IND - claim form for halifax card debt***Claim Dismissed & Costs awarded***

[citizenB]

Pete,

can you either scan in the claim, suitable edited, or let me know.. the date of issue - top right hand corner and exactly what they say on the form - the reason they are issuing the claim

[citizenB]

Hi king, pretty much what Pete has said.. are you researching just to understand, or because you are thinking of "signing / not signing" something

[petebeds]

Pete,

can you either scan in the claim, suitable edited, or let me know.. the date of issue - top right hand corner and exactly what they say on the form - the reason they are issuing the claim

 

Will do when I get home again.

[citizenB]

Many thanks

[petebeds]

Sorry for the delay - copy of the claim form attached suitably redacted.

[petebeds]

I filed a Defence and Counterclaim at the beginning of November. I have now received an N149b Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Fast Track and an N181 Directions Questionnaire. I have to file and serve by 9th December and file proposed directions having attempted to agree them with IND.

 

The Directions Questionnaire is fairly straightforward - but I don't have a clue about what should be in the proposed directions.

 

Any advice?

 

Thanks

[AndyOrch]

Directions can be anything you wish further to happen before trial Peter....disclosure/applications/etc.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[petebeds]

An update -

 

I have filed and served the Directions Questionnaire and Proposed Directions

 

IND have responded with their own Directions Questionnaire and Proposed Directions, where they are asking for the claim to be dealt with in the Small Claims Track (despite its value) in order "to keep costs proportionate to the claim".

 

They have also produced a copy of a Deed of Assignment, however no proof that Notice of Assignment was ever sent to me.

 

They have also produced two documents purporting to be Agreements, one between Halifax plc and myself giving the address where I lived at the time, and another between Bank of Scotland plc and, apparently, myself and giving my current address. Neither of these documents is signed or dated.

 

They have also sent notice that Hegartys are no longer acting for them.

[AndyOrch]

Can we see theirs Peter?

 

 

Regards

 

 

Andy

[petebeds]

Apologies for the extended silence - caused by hardware problems and a house move.

 

the DJ looked at both sets of draft directions (theirs wanted allocation to Small Claims Track)

and ordered a telephone allocation hearing for today at 10.00,

Claimants being ordered to arrange.

 

Guess what?

No details of the telephone conference sent through as of Saturday post

so am now waiting for the Court Office to open just before 10 so I can get it sorted in person.

 

They have sent a WS demanding Summary Judgement

but there is first of all the defective DN,

then the date of the DN being wrong on the Deed of Assignment they sent me,

plus 'copies of "Notices of Assignment"' that have so far not surfaced but miraculously appeared

- all dated the same day as their first LBA....

. first I've ever seen of them..

.. Lets see what the DJ has to say....

Plus when I bring up Brandon....

 

Will post up later.

[petebeds]

For some reason the system says I posted that an hour later than I actually did!

[petebeds]

Just back from the Court.

 

Waited until 10.15 and was shown in to the DJ.

 

No phone call had been received from the Claimants,

however the Court's phone system had gone down affecting both inbound and outbound calls.

 

Due to the DJ having a very busy List for the day

 

the Allocation Hearing has been adjourned for a non-telephone hearing, costs reserved.

 

Fresh Draft Directions to be submitted.

[petebeds]

Quick question - where an account has been assigned but there is a mistake on the schedule to the deed of assignment (in this case a date is wrong), what effect does that have on the assignment itself?

[petebeds]

Just back from Court where

 

 

to cut a long story short IND's claim was dismissed.

 

 

They had failed to provide some rather important documentation to the Court

 

 

which meant that their evidence was inadmissible,

 

 

therefore without that evidence the DJ said that the case was "doomed to dismissal" due to the Claimant's "self-inflicted injuries".

 

I have been awarded Costs - would appreciate some guidance as to what I can claim and what would is reasonable under the circumstances.

[AndyOrch]

Wouldn't happen to be the pre trial check list (N170) by any chance peter?

 

Excellent news anyway...delighted for you...thread title amended to reflect the outcome.

 

Again well done.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[petebeds]

Andy - replying by PM.

[AndyOrch]

I have made reply peter...so do I take it that they had failed to submit their WS with the court also?

[petebeds]

WS was submitted (2 of them) but they ignored/forgot about CPR33....

[AndyOrch]

Of course...excellent District Judge presiding then

[petebeds]

Delightful envelope arrived in the post this morning:

 

 

IND are appealing the DJ's Decision on the grounds that they reckon they did comply with CPR33

and therefore their hearsay evidence should have been allowed.

 

However also attached is a copy of the Order made by the DJ back in July where it was stated that

 

 

"The parties have permission to rely at the trial

 

 

only on the oral evidence of the witnesses of fact whose statements have already been served."

 

What do I do from here?

[AndyOrch]

Hi Peter responding to your PM

 

In the above General Order of July....can you expand as to why point 2 was directed........there was a large gap in your thread (Feb - April-Nov)so its difficult to ascertain what has happened...did they fail to submit their Witness Statement ...in line with the directions?

 

Andy

[petebeds]

Hi Andy

 

I can only guess that point 2 in the Order was directed as the DJ had read their Witness Statements (which were filed and served in February and June) and saw that there was no clear statement that they wished to rely only on the witness statements, therefore would not be calling the witness, but they did not say why in line with the rules.

 

Their argument being that by saying "I wish to rely on CPR33.2(1)(b) and Section 2(1)(a) of the Civil Evidence Act 1995)" plus what they said in the rest of the paragraph about having nothing further to say about the account they complied with the rule.

 

My only guess being that the DJ who made the July Order after filing of Pre-Trial Checklists saw that and put in point 2 into the Order to make sure there was no doubt.

[AndyOrch]

Have a read of page 103...the link should direct you straight to this.

 

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=bOqOAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA103&lpg=PA103&dq=CPR+33.2.1%29%28b%29&source=bl&ots=pAN0ew-H_g&sig=73BVVQpVaX1Ui_bPxC3Q6Cx5P3A&hl=en&sa=X&ei=VCl7VPOmBszW7AbQmYCYCA&ved=0CDcQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=CPR%2033.2.1)(b)&f=false

[petebeds]

Andy - that's what they're arguing. However, footnote 7 at the bottom of the page - it doesn't say anywhere that they weren't going to call the Witness and why not.

 

But obviously the DJ saw that and made the order - this was made after both WS had been filed and served.

[AndyOrch]

Obviously the DJ had his reasons for imposing the direction and also for striking it out...I personally cant see the court allowing the appeal...judges dont like their orders being questioned......you can either let it run its course and hope that the Judge sticks fast or you could also submit opposing it.