CCJ from CL finance (Howard Cohen)

[debtdebtdebt]

HELP????

 

Further to my defence I have been notified the judgment as follows....

- Permission to file defence - out of time

- Defence struck out - failed to disclose a cause of action

- Can apply to have this set aside/varied/stayed within 7 days and the clock is running.....

 

What are my options I dont understand?

I am very worried but more significant personal matters are taking up my time....any suggestions...please ???

 

Much appreciated in advance

Edited December 23, 2009 by debtdebtdebt
typo

[postggj]

What Happened Debt4get

Yours Is A Long Thread

Brief Update Please

 

DID YOU GO OVER THE TIME SCALES TO FILE

[debtdebtdebt]

Thanks postggj,

Followed all procedures been to court twice.

1.To submit initial defence + request documents etc

2.Secondly to follow-up after request for documents which were filed not served, way out of time - contrary to court directions

 

Saw DN they rely on @ last appearance - requested time to consider given 14 days to File ammended defence (which could have been incorrect) plus letter of apology to the court for filing late due to illness - the dreaded mutant flu going around - knocked me and OH right out!

Yes I did file it late:cry:

 

This in post today....7 days to respond.....but less now as dated 20th

Edited December 23, 2009 by debtdebtdebt

[debtdebtdebt]

I want to respond to it ASAP.....but unsure what my options are.

Using non-compliant DN as ammended defence, my untrained (legal) eyes spotted 3 items which make it non-compliant.

Edited December 23, 2009 by debtdebtdebt
typo

[postggj]

Its Not The End Of The World

 

Lets Deal With This Tomorow With A Fresh Pair Of Eyes

[debtdebtdebt]

Thanks...appreciated

[debtdebtdebt]

bump please????

[postggj]

debtdebtdebt

 

before we begin might i sugest you hit the report triangle to get an imput from the site team to do a quick assesmant of the situation and best way to move forward

[debtdebtdebt]

Done....thanks

[citizenB]

Sorry, I have to tell you your DN is not invalid due to not being given sufficient time to remedy.

 

The regs were changed on 19th December 2006. Prior to that there was only 7 days allowed for remedy.

 

The only way I can see you challenging the DN is to put them to strict proof that it was actually received.

[citizenB]

What I find interesting is you say that the NOA says the account was assigned on the 22nd August 2008. However, they had already started proceedings on the 20th August 2008.. when they didnt own the debt at that time ??

 

Also, on the agreement/application form.. it looks like you ticked NO you didnt want the card protection, but you say that the statements show you were paying for this product ?

[debtdebtdebt]

Sorry, I have to tell you your DN is not invalid due to not being given sufficient time to remedy.

 

The regs were changed on 19th December 2006. Prior to that there was only 7 days allowed for remedy.

 

The only way I can see you challenging the DN is to put them to strict proof that it was actually received.

 

citizenB,

Thanks.... I requested this at initial defence of claim have not responded.

 

On review of DN I noted 3 things...

- claimants name + address (not there?)

- Correctly identify important information bold underline etc(its not as prescribed?)

- the time to serve (which you now advise incorrect)

 

Were the first 2 reasonable grounds to challenge DN...?

 

As regards PPI taken out a long time after initial agreement. Done verbally and active thereafter, never signed an agreement or saw it - all done on the phone.

 

Looks like I'll have a judgement to pay claim in the NY:sad:

Sorry but I feel rather down, difficult to enter into the festivities....inevitable appears likely...unless anyone else has other suggestion(s)????

Edited December 24, 2009 by debtdebtdebt
typo

[blind-as-a-bat]

sorry to jump in on the end, not read the thread since i last posted, the default notice, in post 138, is that the default notice CB is sying is valid?

Edited December 24, 2009 by blind-as-a-bat

[blind-as-a-bat]

Is that the one CL/HC are relying on in there court bundle, this is important

[blind-as-a-bat]

There is no such post code as LS99 ZBD, the real defaults from GE money are LS99 2 BD

 

The typeface in the GE money logo is also Wrong

 

HC/CL have forged them just as they did in my case, as agreed by the judge, does this apply and does it help, as i say i have not read the entire thread so dont know if this makes any differance

[debtdebtdebt]

Blind-as-a bat,

Thanks, yes it is....and that does help;)

I saw similar on another post and was sceptical it appeared...plus the fact I never got it in the first place!

 

But really could do with help on my response to the court (post 151).

 

Correctly and with some certainty:(

 

Merry Christmas to you and appreciate your help at this time.

