Cabot/Morgan & My Monument card case

diddydicky · February 11, 2010

these are the former names of kingshill no 1 ltd

15/01/2007 CABOT FINANCIAL (UK) LIMITED

12/03/1999 COMMERCIAL FINANCIAL SERVICES (UK) LIMITED

diddydicky · February 11, 2010

and these are the former names of Kingshill no 4 ltd

21/06/2006 CABOT FINANCIAL LIMITED

12/03/1999 COMMERCIAL FINANCIAL SERVICES (EUROPE) LIMITED

diddydicky · February 11, 2010

so there are two cabot companies one is ltd and the other (uk) ltd

you might also want to check out kingshill no 2 and kingshill no 3

robcag · February 11, 2010

Hi sir f

I've received a broadly similar 47 page document (page 47 completely blank) purported to be a 'redacted' copy of the DoA from Morgans in response to my CPR request.

Throughout, the document is mainly obscured by black felt-tip lines except for two or three paragraphs (one of which actually gives a total amount of money for the alleged sale - which could possibly be useful at some point to establish the authenticity/relevance of the document supplied).

There is nothing to link the account number to the document (a previous similar document from another company at least contained the details of the block of accounts included in the sale, which were all blacked out except for mine).

Pages 1 and 3 have spaces for a date (i.e. day number) to be inserted in a line which is printed 'DATED _____ November 2008', but this has not been filled in.

Page 46 has a statement saying "This Agreement has been signed by or on behalf of the parties on the day specified at the beginning of this Agreement."

There is a signature of someone 'for and on behalf of' 'Cabot Financial (UK) Limited', but no signature in either of the two spaces provided for the Vendor to sign (Capital One as it happens).

So ... document not dated, and not signed by vendor.

Which leads me to conclude that this is just some generic copy sent out to anyone who asks for a copy of their DoA (they probably just change page 1 and 3 to suit the appropriate month/year of assignment).

Cheers

Rob

diddydicky · February 11, 2010

cabot financial (UK) was not a correct business title in November 2008- it changed its name to Kingshill No 1 Ltd on 15 January 2007!! (see post 201)

robcag · February 12, 2010

cabot financial (UK) was not a correct business title in November 2008- it changed its name to Kingshill No 1 Ltd on 15 January 2007!! (see post 201)

Thanks for pointing that out DD , I hope I'll be able to put that to good use when the time comes!

Cheers

Rob

alangee · February 12, 2010

I have been looking through my Monument file and I have a letter from Monument which states that the reply card that Cabot are relying on is in fact an application card. I know that we all knew that anyway, but it is nice to have it confirmed by the OC.

Alan

Edited February 12, 2010 by alangee

diddydicky · February 12, 2010

Thanks for pointing that out DD , I hope I'll be able to put that to good use when the time comes!

Cheers

Rob

i would also check out those other kingshill companies- it could be that one of them changed ITS name to cabot when cabot changed to kingshill - in which case you may then end up with an entirely different company on the assignment!!

sir fussalot · February 12, 2010

Thanks all. I have just skimmed over the replies.

Fantastic......:grin:

I have a lot to go at. and will try over the W/E.

I really appreciate all the work EVERYONE has put in

Fussey.. :-)

sir fussalot · February 12, 2010

DIDDY....

Just thought , on another theme.

Cabrot tried to (and did ) get a charging order on another card..

(it'll keep for another day!), and on various letters they came from,

Kings Hill a/c, Cabrot financial, Cabrot Europe, Cabrot Europe LTD.

etc, etc, So I asked the D.J. who was I supposed to deal with?

He made an order to specify who I was to "deal with". so as you have

pointed out; they could not necessarilly be the correct company.

BTW. they did not comply with the order, the letter came thro' about a week later than it should have.

So, naturally being public spirited, I told the court.

Never heard anymore though.... :cool:

fussey

diddydicky · February 12, 2010

DIDDY....

Just thought , on another theme.

Cabrot tried to (and did ) get a charging order on another card..

(it'll keep for another day!), and on various letters they came from,

Kings Hill a/c, Cabrot financial, Cabrot Europe, Cabrot Europe LTD.

etc, etc, So I asked the D.J. who was I supposed to deal with?

He made an order to specify who I was to "deal with". so as you have

pointed out; they could not necessarilly be the correct company.

BTW. they did not comply with the order, the letter came thro' about a week later than it should have.

So, naturally being public spirited, I told the court.

Never heard anymore though....

fussey

that wasn't very nice of you was it

sir fussalot · February 13, 2010

Robcag

In the N.O.A I have a page headed.

