the required Documents” supporting their case despite being ordered to do so.

 

The claimant has had every opportunity to file such documentation and the size of the organisation, it is not unreasonable for them to have filed such documentation on time at the first opportunity, they have since been given a second chance to file documents by order of District Judge XXXXXXXXXX and they appear to have ignored the Honourable Judge’s orders and have failed to comply as directed.

 

The result of this failure is that I am unable to file a fully particularised defence to the claimants claim as directed by the Honourable Judge XXXXXXXXXX as without the documentation which the claimant relies upon, I am unable to answer their allegations as set out in their particulars and I am placed at a severe disadvantage, as I am a Litigant in person.

 

Therefore, I would request that pursuant to CPR part 3.4, 2 © that the claim is struck out without further order

 

If this is not acceptable, then please refer this letter and the file to District Judge XXXXXXXXXX to highlight the Claimant’s non-compliance with the order dated 26th November 2008 and for further directions to be issued.

 

I believe that the facts stated in this supporting documentation are true.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Signed……………………………. (Defendant)

 

Dated …………………………….

In the XXXXXXXX County Court

Claim no XXXXXXXX

 

 

Thanks again

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

[tiokim]

Hi Mrs Z.

I think you will be ok. Remember the DN is a defective one(no 14 days allowed) and the CCA is not enforceable(no prescribed terms within the signed part of the contract). Nothing they can do to change that. I think they are just trying to score out of your short defence. Lets hope that Andyorch/Aluysiorch (the advocate of the short defences) will not disappear and help you to write and file your witness statement before the hearing.

[42man]

Not sure if you'd seen this -

 

A valid credit agreement must contain certain terms within the signature document (s.60(1)(2) CCA 1974). These core terms are the credit limit, repayment terms and the rate of interest (SI 1983/1553 (6 Signing of agreement) which states that the prescribed terms must be within the signature document. (Column 2 schedule 6). s.61(1)(a) states the agreement must contain all the prescribed terms and be signed by both the debtor and on behalf of the creditor.

 

Further, s.127(3) CCA 1974 makes the account unenforceable if it is not in the proper form and content or improperly executed.

 

In Wilson and another v Hurstanger Ltd (2007) it was stated “In my judgment the objective of Schedule 6 is to ensure that, as an inflexible condition of enforceability, certain basic minimum terms are included which the parties … and/or the court can identify within the four corners of the agreement. Those minimum provisions combined with the requirement under s.61 that all the terms should be in a single document, and backed up by the provisions of section 127(3), ensure that these core terms are expressly set out in the agreement itself: they cannot be orally agreed; they cannot be found in another document; they cannot be implied; and above all they cannot be in the slightest mis-stated. As a matter of policy, the lender is denied any room for manoeuvre in respect of them. On the other hand, they are basic provisions, and the only question for the court is whether they are, on a true construction, included in the agreement”.

[Misterzeus]

Thanks tiokim, you're really kind

 

What concerns me with the CCA is that (though barely legible) is that it does state:

 

I have read the credit agreement overleaf as well as my customer copy of the full set of conditions etc. It's very hard to read as the copy is so dark but nonetheless it's still there!

 

I'm presuming the 2nd page is the terms, though again barely legible and it strains the eyes to read it!!!

 

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/n...Co-op1done.jpg

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/n...Co-op2done.jpg

 

The DN is definately flawed and they haven't sent an actual copy in their last bundle of paperwork either.

 

Yes it would be great if Andyorch or Aloyuish were around, but we all have busy lives I guess!

 

Thanks again

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

[Misterzeus]

Thanks 42man! Sorry didn't notice your post.

 

It would be much appreciated if you would be kind enough to give me your opinion on the CCA they sent please?

 

Thanks

 

Mrs Z

[tiokim]

My guess is that the terms are not there. More likelly they no longer have the original and have not scaned the back of it. If they did, they would have made a big noise about it and would have sent to the court and to you a copy of it.

[Misterzeus]

Thanks again tiokim

 

I certainly hope that is the case!!

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

[AndyOrch]

Hi Mrs Z.

I think you will be ok. Remember the DN is a defective one(no 14 days allowed) and the CCA is not enforceable(no prescribed terms within the signed part of the contract). Nothing they can do to change that. I think they are just trying to score out of your short defence. Lets hope that Andyorch/Aluysiorch (the advocate of the short defences) will not disappear and help you to write and file your witness statement before the hearing.

