Casperlady and Howard Cohen in court next week for SJ hearing. - help?!

[supasnooper]

Looks like I'm missing something again, as I can't really see how the DN is faulty - and I don't know the date my account was terminated. Is it just because they weren't clear in their intentions?

 

 

Please re-read Pinky's post #62, then refer to Pinky's post #74 to see why the Default Notice is defective.

[casperlady]

Please re-read Pinky's post #62, then refer to Pinky's post #74 to see why the Default Notice is defective.

 

Thank you This is like being back at college.

 

I've looked up Kpohraror vs Woolwich - it seems to be about damages, but everything I find relating to it seems to be about termination of agreement on the back of a faulty DN. Which is what I need isn't it? I'll keep looking..

[IdaInFife]

yes thats what you need

[Pinky69]

I gave you the reasons above why the DN is unlawful. What you have to do is go through the Act and list the Sections against the reasons so you know what part of the Act to quote in court. The addresses bit would probably be accepted in court but all the other reasons stand.

 

There are 2 ways to terminate an account. One is by termination letter, which they don't seem to have given you, the other is by action, and in your case the date of termination is the date they sold it to CL Finance. In doing so they rescinded the account because they didn't issue a lawful DN first.

[casperlady]

No on further searching, it definitely seems to be about damage to credit ratings..

[casperlady]

Thank you Pinky, I really appreciate everyone's help on this. I'm sorry to be so dim about it all.

[Pinky69]

The part of Khoparor you need is this:

 

Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but gives a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

 

Forget the damages bit. It's the unlawful rescission that prevents them enforcing the debt.

[casperlady]

Thank you.

 

This part was in my defence already...

 

The Need for a Default notice

 

18. It is neither admitted nor denied that any Default Notice in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant. And that the said notice gave the prescribed period of time to remedy any breach

 

19. Notwithstanding point 18, I put the claimant to strict proof that any default notice sent to me was valid. I note that to be valid, a default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237)

 

20. Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but would also give rise to a potential counterclaim for damages where damage occurs to my credit rating (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society - [1996] 4 All ER 119)

 

[citizenB]

 

I'll leave you now in Citizen B's capable hands for court procedure.

 

Ummm:?

 

All the information you require in respect of faulty/dodgy DNs is in the defence below. This includes the postage requirements as well.

 

Pick out the bits you need...

 

 

 

The requirement for a valid Default Notice to lawfully Terminate an Account whilst in default

 

1. Notwithstanding the matters pleaded above, the Claimant must under Section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 serve a valid Default Notice before they can demand early payment of sums not yet due under a Regulated Credit Agreement.

 

2. Under the Interpretation Act 1978 Section 7, it states:

 

Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expressions "give" or "send" or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post."

 

2. Practice Direction

Service of Documents - First and Second Class Mail.

 

With effect from 16 April 1985 the Practice Direction issued on 30 July 1968 is hereby revoked and the following is substituted therefore.

1). Under S7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 service by post is deemed to have been effected, unless the contrary has been proved, at the time when the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

2). To avoid uncertainty as to the date of service it will be taken (subject to proof to the contrary) that delivery in the ordinary course of post was effected:-

(a) in the case of first class mail, on the second working day after posting;

(b) in the case of second class mail, on the fourth working day after posting.

"Working days" are Monday to Friday, excluding any bank holiday.

3). Affidavits of service shall state whether the document was dispatched by first or second class mail. If this information is omitted it will be assumed that second class mail was used.

4). This direction is subject to the special provisions of RSC Order 10, rule 1(3) relating to the service of originating process.

 

8th March 1985

J R BICKFORD SMITH Senior Master

Queen's Bench Division

 

3. Further to point 2 above, CPR rules on service also state the required timescales to be given for serving of documents :-

 

Under CPR 6.26 First class post (or other service which provides for delivery on the next business day) is deemed to be “served” The second day after it was posted, left with, delivered to or collected by the relevant service provider provided that day is a business day.

 

4. The Default notice supplied by the Claimant is dated Friday 3rd August, to allow service in line with the statutory requirements mentioned in points 2 & 3 above, 2 working days were required to allow for 1st Class postage. Thus the Rectify date should be 14 calendar days from Wednesday 8th August, namely Wednesday 22nd August 2007, not the 14 calendar days from the date of the letter as stated in the Default notice which would have been 17th August.

