MandM vs Egg Loan ***Won with Strike Out***

[MandM]

I'm at work today but have periodic access to my PC.

 

If I can be of any use to you at all, it's that I can at least point you nin the direction of my own instincts on this!!

 

So, I think that my ace card is the DN and i'm hoping to draw as much attention as possible back to that.

 

Here's their DN, and you'll see that for some reason they omitted the wording "Served under Section 81 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974"!!!!

The first requirement of the contents required in a DN

 

Very strange, but their problem I hope,

http://i983.photobucket.com/albums/ae316/slinkymary50/Top2.jpg

 

 

Hope it helps

 

M

[AndyOrch]

Phew!!! all 17 pages read

 

Ok the DN is pants therefore termination is invalid also.As you quite rightly state no "Served under Section 81 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974" and also their Name address and postcode not on the top (their collections address will not suffice)

Moving on if the P.o.C amount is incorrect then its a sure bet the DN is also.They cant proceed until figures are validated.

Within your Directions you requested copy of said DN.What was supplied was the corrected template and not a copy of the DN they wish to base their claim on also statements of account must be actual bonafied Egg headed and numbered duplicate Statement copies, as you would receive normally,not reconstructed.

Therefore they have not complied with your Directions.

Copy of cancellation notice keep this in your mind but dont edge your bets on it, most DJ would let it go.

On to your latest order you need to agree or propose fresh directions,the DJ is requesting some clarity in this case (and I can see why)

You need to be specific now and request actual valid statements and infer that the P.o.C amount needs to be validated.

By way of your Directions you can now imply that the original DN as miraculously turned up and that you intend to contend its validity and conformity to the CCA1974 and as such unlawful termination of said account (this is your ace).

To be realistic the agreement cant be challenged nor the owness of the debt and as such the DN may be your saving grace but that would be up to the DJ on the day and what he feels is relevant.

 

I trust the above is of help

 

Regards

 

Andy

[MandM]

Phew!!! all 17 pages read

 

Ok the DN is pants therefore termination is invalid also.As you quite rightly state no "Served under Section 81 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974" and also their Name address and postcode not on the top (their collections address will not suffice)

Moving on if the P.o.C amount is incorrect then its a sure bet the DN is also.They cant proceed until figures are validated.

Within your Directions you requested copy of said DN.What was supplied was the corrected template and not a copy of the DN they wish to base their claim on also statements of account must be actual bonafied Egg headed and numbered duplicate Statement copies, as you would receive normally,not reconstructed.

Therefore they have not complied with your Directions.

Copy of cancellation notice keep this in your mind but dont edge your bets on it, most DJ would let it go. Not worried about this - have a letter from the Sols terminating the agreement

On to your latest order you need to agree or propose fresh directions,the DJ is requesting some clarity in this case (and I can see why)

You need to be specific now and request actual valid statements and infer that the P.o.C amount needs to be validated.

By way of your Directions you can now imply that the original DN as miraculously turned up and that you intend to contend its validity and conformity to the CCA1974 and as such unlawful termination of said account (this is your ace).Have shown my DN already in my defence so they can't say i ambushed them

To be realistic the agreement cant be challenged nor the owness of the debt and as such the DN may be your saving grace but that would be up to the DJ on the day and what he feels is relevant.

 

I trust the above is of help

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Thank you Andy O. Much appreciated.

 

As far as 'presentation' is concerned, am I simply using a layout similar to that one that I used at AQ stage?

 

And am I correct in asuming that I keep the directions simple and back it up with a WS to make or expand on the points?

 

Thank you again, you're a star.

 

M

[AndyOrch]

Yes simple and clear you need to remove the confusion that their Sols are adding to the matter. Precise Direction, you can copy it over to them to seek agreement, which may result in mediation because if you get your Directions just so, they will know game is over.

I dont see any need to draft a WS as the crux in this case is simple its them that are making it complicated.

If you care to post up your initial draft and I will give it that cutting edge to enable you to submit on time.

 

Regards

Andy

[MandM]

Yes simple and clear you need to remove the confusion that their Sols are adding to the matter. Precise Direction, you can copy it over to them to seek agreement, which may result in mediation because if you get your Directions just so, they will know game is over.

I dont see any need to draft a WS as the crux in this case is simple its them that are making it complicated.

If you care to post up your initial draft and I will give it that cutting edge to enable you to submit on time.

 

Regards

Andy

 

Thanks Andy,

 

Will post it up by Sunday night.

 

M

[MandM]

OK, here goes...........

