next directory ppi/ppp

[sharpgun]

bump

[sharpgun]

ok just cut and pasted and amended to suit this letter, am sending now and will apply to the court next week to be struck out when they dont reply

 

 

 

 

Simon Brown,

Legal Dept,

Phase 3,

Next Retail Ltd,

Enderby, Leicester,

LE19 4AT 06/09/2010

Court case XXXXXXXXXX

Dear Sir,

 

Re: XXXXXXXX v Next directory ltd

CPR 31.14 Request

 

 

Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14 for the disclosure and the production of a verified and legible copy of each of the following documents mentioned in my Particulars of Claim:

 

1 the agreement. You will appreciate that in an ordinary case and by reason of the provisions of CPR PD 16 para 7.3, where a claim is based upon a written agreement, a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should be attached to or served with the particulars of claim and the original(s) should be available at the hearing. Further, that any general conditions incorporated in the contract should also be attached.

 

2 the original ppp plan (signed)

 

3 the default notice

 

4 the termination notice

 

5 [any other documents mentioned in the Particulars of Claim]

 

 

You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties and ensure that the document(s) I have requested are copied to and received by me and the court by 4.00pm 13th September. Your CPR 31 duties extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for the originals of the documents I have requested, the better for you to be able to verify the document's authenticity and to provide me with a legible copy. Further, where I have requested a copy of a document, the original of which is now in the possession of another person, you will have a right to possession of that document if you have mentioned it in your case. You must take immediate steps to recover and preserve it for the purpose of this case.

 

Where I have mentioned a document and there is in your possession more than one version of that same document owing to a modification, obliteration or other marking or feature, each version will be a separate document and you must provide a copy of each version of it to me. Your obligations extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for any version(s) to include an obligation to recover and preserve such version(s) which are now in the possession of a third party.

 

In accordance with CPR 31.15© I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.

 

If you require more time in which to comply with this request you must tell me and the court in writing. You must tell me and the court before the time for compliance which 13th september when this request expires. In telling me you require more time you must tell me and the court what steps you have taken and propose to take in order to comply with this request and also state a date by when you will comply with this request. In addition your statement must be accompanied with a statement that you agree to an extension of the time for me to amend my statement. Your extension of time must be not less than 14 days from the date when you say you will have complied with my request and you must state the new date for amending my statement.

 

If you are unable to comply with this request and believe that you will never be able to comply with this request you must tell me and the court in writing.

 

Please note that if you should fail to comply with this request, I will make an application to the court for an order that the proceedings to be struck out for non-compliance and a summary costs order.

 

Please take note that this letter will be added to my bundle, and that this letter is your copy, a further copy of this letter will be given to the court

 

[sharpgun]

HELP

nEXT HAVE REPLIED AND SAID THAY DONT HAVE TO COMPLY WITH A SECTION 31.14 REQUEST BECAUSE IT IS NOT FAST TRACK, i NEED SOME HELP PLEASE. Is this right because you cannot believe anything they say There must be a section which refers to small claims

Edited September 12, 2010 by sharpgun

[car2403]

HELP

nEXT HAVE REPLIED AND SAID THAY DONT HAVE TO COMPLY WITH A SECTION 31.14 REQUEST BECAUSE IT IS NOT FAST TRACK, i NEED SOME HELP PLEASE. Is this right because you cannot believe anything they say There must be a section which refers to small claims

 

Well, no, not really. Lol. They will say that to make you think that they don't have to reply. I suppose their argument, like all the others we'ver heard, (and will hear again) is that the Small Claims Track has it's own standard directions for how the claim will progress, so they argue that they don't have to disclose documents until ordered by the Court to do so.

 

So, there's 2 ways to deal with this, either, wait for the claim to progress to the point they are ordered to disclose, or, apply to the Court for an order that they should comply with your CPR request.

 

TBH, it's probably quicker to wait for the standard directions to come, but then you may want to play them at their own game by sending them something along the lines of "I've asked to save the Court some time, you aren't playing ball, so I'm going to bring this behaviour to the attention of the Court when they come to consider the issue of costs, regardless of allocation to SCT". Of course this will have to be without prejudice, save as to costs, to be correctly admissible. I don't think I've seen any capitulate on receiving such a letter, but it's still nice to see them squirm when they get in to the Courtroom.

[sharpgun]

ok after searching cpr 27 and cpr 32,4 i rang the court and asked there advice a very nice girl said that they were experiancing alot of companies that were refusing to comply for requests for information. She said that by asking the judge by way of n244 to order the defendent to comply, might be the best way it costs 40 pound and he can only say no. So thats what i am trying

[car2403]

ok after searching cpr 27 and cpr 32,4 i rang the court and asked there advice a very nice girl said that they were experiancing alot of companies that were refusing to comply for requests for information. She said that by asking the judge by way of n244 to order the defendent to comply, might be the best way it costs 40 pound and he can only say no. So thats what i am trying

 

Have they complied with the latest Court orders? If not, you need to apply for a strike out, for failing to comply, rather than for an order that they comply with your CPR request, I would have thought?

 

TBH, I'm very surprised that the Court has offered any advice whatsoever - their usual stance is that you should seek legal advice

[citizenB]

ok gang need some help here please, as they have now defered the court case the judge makes an interesting point i Qoute

Both parties by 4pm on the 13th sept, are to fully comply with the order for directions on the 3rd of june.

I havnt got a clue what that means, does it mean that the judge has read it and is saying to next gat the docs or else I dont no. Anyway i am thinking about applying via N244 to have the case struck out as they have not supplied enough evidence to back up there defence. Is this a good idea?