 

Hi Mrs Z I trust you are well

 

Ok just to enlighten my learned friend Tiokim the Defence used in this case was purely drafted by the latter name suggested ,and finalised by CB and approved by the latter.

I cant speak for the latter named but I have no intention of disappearing and will assist and continue to offer advice when and where needed.

As i recall you recently critised another thread by Amber So scared and don't knowwhat to do next. Robinson way have issued a CC claim against me (1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page) were I had assisted and understand she still awaits your alternative advice to which you have never returned or offered alternative advice.

 

I trust the above corrects any misconceived points within this thread

 

Regards

 

Andy:cool:

Edited February 13, 2009 by Andyorch

[citizenB]

No you didnt give the impression that the strike out had been allowed. I formed that one all on my own

 

Mrs Z, when did you file that defence.. was it after they supplied you with the package of "goodies" and you discovered that items were still missing.

 

I rather think that they should be looking at that CPR direction themselves as they too are going to struggle with evidence by the looks of things.

 

Hiya Andy.

[Misterzeus]

Hi Andy so pleased you're still around! I am well thank you if not somewhat panicky. Hope you are well too?

 

Mr Z and I would appreciate your input in our way forward if you wouldn't mind? If it wasn't for you and your invaluable help, we would have been at the mercy of the Co-op by now for sure!!

 

Thanks Andy

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

 

citizenB,

 

Cobbets sent the package of "goodies" 18th December (SD), the amended defence was submitted at the end of December. By items missing, do you mean a copy of the DN? Yes it was missing, I put a link to what they considered was a "DN Template letter"!

 

I really don't know what to think, regarding if they have a case or not. The strange thing is they are asking for a strike out but want it dealt with at a hearing!

 

All I know is that it's getting me down at the minute! A part of me wants to throw the towel in but the other part (my stubbornness) wants to fight!! Lol!!!

 

Thanks again

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

[citizenB]

I think most of these strike out requests are held in the court, so I dont think you need to worry about that.

[Misterzeus]

Good morning all, Mrs Z here.

 

 

Thanks citizenB, you were right!

 

 

Mr Z has just rung the Court and they said that a letter should arrive today or tomorrow regarding the “strike out” hearing applied for by Cobbetts. The date is the 3rd March – eeek!!

 

Cobbetts are stating that Mr Z’s “Amended Defence” does not comply with the DJ’s Order (dated November 2008) as it does not constitute a sufficiently particularised response to the documents supplied by the claimant. It goes on to say that the “Amended Defence” contains the wording of the Order (true but that was just for ease of reference for the Judge) and then states that the Claimant has not complied with the order and requests that the Claim is struck out. (Not true, no copy of DN, CCA not compliant).

 

Cobbetts go on to say that “In light of the above the Claimant respectfully submits that the Claimant duly complied with the Order and supplied the required documentation to the Defendant”. The Defendant has failed to file and serve a particularised amended defence and therefore the Claimant respectfully submits that the Defendant’s Defence be struck out and there be judgement for the Claimant etc. etc.

 

The DN is non compliant.

 

 

Opinions needed desperately please on the alleged CCA;

 

 

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/n...Co-op1done.jpg

 

http://i305.photobucket.com/albums/n...Co-op2done.jpg

 

 

We would appreciate some direction with this as Mr Z is not totally confident on how to proceed.

 

We understand that the relevant case laws need to be printed and produced in addition to other paperwork and presumably a witness statement.

 

We were thinking that providing we can be sure that the CCA they have supplied is non compliant along with the incorrectly formatted (and lack of 14 days notice) DN that Mr Z could apply for a “strike Out” at the hearing.

 

Time is truly of the essence now, so any advice/opinions would be most gratefully received, thank you.

 

 

I am really scared that the Claimant will win judgement by default if we don't address this correctly.

 

 

Regards

 

Mrs Z

[tiokim]

Hi Mr and Mrs Sorry about creating distraction in your thread at this vital time. I am glad you are getting important and vital help right now.

Andy, I don’t agree with your reasoning. The fact that I don’t know how best to tackle the problems created by short defences does not prevents me to criticise the idea of it. I noted that you have not forward any positive advise here yet or to Amber on the thread you mention above. Smoke screens and mirrors are the language of DCAs.