 

DRAFT ORDER FOR DIRECTIONS

 

 

 

In the xxxxxxxx County Court

Claim number xxxxxxxx

 

Between

 

 

smEgg Banking PLC* - Claimant

 

 

 

 

and

 

 

XXXXXXXXX- Defendant

 

 

 

 

Draft Order for Directions

 

 

Draft Order for Directions

 

The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of this order file and serve the following:

 

* Copies of the Credit Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim, and any documents referred to within it which complies with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended, which the claimant seeks to rely upon. Copies of original document only will suffice.

 

* Copy of the Default Notice compliant with s87 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended, as issued to the Defendant and which the claimant seeks to rely upon.

 

* Copies of all original statements for the duration of the alleged agreement, used to establish a balance on the claimants Particulars of Claim dated XXXXXXX

 

* Copies of any other document to be relied upon

 

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

Edited December 13, 2009 by MandM
typo. got 10 thumbs!!

[MandM]

Sent an SAR to Egg for a card I had and got back lots of stuff relating to the loan in this thread. Strange thing is that within the various logs they detail all correspondance (even texts) but the DN isn't mentioned around the date it was issued. It says it was sent 3 months later which is odd as we were already at AQ stage by then lol. Nither is there a copy of the DN in the bundle or the usual screenshot/template you'd expect. It's as if they're pretending it doesn't exist!!

 

Also (and this is really weird) i've been arguing that I cannot have been sent the original T & Cs as the numbering is completely out of sync with the refernces within the agreement. There's 2 lots in the SAR bundle (I assume current AND original). Amazing what they can find when you force the issue .

 

M

[AndyOrch]

Looks fine M

 

I would consider just tagging this on to the end.

 

Having regard for the Overriding Objectives it is averred that without disclosure of the above documents the Claimants case can not proceed and this is regarded as a further frustration to intimidate me in theses proceedings.

 

If the Claimant is unable to produce the documents to verify their claim it is requested that this matter be struck out pursuant to CPR 31 .8

 

 

 

Andy

[MandM]

Looks fine M

 

I would consider just tagging this on to the end.

 

Having regard for the Overriding Objectives it is averred that without disclosure of the above documents the Claimants case can not proceed and this is regarded as a further frustration to intimidate me in theses proceedings.

 

If the Claimant is unable to produce the documents to verify their claim it is requested that this matter be struck out pursuant to CPR 31 .8

 

 

 

Andy

 

Thanks Andy,

 

Should I be sending this to the Sols for their 'agreement' or straight to the court?

 

M

[AndyOrch]

Dont see why not shows you are trying to be amicable head it proposed their copy and the other Draft to the Court.up to them them if they want agree or not.

 

Andy

[MandM]

Dont see why not shows you are trying to be amicable head it proposed their copy and the other Draft to the Court.up to them them if they want agree or not.

 

Andy

 

Thanks Andy, will get them posted off,

 

M

[MandM]

Would this be adequate to send to the sols as a covering letter?

 

Dear xxxxx

 

Case No XXXXXXXX MandM v Your client

 

Please find attached my proposed Draft Directions which I will be sending to the court as requested.

 

It is clear that, upon examining the documents produced to date by you/your client in respect of the above case, you are unable or unwilling to forward me;

 

(i) A copy of the Default Notice (as issued XX/XX/XXXX) that is compliant with s87 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) as amended.

 

(ii) The actual credit agreement together with terms and conditions upon which your clients case relies.

 

(iii) Actual copies of all original statements for the duration of the alleged agreement, used to establish a balance on the claimants Particulars of Claim.

 

Therefore, in order to save additional costs and wasting the courts time still further I propose to submit the attached to the court as my Draft Directions.

 

I trust that this meets with your approval and hope to seek your agreement on this as..........(not sure what to put here!!!!!!)

 

In the meantime I would like to wish you and your staff a very Merry Christmas and a happy and prosperous New Year

 

Regards,

 

MandM (the last sentance will be removed lol)

Edited December 15, 2009 by MandM
typo

[AndyOrch]

I trust that this meets with your approval .....Having regard for the Overriding Objectives and CPR..(not sure what to put here!!!!!!)

[MandM]

I trust that this meets with your approval .....Having regard for the Overriding Objectives and CPR..(not sure what to put here!!!!!!)

 

 

Thanks Andy

 

M

[MandM]

Had some movement. Into further new ground now .

 

Had notification back from the Sols just before Christmas saying "thanks, got your draft directions, will look at it after the holiday."

 

Seems they didn't.

 

Had notification from the court today basically using the whole of my draft directions;

 

Only changes were as follows: -

 

Crossed out the word "Draft" on the top;

 

Changed this to 28 days

The Claimant shall within 14 days of service of this order file and serve the following:

 

 

And crossed this bit out completely

If the Claimant is unable to produce the documents to verify their claim it is requested that this matter be struck out pursuant to CPR 31 .8

 

Apart from that it's been issued as written.