 

5. I therefore put the Claimant to strict proof that any Default Notice sent to me was valid and allowed the statutory 14 clear days to rectify the breach. I also note that to be valid, a Default Notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237).

 

6. The failure of a Default Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119.

 

7. It is submitted that the above Default Notice served s87(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 failed to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561).

 

8. For a Creditor to be entitled to terminate a regulated Credit Agreement where there is a breach, demand repayment in full or take any legal action to recover any monies due under the Agreement, a creditor must serve a Default Notice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

 

Section 87. Need for Default Notice

 

(1) Service of a notice on the Debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "Default Notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the Debtor or hirer of a regulated Agreement -

 

(a) to terminate the Agreement, or

 

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

 

© to recover possession 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 any security.

 

9. The Act also sets out via Section 88(1), that the Default Notice must be in the prescribed form, as below:

 

Section 88. Contents and effect of Default Notice

 

(1) The Default Notice must be in the prescribed form…

 

10. The wording must make it clear that no variation is acceptable. Therefore it cannot be dispensed with as a De Minimus issue.

 

11. I note that the regulations do not allow any variation in the form of these statements and therefore it is suggested that where the statements are not as laid down in the regulations the Default Notice is rendered invalid as a consequence.

 

12. In the case of Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339 in the Court of Appeal, the Court addressed in some detail the issue of the contents of a Default Notice and should the notice fail to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) it would render the Default Notice invalid I quote the comment of KENNEDY LJ: "This statute was plainly enacted to protect consumers, most of whom are likely to be individuals" the judgment appears to confirm the consumer credit legislation made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as plainly enacted and set out to offer protection to the consumer. Therefore it is suggested that the failure of the Claimant to set out the Default Notice in accordance with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) could unduly prejudice me as it failed to allow the required time to remedy the alleged default.

 

13. The Claimant’s failure to issue a valid Default Notice must surely prevent a right of action and would make any termination of the Agreement unlawful, as statute provides the procedure that must be followed. Since the Claimant has failed to adhere to statutory procedure it is averred that the Claimant does not have a right of action, and can never now have a right of action having terminated the Agreement unlawfully.

 

14. Furthermore, the Arrears Total outlined cannot be accurate, as the Balance on the Account was at least partly comprised of Unlawful Charges plus additional Charges and Interest added unlawfully whilst the Account was in Dispute. Therefore, the Arrears claimed cannot be accurate, as they are themselves calculated using a Total that was itself inaccurate.

 

15. This is at all times an Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. There is no provision in the Act that allows a large financial institution to terminate an Agreement that is in alleged default or breach simply by giving notice to the Consumer. Section 98(6) makes that quite clear. The Creditor must follow the steps outlined in Section 87 and Section 88 if they are to lawfully Default and Terminate, and enjoy the benefits of Section 87.

 

16. Finally, an invalid Default Notice cannot be remedied by simply issuing a new Default Notice. The Claimant may not serve a second effective default notice in prescribed form post-termination of the agreement. Any such second default notice will necessarily state a date by when I would be required to comply after which in default the agreement would terminate. The second default notice would therefore contain the fiction that the agreement endured when that cannot be the case, as it was terminated on XX/XX/XX. Terminating an Agreement on the back of a defective Default Notice, simply confirms the undeniable truth that Termination of the agreement by the Claimant was carried out in circumstances which then prohibited them from enjoying the benefits of Section 87, namely the opportunity to seek early Payment of a sum that was, prior to Termination, only payable in the future.

[casperlady]

Thank you so much Citizen B. So I'll try to draft a new defence from the information above and post it here.

 

So on Tuesday, we think it's just to decide a track and that I won't need to give any of this information then? I was going to ask for more time to draft a new defence after the information provided by Cohens. Just turn up just me and ask for that, do you think that will work?

[citizenB]

I would be inclined to have an amended defence ready if you possibly can. Just in case. So make an attempt to get a draft together and post it up for comments.

[casperlady]

I'm trying to write an amended defence, am tearing my hair out. The part about the 14 days to remedy the breach isn't valid is it because they gave me 21 days from receipt.