 

Well, no, not really. Lol. They will say that to make you think that they don't have to reply. I suppose their argument, like all the others we'ver heard, (and will hear again) is that the Small Claims Track has it's own standard directions for how the claim will progress, so they argue that they don't have to disclose documents until ordered by the Court to do so.

 

So, there's 2 ways to deal with this, either, wait for the claim to progress to the point they are ordered to disclose, or, apply to the Court for an order that they should comply with your CPR request.

 

TBH, it's probably quicker to wait for the standard directions to come, but then you may want to play them at their own game by sending them something along the lines of "I've asked to save the Court some time, you aren't playing ball, so I'm going to bring this behaviour to the attention of the Court when they come to consider the issue of costs, regardless of allocation to SCT". Of course this will have to be without prejudice, save as to costs, to be correctly admissible. I don't think I've seen any capitulate on receiving such a letter, but it's still nice to see them squirm when they get in to the Courtroom.

 

Has this been allocated to track already then ? If you havent completed an Allocation Questionairre then I think it is still trackless.

 

Whether or not it has been allocated, the courts still expect both sides to have complied with CPR and the over riding objectives.

 

I would think that a Judge would be pretty miffed if they were advised that the Claimant was racking up costs because they decided to wait for a Judge to ORDER them to do something, when a perfectly reasonable request had been made prior to hearing.

[sharpgun]

it has a court date which has been changed three times, the latest by next because they said they hadnt recieved the new date from the court which was the 6th of sept . it is small claims court. I hope that the judge sees sence and makes next comply even if they cant. this is what y am applying for

 

 

 

N244

1.

I apply to the court for an order that next, do supply the information asked for in the pt 18 request (attached) to substantiate their defense. If the court orders next to provide the evidence and next fail to do so, I ask the court, that the defenses case be struck out.

2

The costs of this application be the claimants

[car2403]

Why apply for a disclosure order when they haven't complied with the existing order or your CPR request?

 

Look here;

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...-claimant.html

[citizenB]

Both parties by 4pm on the 13th sept, are to fully comply with the order for directions on the 3rd of june.

 

Did you comply with whatever the order was.. by 4pm today ?

[sharpgun]

yes but that has now changed to the new date which is 26th october. so 21 days before.

[citizenB]

Ah, I see. Carry on like this and the date will be pushed into the new year !!

[sharpgun]

hi car,yes read the thread and i think i am going down the right road, but it boils down to which judge, what day of the month, if his wife or her husband has ****ed them off, so nothing ventured nothing gained, anything to **** simon brown off.

[sharpgun]

filed n244 yesterday, now wait and see

[sharpgun]

had a final hearing date of the 26th october but now since i put my n244 application in to try and get next to supply documents as per my prt 18 request the judge has come back and asked that the 26th will now be a directions hearing. any feedback appreciated

[sharpgun]

bump

[sharpgun]

just had second offer from next this time they are offering £400 and the offer to wipe the ccj off the credit files,and they havnt had the letter from the court yet, which i think may make them twitter. But the one thing I have learnt about simon brown is that he treats it like his own money. So we shall see, I will be ignoring the offer

Edited September 30, 2010 by sharpgun

[citizenB]

What is the amount you are looking for, sharpgun ?

 

Directions hearing

 

Case management directions

 

5.1

 

The claim will be referred to the master or district judge once a defendant has acknowledged service, or otherwise on expiry of the period for acknowledgment of service, (or, if no defendant is named, as soon as the claimants' evidence has been filed) to consider directions for the management of the case. Such directions may be given without a hearing in some cases; these might include directions as to parties or as to notice of proceedings, as mentioned in paragraph 4 above.

[sharpgun]

so is this positive? the fact they are postponing the main hearing for this. it is 5k just under plus costs

which is made up of aprox 500 of ppi payments, interest at the same rate they charged and a 1k compensation.

[sharpgun]

ok went to court. judge very nice lady,after going through all the part 18 request word for word,she told me that the reason i was taking next to court was mis-selling and to foreget about everything else. just as we were about to go in nexts rep approached us ans said they had some new evidence, which was that the insurance company had made a mistake and that we could now claim on the insurance even after they had told us three times that they we could not claim, she said because of this they couldnt lose. the judge said to the other side that it was blattently obviuos that they hadnt sold ppp properly but said she could understand why they didnt have paperwork because it was so long ago, she then questioned how they new the exact figure we had paid in ppp when they didnt have records before 2001, so she gave them a month to produce them.( what i didnt ask was if they dont what happens?) As we walked out they still made us a silly offer and said we had no chance of winning.So why make us an offer.the judge said it was a complicated case and that it take a whole afternoon for the main hearing. My thoughts are that it is still misselling of ppp and shouldnt have been added without our permission.

Edited October 28, 2010 by sharpgun

[pawnbrokers]

sg, sorry i havnt been around to help in any way, my own life problems got in the way, but its great to see you have had the court experience, and while the judges are always "Nice", i personally found that they also seem to give far more credence and allowances to the Professionals, I dont understand, how the fact they Next now say that you can claim on this policy, how long is this after the fact, and bl00dy convenient to find it out on the courts doorsteps.

whats next on Next, full claim within the next month, or are you still waiting further disclosures, - dont think yu made that clear - will try to keep my eye on this as, im still battling with next "head in the sand" attitude, Good luck, and you must always remember the solicitors, quite often throw in something to try to keep yu off balance and loose focus.

Thats why their paid so much money - regards - pb:-)