Schedule

List of Accounts

It is completely BLANK.

They are taking the P

In particular, , as they have not complied with a court order before.

They have "rushed" this one out.. :-x

Fussey

This

sir fussalot · February 13, 2010

Diddy

According to companies House.

CABOT FINANCIAL (EUROPE) LIMITED 03439445

05754978 CABOT FINANCIAL GROUP LIMITED

04071551 CABOT FINANCIAL HOLDINGS LIMITED

04934534 CABOT FINANCIAL HOLDINGS GROUP LIMITED

03513705 CABOT FINANCIAL (INTERNATIONAL) LIMITED

03757424 CABOT FINANCIAL (UK) LIMITED

CABOT EUROPE LIMITED Dissolved

FC010672 C CABOT EUROPE LIMITED Company Removed

05714535 CABOT FINANCIAL LIMITED

03936134 CABOT FINANCIAL DEBT RECOVERY SERVICES LIMITED

03514385 KINGS HILL (NO. 4) LIMITED

03514391 KINGS HILL (NO. 1) LIMITED

03958468 KINGS HILL (NO.3) LIMITED

03959268 KINGS HILL (NO. 2) LIMITED

s.f.

Edited February 13, 2010 by sir fussalot

Hadituptohere · February 13, 2010

Alangee would it be possible to see this document from monument regarding the reply card?????

Hadituptohere

alangee · February 13, 2010

Hi Hadit

Attached as requested.

I asked - through S78 and CPR 31.16 - Monument for a copy of my agreement. They replied by sending me a reconstituted copy of the agreement (as it would look now) and a copy of the reply card. I queried the reconstituted copy of the agreement and they came back with this document as a final response.

Alan

Monument Final Response.pdf

Dotty50 · February 13, 2010

Hi, this is my thread and everything they sent me is on the first post, if it's of any help to you.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/getting-out-debt/239332-monument-cca.html

Hadituptohere · February 13, 2010

Thankyou alangee,

aplologies for hijacking the thread.

Hadituptohere

sir fussalot · February 18, 2010

Hiya all,

I have to , by 4 p.m. to-morrow, file a fully particularised defence to court.

( I shall hand deliver it)

Now, DO I ;

Go for No Agreement. as on the application form,there are no prescribed terms, citing the Waksman's Appeal court ruling.

OR,

No Assignment letter/note, deed. therefore no authority to collect?

The pertinent points on the "redacted" deed of assignment. supplied by Cabrot. i.e., Name, address, a/c No. amount. etc, are ALL BLACKED OUT.so I don't think this is addmissable as it could be for anybody's account.

Also the date on which they say they bought the debt is different from the date they say in their court evidence.?

HELP.

s.f.

Edited February 18, 2010 by sir fussalot

sir fussalot · February 19, 2010

Hiya all,

My Defence had to be in by 4pm DJ said "Fully particularised"

mentioned that I couldn't do that as I was still short of documents..

In the XXX County Court

Claim Number XXX

Between: Cabot Financial (UK) Claimant

and

XXX XXX Defendant

by Order of District Judge XXX

Dated ZZZZ

“The Defendant shall file and serve a fully particularised defence by 4 p.m. 19th February 2010”

1 I am the defendant in this case and wish to honour the above order to make a “fully particularised

defence”.

2 However, in the absence of the requested documentation from the previous court

order, I, being a “Litigant in Person”am unable to make a full defence at this time.

3 I would ask the courts permission, to be allowed to amend my defence when and if the

requested documents are made available.

4 On or around mid November 2008 I received a letter from a debt collection agency called

“Fire”. As they said they were acting on behalf of Cabot, I asked for more information as

to what this alleged debt was for... I am unable to access a copy of the letter at this time but

I do have the reply/acknowledgement, from Cabot.No further contact from “FIRE” was

received or sent.

[ exhibit CA 1 ]

5 On or around the end of November 2008, I wrote to Cabot asking for a formal CCA request.

Again, I cannot access the letter to date but have a reply from Cabot, acknowledging receipt.

[ exhibit CA2 ]

6 As you will see, the letter confirming receipt is dated 2nd December 2008. This would have

given Cabot 12 days to the 14th December to comply with my request. As per the, “Consumer

Credit Act 1974”. (the Act).