 

Also I don't know what I have to back up the part about unlawful charges as the 'CCA' they have provided says they charge £12 for late payment, £12 for each failed direct debit, and that seems to match up to the statements.

[casperlady]

Ok, here is my draft amended defence.. any comments would be very gratefully received, am sure there must be many errors with it..

 

In the XXXX County Court

Claim number XXXXX

 

Between

 

C L Finance Ltd - Claimant

and

XXXXX - Defendant

Defence

1. I XXXXX of XXXXX am the defendant in this action and make the following statement as my defence to the claim made by C L Finance Ltd

 

2. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in the claimants Particulars of Claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof.

3. I have received the copy of the claimant’s witness statement. In part 5 of the witness statement the claimant states. “On 26th October 2008, pursuant to Section 87 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a Default Notice was served upon the defendant requiring payment of the arrears to be made, the Defendant having failed to make payment in accordance with the terms of the agreement. The Defendant failed to comply with the same and therefore the agreement was terminated.”

The Claimant has attached a copy of a default notice allegedly sent to the defendant on 26th October 2008.

The requirement for a valid Default Notice to lawfully Terminate an Account whilst in default

 

1. Notwithstanding the matters pleaded above, the Claimant must under Section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 serve a valid Default Notice before they can demand early payment of sums not yet due under a Regulated Credit Agreement.

 

2. I note that to be valid, a Default Notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237).

 

3. The failure of a Default Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119.

 

4. It is submitted that the above Default Notice served s87(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 failed to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561).

 

5. For a Creditor to be entitled to terminate a regulated Credit Agreement where there is a breach, demand repayment in full or take any legal action to recover any monies due under the Agreement, a creditor must serve a Default Notice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

 

Section 87. Need for Default Notice

 

(1) Service of a notice on the Debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "Default Notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the Debtor or hirer of a regulated Agreement -

 

(a) to terminate the Agreement, or

 

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

 

© to recover possession 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 any security.

 

6. The Act also sets out via Section 88(1), that the Default Notice must be in the prescribed form, as below:

 

Section 88. Contents and effect of Default Notice

 

(1) The Default Notice must be in the prescribed form…

 

10. The wording must make it clear that no variation is acceptable. Therefore it cannot be dispensed with as a De Minimus issue.

 

11. I note that the regulations do not allow any variation in the form of these statements and therefore it is suggested that where the statements are not as laid down in the regulations the Default Notice is rendered invalid as a consequence.

 

12. The Consumer Credit Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices Regulations (1983) state that a default notice must;

Where the creditor states that he intends to demand earlier payment of any sum,

(a) the amount of the sum before deducting any rebate on early settlement..

The default notice does not specify any sum.

13. In the case of Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339 in the Court of Appeal, the Court addressed in some detail the issue of the contents of a Default Notice and should the notice fail to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) it would render the Default Notice invalid I quote the comment of KENNEDY LJ: "This statute was plainly enacted to protect consumers, most of whom are likely to be individuals" the judgment appears to confirm the consumer credit legislation made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as plainly enacted and set out to offer protection to the consumer. Therefore it is suggested that the failure of the Claimant to set out the Default Notice in accordance with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) could unduly prejudice me as it failed to allow the required time to remedy the alleged default.

 

13. The Claimant’s failure to issue a valid Default Notice must surely prevent a right of action and would make any termination of the Agreement unlawful, as statute provides the procedure that must be followed. Since the Claimant has failed to adhere to statutory procedure it is averred that the Claimant does not have a right of action, and can never now have a right of action having terminated the Agreement unlawfully.

 

15. This is at all times an Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. There is no provision in the Act that allows a large financial institution to terminate an Agreement that is in alleged default or breach simply by giving notice to the Consumer. Section 98(6) makes that quite clear. The Creditor must follow the steps outlined in Section 87 and Section 88 if they are to lawfully Default and Terminate, and enjoy the benefits of Section 87.

 

16. The ‘Notice of Assignment’ states that the account was transferred to CL Finance by absolute assignment. This was without prior issue of a lawful Default Notice as per the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 and therefore the account has been unlawfully rescinded.