 

I suspect the last bit may have been crossed out as above it said

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

 

Is there anything now that I should be doing or watching out for? Should I be writing to the Sols saying "lets save costs and call it a day?"

 

They cannot comply with all of the directions no matter what. The DN remains defective.

 

Any thoughts?

 

M

[MAGDA]

Hi M&M hope you are well. The judge has ordered that the claimant complies with your directions (that was good!) within 28 days (longer than usual) so keep an eye out and if they don't comply with the directions in full (as ordered) within this time, go back to the court and advise them of this - at this point the judge will probably give them further time (say 10-14days) to comply making an "unless" order, and if they don't, may strike out their claim. How long is it until the actual trial date m&m - have you got a date for that yet?

 

Re: negotiating - I would hold fire for now and see what else develops - if you decide you want to go down that route, you can always do so a bit later on.

 

regards, Magda

[MandM]

Hi Magda, Hope you're well and enjoyed the hols.

 

Still no sign or indication of a trial date.

 

With regards the 'directions' do they have to stick to them to the letter? as they can't on one particular item. Can see them getting their act together on the rest of it (or explaining it away as admin problems lol) but if the directions for the DN remain unchanged they could be snookered a bit. Will hold off all contact - suppose it's up to them to make the next move.

 

Have held back on my PPI claim for the card (substantial) so as not to confuse matters but tempted to put it in (and confuse matters lol)

 

M

[MAGDA]

Hi, yes, had a great holiday thanks - amazing how quickly it goes though isn't it.

 

They should have to comply with the Directions to the letter as that is what the judge has ordered, so he obviously agreed with you when you submitted them and didn't think they were unreasonable.

 

Re: PPI, I think I would be tempted to add that in as well, confusing them shouldn't be too difficult anyway:rolleyes:

 

Hopefully, they won't be able to fully comply with the directions and the ball is back in your court again.

 

All the best, Magda

[MandM]

Well, hoping the judge will see i've given them a fair shot. No CPR used, no SOs - went quite gently and has worked quite well thanks to this site. Just gave them enough rope.

 

Going to throw the PPI in the pot now. Mind's made up that it's time to wind them up a bit . Gotta have some fun.

 

M

[MAGDA]

Yes, I don't think they'll be laughing though:D

 

You really deserve to be successful with this one, here's hoping it all works out for you!

 

Magda

[Sunshine54]

morning M

 

hope you are enjoying a sunny Sunday

 

I'm a little bit confused. Are you saying that the Directions say that the claim will be struck out if they don't comply and provide the requested info or are you saying that they crossed out that bit when they issued the directions?

 

best regards

S

[MandM]

morning M

 

hope you are enjoying a sunny Sunday

 

I'm a little bit confused. Are you saying that the Directions say that the claim will be struck out if they don't comply and provide the requested info or are you saying that they crossed out that bit when they issued the directions?

 

best regards

S

 

Morning S, and the sun is shining .

 

It was in twice.

 

The DJ left in:

If the Claimant fails to comply with this order, the claim will be struck out without further order.

 

And crossed out:

If the Claimant is unable to produce the documents to verify their claim it is requested that this matter be struck out pursuant to CPR 31 .8

 

Apart from giving them 28 days rather than 14 as i'd suggested the DJ left my DD intact. Seems fair to me as it appears that the Sols never responded in time.

 

M

[Sunshine54]

hi M

does that count as an 'unless' order? So that you don't have to go back and ask for it to be struck out and they won't get extra time?

 

If the claim is going to be struck out are you going to ask for your PPI as a separate claim or are you going to file a counterclaim ?

 

S

[MandM]

hi M

does that count as an 'unless' order? So that you don't have to go back and ask for it to be struck out and they won't get extra time?

 

If the claim is going to be struck out are you going to ask for your PPI as a separate claim or are you going to file a counterclaim ?

 

S

 

Not sure, it says without further order so sounds pretty terminal. I'll give it a month and then contact the court I suppose.

 

On the PPI, it's on the card and hasn't been brought up yet so hasn't been a part of this one which is the loan. They haven't gone for me on the card. Been paying a nominal amount each month but just started getting threat letters again from the DCA. Might go for the card as a seperate issue and let them start putting the two together.

 

I assume that the whole thing will end up as a deal of some sort.

 

M

[MandM]

Have some news - and need some advice. Just had a call from Mrs M to say that a bundle has arrived from the Sols in the post today.

 

They seem to have produced similar bits as produced before but with some notes with regards to the balance and the CCA.

 

BUT the DN (hopefully) has them on the run. My feeling is that they think it's a forgery! They have stated that they are going to put me to strict proof regarding the existance of my DN. They have further stated that their 'client' wishes to inspect the DN in the next 14 days and that I am to make arrangements to organise this.

 

Any ideas????

 

M