Midland Bank - v - little old me - claim issued

[Fedupandfightingback]

Sorry Fedup, yes I was.

 

people sometimes need a crystal ball with me.

 

I wish I did have a crystal ball

 

Ok, a few questions

 

Can anyone point me to a thread where a CAGer has applied for a Strike out application so I can what is involved.

 

Is this done on a the N244 form ?

[pt2537]

Get a request to extend the deadline for filing the defence in ASAP

 

CPR 15.5 allows you to do this and the parties should be able to consent to this without to much problem

[Fedupandfightingback]

Agreement extending the period for filing a defence

 

15.5

 

 

(1) The defendant and the claimant may agree that the period for filing a defence specified in rule 15.4 shall be extended by up to 28 days.

 

 

(2) Where the defendant and the claimant agree to extend the period for filing a defence, the defendant must notify the court in writing.

 

 

 

pt, thank you. So I just write to the Claimant using 15.5 . I send a copy to the court manager. Then when DG replies, I send a copy of their agreement to the court manager. ?

 

Thanks x

[Fedupandfightingback]

I have today received your letter dated 13th May 2010, sent 2nd class mail, in response to my CPR31.14 request dated 10th May 2010.

In order for me to keep the court informed of any delays which are beyond my control, would you please confirm that; having issued a claim against me without the documents you intend to rely on in your possession, you have now requested these from your client.

In order to prevent me from being disadvantaged by this, would you please also confirm that you will agree to an extension of 28 days FROM the date I receive these documents from your client?

"Agreement extending the period for filing a defence

 

15.5

 

 

(1) The defendant and the claimant may agree that the period for filing a defence specified in rule 15.4 shall be extended by up to 28 days.

 

 

(2) Where the defendant and the claimant agree to extend the period for filing a defence, the defendant must notify the court in writing."

Might I suggest that in order to prevent any dispute as to the date of my receiving the documents requested, that your client dispatch them to me either by courier or some other tracked method of posting.

I look forward to receiving your confirmation of the above.

Yours faithfully

 

 

Something like the above ?

[vint1954]

And I would copy the court manager in at Northampton.

 

I think there is a place on the website @ moneyclaim.gov.uk to allow 28 days to file a defence ( extra Time )

[Fedupandfightingback]

 

And I would copy the court manager in at Northampton.

 

I think there is a place on the website @ moneyclaim.gov.uk to allow 28 days to file a defence ( extra Time )

 

 

Thanks for the Carey Judgment, Vint.. saved to my ever increasing file and have noted the specific points.

 

Update,

 

I copied Northampton in on the original letters cpr31.14 and 15 sent to DG, with a covering letter advising they were purely advisory.

 

a few days later, I received a letter from CCBC saying.. thank you for your defence, a copy has been sent to the other side.. what

 

Anyway, phoned them and they said that I should write in and explain what had happened, and ask for it to be removed.

 

I have telephoned DG twice in order for them to agree an extenstion. First time they said the docs were being "assembled as we speak" that they would go out by the end of this week and there would be a covering letter adivsing that they would agree to an extension. I tried to press for the date of the extension, but they wouldnt divulge. But said I should phone later in the week to confirm dispatch.

 

I wrote to them immediately confirming our telephone conversation.

 

Today I phoned to confirm dispatch but this time I am told that the documents are still being requested... !! Was asked for a telephone number in order for the caseworker to advise when dispatch would be. I wasnt prepared to do this because DG refused to guarantee that the number would be held only for their use.. and not passed to their client. Guy wouldnt agree to that, and implied that I was being obstructive by not providing a telephone number in order to facilitate my request for documents..

 

Anyway, I have given a mobile number which will be dumped as soon as I have the documents.. sheesssh..

 

straight on to the court to find out if the "defence" has been removed and thankfully that at least has been resolved and it has been removed. Explained to the clerk what was going on with DG, and she says to have minimal defence prepared ready to put in on 6th June as it now takes 24 hours for them to be logged.

 

I am ok with that, but would rather a proper extension of time in order to get the defence right first time.

[vint1954]

Hi fedup,

 

Have you tried applying for extra time online?

 

They realy make you mad. Everything should be put in writing from them, or it cannot be proved in court.

 

Have you used CPR 31.15 yet?

[Fedupandfightingback]

Hi fedup,

 

Have you tried applying for extra time online?

 

They realy make you mad. Everything should be put in writing from them, or it cannot be proved in court.

 

Have you used CPR 31.15 yet?

 

Hi Vint,

 

DG telephoned yesterday afternoon and I finally pinned them down to an actual date for extension. 28 days from the date I should have originally filed... I have written to DG confirming our conversation and have written to the court with a copy of that letter. Both letters sent via SD.. but they wont get them until Tuesday now, because of the Bank Holiday.

 

DG are now not sending the documents until 4th June.. which would be just 3 days before I needed to file originally !

 

Yes, I did send a 31.15 request, but will send another if, when I receive the package there is any original paperwork I need to inspect.

 

So.. back on track now.. hopefully.

[vint1954]

Excelent. CPR 31.15 requires physical inspection of the document.

[vint1954]

I am sure it has been mentioned before, but creditors seem to think that they can rely reconstructed agreements, quoting Carey. They are either Nuts, Lying or both.

 

Obviously s 78 for information only on live ongoing agreements, which is what Carey was about, and Waksman actualy stated that if the agreement was varied, then a copy of the actual agreement is also required. He was very clear to only rule on s78.