16. Finally, an invalid Default Notice cannot be remedied by simply issuing a new Default Notice. The Claimant may not serve a second effective default notice in prescribed form post-termination of the agreement. Any such second default notice will necessarily state a date by when I would be required to comply after which in default the agreement would terminate. Terminating an Agreement on the back of a defective Default Notice, simply confirms the undeniable truth that Termination of the agreement by the Claimant was carried out in circumstances which then prohibited them from enjoying the benefits of Section 87, namely the opportunity to seek early Payment of a sum that was, prior to Termination, only payable in the future.

Statement of Truth

I, believe the above statement to be true and factual

 

 

Signed

XXXXX

[GhostDebt]

Hi Casperlady,

The Default Notice must specify an actual date, and not just say '21 days from receipt'.

[GhostDebt]

Also,

Have you had a copy of the DN or Notice of Assignment?

Have you asked for/or been provided with a copy of the Deed of Assignment?

 

You're welcome to look over my CL threads and see if there is anything you can borrow from the defences/skeleton arguements that have been done.

 

Regards

[casperlady]

Thank you GhostDebt, I'll add that in too. I do have a copy of the DN and Notice of Assignment, they sent the lot. I'll have another look at your threads too.

 

Just over 24 hours to go until court now.

[casperlady]

I have amended the defence slightly, added to it the part about the date.

 

Also, does anyone know if I can add anything else about the notice of assignment? Any help gratefully received - court is tomorrow. Thank you..

 

In the XXXX County Court

Claim number XXXXX

 

Between

 

C L Finance Ltd - Claimant

and

XXXXX - Defendant

Defence

1. I XXXXX of XXXXX am the defendant in this action and make the following statement as my defence to the claim made by C L Finance Ltd

 

2. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in the claimants Particulars of Claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof.

3. I have received the copy of the claimant’s witness statement. In part 5 of the witness statement the claimant states. “On 26th October 2008, pursuant to Section 87 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, a Default Notice was served upon the defendant requiring payment of the arrears to be made, the Defendant having failed to make payment in accordance with the terms of the agreement. The Defendant failed to comply with the same and therefore the agreement was terminated.”

The Claimant has attached a copy of a default notice allegedly sent to the defendant on 26th October 2008.

The requirement for a valid Default Notice to lawfully Terminate an Account whilst in default

 

1. Notwithstanding the matters pleaded above, the Claimant must under Section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 serve a valid Default Notice before they can demand early payment of sums not yet due under a Regulated Credit Agreement.

 

2. I note that to be valid, a Default Notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237).

 

3. The failure of a Default Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119.

 

4. It is submitted that the above Default Notice served s87(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 failed to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561).

 

5. For a Creditor to be entitled to terminate a regulated Credit Agreement where there is a breach, demand repayment in full or take any legal action to recover any monies due under the Agreement, a creditor must serve a Default Notice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

 

Section 87. Need for Default Notice

 

(1) Service of a notice on the Debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "Default Notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the Debtor or hirer of a regulated Agreement -

 

(a) to terminate the Agreement, or

 

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

 

© to recover possession 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 any security.

 

6. The Act also sets out via Section 88(1), that the Default Notice must be in the prescribed form, as below:

 

Section 88. Contents and effect of Default Notice

 

(1) The Default Notice must be in the prescribed form…

 

10. The wording must make it clear that no variation is acceptable. Therefore it cannot be dispensed with as a De Minimus issue.

 

11. I note that the regulations do not allow any variation in the form of these statements and therefore it is suggested that where the statements are not as laid down in the regulations the Default Notice is rendered invalid as a consequence.

 

12. The Consumer Credit Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices Regulations (1983) state that a default notice must;

Where the creditor states that he intends to demand earlier payment of any sum,

(a) the amount of the sum before deducting any rebate on early settlement..

The default notice does not specify any sum.

13. The Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 state that;

Details of breach of agreement and action requited to remedy, or pay compensation for, the breach

A specification of

(a) the provision of the agreement alleged to have been breached; and

(b) the nature of the alleged breach of the agreement, specifying clearly the matters complained of; and either

© if the breach is capable of remedy, what action is required to remedy it and the date, being a date [not less than fourteen days] after the date of service of the notice, before which that action is to be taken; or

(d) if the breach is not capable of remedy, the sum (if any) required to be paid as compensation for the breach and the date, being a date, after the date of service of the notice, before which it is to be paid.

The default notice provided by the claimant does not specify a date for the alleged breach to be remedied by therefore does not comply with these rules.