[citizenB]

BAB, I am not saying the DN IS valid, I am saying that the lack of time to remedy cannot be used as it was issued prior to 19 December 2006 when only 7 days were given.

[blind-as-a-bat]

I know CB, i meant no offence.

 

But HC/CL are doing it yet again, misleading the court a default was issued, i dont know if a real one from GE was issued or not, but that is not proof one was in any way, as CL/HC have manufactured it, they have supplied a false document under a witness statemant too the court claiiming it is real one if they are following the same line as my case.

 

Without a DN they have no right of action, as they cannot demand the full amount, and have unlawfully terminated the contract doing so in court.

 

And they know it:wink:

 

Merry Christmas

Edited December 25, 2009 by blind-as-a-bat

[citizenB]

I know CB, i meant no offence.

 

But HC/CL are doing it yet again, misleading the court a default was issued, i dont know if a real one from GE was issued or not, but that is not proof one was in any way, as CL/HC have manufactured it, they have supplied a false document under a witness statemant too the court claiiming it is real one if they are following the same line as my case.

 

Without a DN they have no right of action, as they cannot demand the full amount, and have unlawfully terminated the contract doing so in court.

 

And they know it:wink:

 

Merry Christmas

 

Absolutely. If you have data from a SAR, ddd, is there a communications log, where activity on the account is noted ie phone calls, letters sent etc.. if so, check around the date they say the DN was sent and see if it has been logged .

[debtdebtdebt]

cb/blind-as-a-bat,

Thanks I really appreciate your input and feel guilty I'm diverting you from much more enjoyable activities.

In response to qustions thanks I realise I now cannot use the time served as a reason for non-comploiance and will not.

As regards SAR, never ever seen one... despite having specifically requesting right at the beginnning of claim. Then several times after with recorded letters.

So I guess the lack of it suggest they prefer not to supply evidence to the contrary of what they are claiming - never sent?

 

Did note an alarming but common thread where fabrication seems to be the accepted strategy, clearly and totally unacceptable.

 

Looking to compile my letter (response) to the court including all points raised and other items I have already relied upon that have been discussed but not provided.

Can anyone direct me to the sort of response I need to provide please. The structure or content is fine, dont feel confident enough to just fire something away now.....

 

Thanks and all your help is greatly appreciated.

[citizenB]

ddd, not quite sure what exactly you require. When you say response to the court.. are you meaning a witness statement, defence or just a letter ?

 

Thngs like this are "tailor made" so I doubt if there is anyone with a similar circumstance to you.

 

If you can bullet point what you need to be included (or perhaps a brief summary of where we are now and how you got here) that would help.

[debtdebtdebt]

cb, Thanks.

TBH I'm not sure what I need to do OR if I can do anything but the order from the court says exactly(word for word)...

 

3) TAKE NOTE

"...Any party affected by this order may apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days of service of this order...."

 

suggestions what I can do, does this mean they have successfully filed the claim and judgment is due/imminent pending no objections from me? Because that is what I understood or does it mena something else....

Edited December 28, 2009 by debtdebtdebt
typo

[citizenB]

HELP????

 

Further to my defence I have been notified the judgment as follows....

- Permission to file defence - out of time

- Defence struck out - failed to disclose a cause of action

- Can apply to have this set aside/varied/stayed within 7 days and the clock is running.....

 

What are my options I dont understand?

I am very worried but more significant personal matters are taking up my time....any suggestions...please ???

 

Much appreciated in advance

 

cb, Thanks.

TBH I'm not sure what I need to do OR if I can do anything but the order from the court says exactly(word for word)...

 

3) TAKE NOTE

"...Any party affected by this order may apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed within 7 days of service of this order...."

 

suggestions what I can do, does this mean they have successfully filed the claim and judgment is due/imminent pending no objections from me? Because that is what I understood or does it mena something else....

 

 

I have to be honest, I am still not clear on what has happened. The first post I have quoted above, is that the oriignal order, the 2nd post quoted is point 3 in its entirity ?

 

Whose defence has been struck out, who has been given permission to file a defence out of time.

 

"defence struck out due to no cause of action".. is that their defence or yours ?

 

Is there any chance you can post up (minus any identifying bits) the whole order please ?

[debtdebtdebt]

OK, just a minute and I'll post up the most recent order I am referring to.....

 

It was in response to my amended defence. Struck out - out of time(submitted late).

[citizenB]

righto, can you also give me a link to the amended defence please:)