7 At one month after the 14th of December Cabot had still NOT supplied the relevent information.

Thus commiting an offence. s78 6 (b). of the act. “

8 On the 9th of January 2009 Cabot admitted that as they were unable to supply the inform-

mation on time, they would, “continue to hold any action on your account until further notice”

despite this statement they continued to add interest onto the account, contrary to s77 4 (a).

[ exhibit CA3]

page 1

8 Cabot finally sent a copy of the application form, illegible copies of unconsecutive alleged

Terms and Conditions and a selection of copied statements,and stated that they had supplied the

relevant information, on their letter dated, 6th April 2009. 3 months and 5 days after my request.

[ exhibit CA4 ]

9 I received a notification from Northampton County Court on or about 31st August 2009.

I acknowledged the court papers and replied that I would contest the claim.

10 I was then informed that the case had been refered to Walsall County Court.

11 I immediatley sent a CPR 31 : 14 request to Cabots solicitors, Morgans.

[ exhibit CA 5 ]

12 The CPR request was received at Morgans on 4th September 2009.

prooof of; [ exhibit CA 6 ]

13 Although I had again requested thro' the CPR documents,

1 the Agreement

2 the Assignment.

3 A valid Default Notice.

14 No reply or acknowledgement was received from Morgans.

15 On the 18th of September I sent a follow up letter posted 1st class. Seeking an

urgent reply to my request. I also informed them, (Morgans) that if they did not

comply with my request, that I would ask the court for disclosure.

[ exhibit CA7 ]

16 I received no reply until 5th October 2009. Morgans said that they did not receive my letter until

4th October. Enclosed with the letter was

1 a copy of the application form

2 a copy of “Terms and Conditions”

3 copies of account statements.

They also stated that the “Deed of Assignment” could take up to a week to be retrieved.

[ CA8 ]

17 They had still not supplied an executed credit agreement, any authority that they were entitled , to collect any debt. Or bring a case against me. Nor had they supplied a Default Notice.

, As required by the act.

18 .In the letter dated 5th October the Claimant also makes it clear that he will not provide a Default

Notice. As required by the act. Before any enforcement action can be taken.

[ CA9 ]

19 In view of the Claimant not providing any evidence that he is able to bring a claim.

I asked at the court hearing of 11th November for the documents to be disclosed

page 2

20 His Honour Judge TOBY made an order that the original documents where to be brought to

the hearing on the 5th February.

21 No documents where available at the hearing so it was agreed by both parties to adjourn.

22 In the meantime it was requested again that a deed of assignment would be made available.

For the next hearing.

However, it was agreed that the Deed due to “sensitive” commercial information would be

“redacted”.

23 The Deed of Assignment supplied is with respect NOT addmissible as evidence due to the

“redaction”.

24 As all relevent information has been “blacked out” not just “commercially sensitive” infor-

mation. The name, the account holder etc have all been removed, as it stands it has not been

proved that the assignment has been properley executed.

25 To the point above I ask the court for a full disclosure of the alleged assignment. If only for

the court to see and accept

26 The Deed of Assignment shows that the claimant has the right to bring this case as yet despite

three requests and a court order, the Claimant has NOT proved that he is entitled.

27 The Claimant states in his court bundle that a letter was sent informing me of a note of ass-

ignment. I put the Claimant to strict proof that this was the case.The Witness states that this is

a copy of what the letter would have looked like.With no more details regarding the Witness

statement this is “Hearsay”. And I would ask the court for the witness to attend court in order to

be cross-examined.

[ BM5 ]

28 The “agreement” sent to me is not an agreement but an application form. This has been

the only document supplied so far by the Claimant as NO agreement exsists.

29 An application form CAN be an agreement. IF it complies with the prescribed terms.

Re Bank of Scotland-v-Robert Mitchell

The key words in Section 61(1)(a) are the reference to a document

itself containing all the prescribed terms, and conforming to the

regulations under Section 61. This language is clear and specific, and

ensures that mere reference to terms contained in another document

will not suffice. The document must contain the prescribed terms, just

as the signed document referred to in Section 127(3), which might save

the day, must however contain the prescribed terms. The construction

contended for by the defendant is entirely consistent with the language

of Section 61(1), and is also supported by Professor Good in his

encyclopaedic work - see Good & Consumer Credit Law and Practice

volume 2, 2B 5.121, and see also the comments at 2B 5.247. There the

learned author draws a distinction between the language of paragraph

(a) contain and paragraph (b) embody. It is respectfully submitted that

the court should adopt the same reasoning in determining this issue in

favour of the defendant, irrespective of whether or not it finds that the

defendant was supplied with documents other than the credit

agreement itself". 1st June 2009 Approved Judgement HH Judge Langan QC

page 3

30 As the case stands, the Claimant has Not shown that there is an enforcible agreement

Neither has the Claimant shown that he is entitled by a deed of assignment to bring this case

or that the original creditor has supplied a Default Notice in order to be able to pursue the

case, I therefore respectfully ask that this case is unenforcible ay Law, and should be struck out.