14. In the case of Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339 in the Court of Appeal, the Court addressed in some detail the issue of the contents of a Default Notice and should the notice fail to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) it would render the Default Notice invalid I quote the comment of KENNEDY LJ: "This statute was plainly enacted to protect consumers, most of whom are likely to be individuals" the judgment appears to confirm the consumer credit legislation made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as plainly enacted and set out to offer protection to the consumer. Therefore it is suggested that the failure of the Claimant to set out the Default Notice in accordance with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) could unduly prejudice me as it failed to allow the required time to remedy the alleged default.

 

15. The Claimant’s failure to issue a valid Default Notice must surely prevent a right of action and would make any termination of the Agreement unlawful, as statute provides the procedure that must be followed. Since the Claimant has failed to adhere to statutory procedure it is averred that the Claimant does not have a right of action, and can never now have a right of action having terminated the Agreement unlawfully.

 

16. This is at all times an Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. There is no provision in the Act that allows a large financial institution to terminate an Agreement that is in alleged default or breach simply by giving notice to the Consumer. Section 98(6) makes that quite clear. The Creditor must follow the steps outlined in Section 87 and Section 88 if they are to lawfully Default and Terminate, and enjoy the benefits of Section 87.

 

17. The ‘Notice of Assignment’ states that the account was transferred to CL Finance by absolute assignment. This was without prior issue of a lawful Default Notice as per the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 and therefore the account has been unlawfully rescinded.

18. Finally, an invalid Default Notice cannot be remedied by simply issuing a new Default Notice. The Claimant may not serve a second effective default notice in prescribed form post-termination of the agreement. Any such second default notice will necessarily state a date by when I would be required to comply after which in default the agreement would terminate. Terminating an Agreement on the back of a defective Default Notice, simply confirms the undeniable truth that Termination of the agreement by the Claimant was carried out in circumstances which then prohibited them from enjoying the benefits of Section 87, namely the opportunity to seek early Payment of a sum that was, prior to Termination, only payable in the future.

Statement of Truth

I, believe the above statement to be true and factual

 

 

Signed

XXXXX

[casperlady]

Bump in case anyone has any last minute advice before the morning! :-|

[itsamomentintime]

no advice, just best wishes XXX

[citizenB]

Good luck for tomorrow. Make 3 copies of the defence.. then if you do need it, you can give the Judge and the opposition a copy.

[casperlady]

Thank you for the good wishes. I need them, I'm terrified, haven't a clue what to expect!

[the_shadow]

Thank you for the good wishes. I need them, I'm terrified, haven't a clue what to expect!

 

Post #13 onwards

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/108467-basic-introduction-consumer-credit.html

 

S.

[ScabHunter]

Please try not to be terrified. From what I read on here, it is just going to be a hearing to decide the track. That is reasonable as the amount is very close to the limit.

 

I think you are worrying unnecessarily about not filling in the AQ properly. Some of your answers are not the ones I would have given but I don't think there will be any serious consequences.

 

The judge actually mentions the particulars of claim, so he may be thinking more that Coward Hohen has done something wrong than you.

 

If anything does happen to take things beyond the stage of allocating the case to a track, I would definitely request an adjournment as this was not supposed to happen. However, I do agree with CitizenB about having three copies of that defence. The belt, braces, and elasticated trousers approach never did anybody any harm.

 

Whatever happens, be calm, be polite, but argue your points forcefully. I hope everything goes well for you.

 

SH

[casperlady]

Thank you both for your replies.

 

the_shadow thank you for that link. There is so much useful information on this forum, I have spent so much time here recently you think I would have found it, but no! Thank you for pointing me in that direction.

 

And thank you Scabhunter. I think it's mainly the not knowing what's going to happen that's getting to me. Well I have my three copies printed and ready to go. I've been working since 9am so I've tired myself out so hopefully I will get some sleep and then will be able to stay calm and remember the information I've tried to learn. If it gets to that.

 

Thank you again x

[GhostDebt]

Hi Casperlady,

 

Good luck for tomorrow, Just a quick comment, I would tend to deny having received a Notice of Assignment prior to proceedungs and put them to strict proof that it was served in accordance with S.196 Law of Property Act and also ask for a copy of the Deed of Assignment.

 

Regards