I believe this to be a true statement of my Defence

Signed --------------------------- BB nnnn Defendant 19th February 2009

page 4

O.K. then, what have I forgotten or done wrong ?

any comments.

fussalot.

Edited February 19, 2010 by sir fussalot

sir fussalot · March 9, 2010

Hiya all.

I need to put a WITNESS STATEMENT in by Friday 4.oopm.

On Saturday i recieved a reply to my Defence from Morgans :

sir fussalot · March 9, 2010

Here is their reply (in BLUE) to my Defence.

My comments are RED...

1 I am the defendant in this case and wish to honour the above order to make a “fully particularised

defence”.

Para 1 of the Defendants Defence is noted.

2 However, in the absence of the requested documentation from the previous court

order, I, being a “Litigant in Person”am unable to make a full defence at this time.

Para 2 of the Defendants Defence is denied. The Claimant was ordered on 5th Feb '10 to provide the Defendant with a redacted copy of the original Deed of Assignment by the 19th Feb. the Claimant provided the defendant with the same on the9th Feb, The Claimant therefore submits that the Defendant was able to lodge a fully pleaded Defence in accordance with para 1 of the court order.(this is the redacted copy with ALL pertinent points blacked out. i.e. no ref to my a/c ,or address or name etc.)

3 I would ask the courts permission, to be allowed to amend my defence when and if the

requested documents are made available.

Para 3 of the Defendants Defence is noted. The Claimant submits that the Defendant should not be granted leave to further amend his Defence for the reasons detailed at para 2 above.

4 On or around mid November 2008 I received a letter from a

debt collection

agency called

“Fire”. As they said they were acting on behalf of Cabot, I asked for more information as

to what this alleged debt was for... I am unable to access a copy of the letter at this time but

I do have the reply/acknowledgement, from Cabot.No further contact from “FIRE” was

received or sent.

[ exhibit CA 1 ]

para 4 is admitted, On or around 2nd sept '09 Fire sent a letter to the Defendant (No, it was '08

wherein it requested payment for the arrears outstanding on the Defendants Monument Credit card A/C. A template of the letter sent to the Defendant is attached. (Not even a copy of the letter, just a template to a “Mr. Taylor”, blah blah )

5 On or around the end of November 2008, I wrote to Cabot asking for a formal CCA request.

Again, I cannot access the letter to date but have a reply from Cabot, acknowledging receipt.

[ exhibit CA2 ]

On or around 17th Nov '08 a letter was received from the Defendant wherein he requested details of the debt together with a copy of the original agreement. Copy attached. On or around 18th Nov '08 Cabot acknowledged receipt of the letter and passed it to Fire. Copy is attached. (Why would Cabot pass this letter on to Fire who were “Collection Agents for their client Cabot”,. And not send it to the O/C?)

On the 21st Nov '8 the Defendants wife contacted Cabot by phone. During this conversation she requested a cpy of the original credit agreement. Following this request the a/c was transferred to the customer Assurance dept. Who acknowledged the request by way of a letter. A TEMPLATE of which is attached.

Para 5 of the Defendants defence is admitted. Save that the Defendants request wa made pursuant

to s77 of the CCA act. On the 3rd dec'08 the Claimant received a letter from the Defendant in which he made a request for a copy of the original credit agreement. A copy of this letter is attached.

The Claimant submits that, a request pursuant to s77 requires a stat payment f £1.The Defendant did not enclose such a payment accordingly, the Claimant was not bound by the CCA s77. Request.

This was the letter,

to Ms Robertson. Cabot.

I have asked for a copy of the original credit agreement, as I do not have one.Can you please confirm who I am now dealing with ,yourselves or FIRE. I await your reply

Not really a CCA request was it. AND why do Cabot send the £1 back when you DO ask for a s77 request?.

6 As you will see, the letter confirming receipt is dated 2nd December 2008. This would have

given Cabot 12 days to the 14th December to comply with my request. As per the, “Consumer

Credit Act 1974”. (the Act).

Para 6 of the Defendants defence is denied. Save that a letter was sent to the Defendant acknowledging receipt of his request made on 21st Nov '08 The Claimant subnits that it was not required to comply with the Defendants request or at all for the reasons detailed in para 7 above

The Claimant further submits that it is the Assignee of the contractual benefits of the agreement that existed between the Assignor and the Defendant. As a matter of contractual Law, an assignment transfers the rights or benefits but does not relieve the assignor of his duties or burden of liabilities to the other contracting party or entitle that party to enforce such duties or burdens of liabilities against the assignee of the debt.

In the House of Lords case of Linden Gardens trust Ltd.-v- Lenesta Sludge disposals Ltd. (1994 AC 85 Lord Browne-Wilkinson stated. “It is trite law that it is, in any event impossible to assign “the contract” as a whole, ie, including both burden and benefit.The burden of a contract can never be assigned without the consent of the other party to the contract”... consequently, the Defendant is Assignee of the contractual benefits of the contract between the Assignor and the Claimant and opposed to “rights and duties”. It is therefore submitted that the Defendant is not a creditor for the purpose of section 189 of the CCA 1974 and not bound by a s77/78 request. (don't pretend to understand this one)

7 At one month after the 14th of December Cabot had still NOT supplied the relevent information.

Thus commiting an offence. s78 6 (b). of the act. “

para 7 of the Defendats Defence the Claimantrelies upon para 7 – 9 above.

8 On the 9th of January 2009 Cabot admitted that as they were unable to supply the inform-

mation on time, they would, “continue to hold any action on your account until further notice”

despite this statement they continued to add interest onto the account, contrary to s77 4 (a).

[ exhibit CA3]

para 8 (i ) of the Defendants defence is denied save that the Claimant sent letters to the Defendant on the 15th and 24th Dec '08. these letters notified the Defendant of the delay in obtaining the requested documents and that the a/c would be put on hold. (still addedinterest though) until these were obtained. Attached etc. The Claimant submits that it was not bound by the defendants CCA request the reasons detailed above para 7-10

8 Cabot finally sent a copy of the application form, illegible copies of unconsecutive alleged

Terms and Conditions and a selection of copied statements,and stated that they had supplied the

relevant information, on their letter dated, 6th April 2009. 3 months and 5 days after my request.

[ exhibit CA4 ]

para 8 ( ii ) of the Defence is denied The Claimant submits that Cabot provided the defendant with a copy of the executed agreement copy attached (app form) A cpy of the term& C's provided by the Assignor and copies of statements of account prior to the assignment. These documents were provided to the Defendant under cover of a letter dated 6th April 09. A copy REPRESENTATION of this letter attached.

9 I received a notification from Northampton county court

on or about 31st August 2009.

I acknowledged the court papers and replied that I would contest the claim.

10 I was then informed that the case had been refered to Walsall county court

.

11 I immediatley sent a CPR 31 : 14 request to Cabots solicitors, Morgans.

[ exhibit CA 5 ]

para 9 10 11 of the defence is noted

12 The CPR request was received at Morgans on 4th September 2009.

prooof of; [ exhibit CA 6 ]

para 12 of the defence is admitted

13 Although I had again requested thro' the CPR documents,

1 the Agreement

2 the Assignment.

3 A valid Default Notice.

para 13 is noted

14 No reply or acknowledgement was received from Morgans.

Para 14 is admitted

15 On the 18th of September I sent a follow up letter posted 1st class. Seeking an

urgent reply to my request. I also informed them, (Morgans) that if they did not

comply with my request, that I would ask the court for disclosure.

[ exhibit CA7 ]

In respect of para 15 of the Defence the Claimant submits that the Claimant's records do not show that the Claimant received such correspondence from the Defendant ( my fault only got proof of posting)

16 I received no reply until 5th October 2009. Morgans said that they did not receive my letter until

4th October. Enclosed with the letter was

1 a copy of the application form

2 a copy of “Terms and Conditions”

16 I received no reply until 5th October 2009. Morgans said that they did not receive my letter until

4th October. Enclosed with the letter was

1 a copy of the application form

2 a copy of “Terms and Conditions”

3 copies of account statements.

They also stated that the “Deed of Assignment” could take up to a week to be retrieved.

[ CA8 ]

para 16 of the Defence is admitted copy of letter attached.

17 They had still not supplied an executed credit agreement, any authority that they were entitled , to collect any debt. Or bring a case against me. Nor had they supplied a Default Notice., As required by the act.

Para 17 is denied save that the Claimant had not provided a copy of the Deed of assignment until Feb 9th 10.(the Blacked out “alleged” copy) The Claimant submits that the credit agreement attached hereto ( app form) is an executed agreement within the meaning of the CCA act It clearly states under the heading “sign to-day” that this is a credit agreement regulated by the CCA 1974.

The Claimant further submits that neither the Claimant nor the Assignors were required to send Default notices to the defendant. A Default Notice need only be sent to the Defendant in a limited number of circumstances.(well they sent me one AND Terminated my A/C)

Section 87 ( 1 ) of the CCA 1974 requires service of a Default Notice when the Creditor wishes to:

( A ) Terminate the agreement

( B ) to demand earlier repayment of any sum or

( C ) to recover possessions of any goods or land or

( D ) To treat any right conferred on the debtor or hirer by the agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred or

( E ) To enforce security

18 .In the letter dated 5th October the Claimant also makes it clear that he will not provide a Default

Notice. As required by the act. Before any enforcement action can be taken.

[ CA9 ]

The Claimant avers that s 87 and 88 apply only where the creditor wishes to take one of the steps specified in s 87/88 A Default notice is not required where the creditor simply demands repayment for the arrears.( REMEMBER THAT LAST SENTANCE )

The Claimant therefore avers that no Default Notices were required as it merely demands repayment of arrears on the Defendants Monument Credit Card Account.

Para 18 of the Defence is denied. The Claimant relies upon para 20-23. above.

19 In view of the Claimant not providing any evidence that he is able to bring a claim.

I asked at the court hearing of 11th November for the documents to be disclosed

In respect to para 19of the Defence the Claimant can neither admit nor deny that the defendant requested documents to be disclosed at the court hearing on 11th Nov '09.

The defendant is put to stict proof.(asked for doc's in witness statement. Court order of 11th Nov states ( 7 ) ,original documents to be brought to hearing )

20 His Honour Judge “TOBY” made an order that the original documents were to be brought to the hearing on the 5th February.

Para 20 is admitted ( so how come they have denied it above ?)

21 No documents where available at the hearing so it was agreed by both parties to adjourn.

Para 21 is Denied. The adjournment was due to no witness statement and to allow for a redacted copy of D of A Furthermore, upon the Defendants reference to D.J.'s order (7) Judge “TOBY”, stated that copies would suffice for the hearing. ( I didn't hear that)

22 In the meantime it was requested again that a deed of assignment would be made available.

For the next hearing.

However, it was agreed that the Deed due to “sensitive” commercial information would be

“redacted”.

Para 22 is admitted

23 The Deed of Assignment supplied is with respect NOT addmissible as evidence due to the

“redaction”.

Para 23 is Denied. The (Blacked out ) Deed of Assignment provided to the Defendant clearly shows that an

assignment took place between Cabot and Barclay's Accordingly, the Claimant has a legitimate cause of action against the Defendant. ( well is it just me or what??)

24 As all relevent information has been “blacked out” not just “commercially sensitive” infor-

mation. The name, the account holder etc have all been removed, as it stands it has not been

proved that the assignment has been properley executed.

Para 24 is of the Defence is Denied.

The Deed of assignment does not specify the accounts subject to the assignment of a debt (???) the assignor provides information regarding assigned accounts. Attached hereto is an extract of the “raw data” provided to the assignee by the assignor on assignment.

The “raw database” is an electronic data base provided by the assignor which is subject to theAssignment.

The “raw data” confirms among other things, the date the a/c was opened, the a/c number, the defendants name and address and date of birth and the balance of arrears assigned.

25 To the point above I ask the court for a full disclosure of the alleged assignment. If only for

the court to see and accept

Para 25 of the Defence is noted the Claimant relies on the above.

26 The Deed of Assignment shows that the claimant has the right to bring this case as yet despite

three requests and a court order, the Claimant has NOT proved that he is entitled.

Para 26 of the Defence is denied. The Claimant relies upon the above.

27 The Claimant states in his court bundle that a letter was sent informing me of a note of ass-

ignment. I put the Claimant to strict proof that this was the case.The Witness states that this is

a copy of what the letter would have looked like.With no more details regarding the Witness

statement this is “Hearsay”. And I would ask the court for the witness to attend court in order to be cross-examined.

Para 27 of nthe Defence is denied. Notice of assignment was sent to the Defendant on the 3rd October 2006. A copy representation of this notice of assignment is attached. (not proof surely?)

28 The “agreement” sent to me is not an agreement but an application form. This has been

the only document supplied so far by the Claimant as NO agreement exsists.

Para 28of the defence is denied. The Claimant relies upon para 19 above