tradepro and cdc

[george brown]

i stupidly sighned a letter i sent them,,,,so their argument is that i may not have filled the form in but i did sign it.my argument has been that i and many others was shouting out our deyails to a woman in a builders merchants and i didnt see what was filled in or the whole form so i would like to see the origanal doc in court.i really begrudge paying these people, i pay all my other creditors, but these people were so rude,aggressive,and nasty it leaves me with a sour taste.while everyone else put me on a payment plan they promised to put renaiged and defaulted me .i told them that the government had asked banks etc to help people etc and that i wasnt an absent payee, they just defaulted me and we started down this road.whenone is unwell its the last thing you need,many thanks george

[Bazooka Boo]

Sorry George I don't quite follow?

 

You say that you signed a letter you sent to them, this won't be an admission that you owe them or have a contract with them, it is just a letter that you have signed asking for information.

 

Have you requested that they provide you with all of the documents that they will be relying upon in court to enforce this?

 

I am thinking you should send them a CPR 31.....CPR 31.16 I beleive?

 

There is a thing called pre-action protocols http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/practice_directions/pd_pre-action_conduct.htm

 

And specifically 31.16 is:

Disclosure before proceedings start

 

31.16

 

(1) This rule applies where an application is made to the court under any Act for disclosure before proceedings have started1.

 

(2) The application must be supported by evidence.

 

(3) The court may make an order under this rule only where –

(a) the respondent is likely to be a party to subsequent proceedings;

 

(b) the applicant is also likely to be a party to those proceedings;

 

© if proceedings had started, the respondent’s duty by way of standard disclosure, set out in rule 31.6, would extend to the documents or classes of documents of which the applicant seeks disclosure; and

 

(d) disclosure before proceedings have started is desirable in order to –

(i) dispose fairly of the anticipated proceedings;

 

(ii) assist the dispute to be resolved without proceedings; or

 

(iii) save costs.

 

 

 

(4) An order under this rule must –

(a) specify the documents or the classes of documents which the respondent must disclose; and

 

(b) require him, when making disclosure, to specify any of those documents –

(i) which are no longer in his control; or

 

(ii) in respect of which he claims a right or duty to withhold inspection.

 

 

 

(5) Such an order may –

(a) require the respondent to indicate what has happened to any documents which are no longer in his control; and

 

(b) specify the time and place for disclosure and inspection.

 

 

[george brown]

hey have sent me a list of all they intend to rely on in court,this included letters between us and they say the application form.i dont believe they actually hold the origanal application form as i read on threads here that they only hold digital copies of accounts held during the time my account was opend.they are stored on computer.even though they are saying they are going to produce the application form i think they will produce a copy and fob this off to the judge saying that this is what i signed ect.i have demanded that they bring the origanal to court.who knows if they will.they wrote to me saying you may not have fii=lled in the application form but you signed it as we now have a copy of your signature on this letter you sent us and the signature matches.many thanks george

[Guest]

bazooka

read back

claim form already

cpr 31.14 already done?

[Bazooka Boo]

hey have sent me a list of all they intend to rely on in court, Have you actually has sight of those documents?

this included letters between us and they say the application form.i dont believe they actually hold the origanal application form as i read on threads here that they only hold digital copies of accounts held during the time my account was opend.they are stored on computer.

 

even though they are saying they are going to produce the application form i think they will produce a copy and fob this off to the judge saying that this is what i signed ect.i have demanded that they bring the origanal to court.who knows if they will.they wrote to me saying you may not have fii=lled in the application form but you signed it as we now have a copy of your signature on this letter you sent us and the signature matches.many thanks george

 

Have you submitted to them a CPR 31.16 request?

[george brown]

hi no i havent done that,,, what is it ? thanks george

[Guest]

31.16 relates to disclosure before proceedings have started. in your case george proceedings have already started. so if you have not previously done a disclosure request under 31.16 before proceedings started then it is n/a now.

'standard disclosure' would be appropriate next whereby an official (form n265) list of docs would need to be served (if not already? has this been done?)

imo

[george brown]

yes i have a list of docs, it says application form on it,, but i still dont think they have the origanal,,, shall i write to them and ask if they intend to bribg it to court?or if they actually have it ? with some judges accepting copies does it matter>???? i have been following the thought that i really didnt see the application form,,i was in a que beeing served at the builders merchants, i just signed quickly on the way out,many thanks george

[Guest]

when you say a list of docs - has there been 'standard disclosure' on form n265? at what stage is this at? has there been an allocation questionnaire?

[george brown]

no allocation quetionaire just a list of docs they intend to rely on in court, it was ordered that this should be by april 21 but i got this in june 10,thankyou

[Guest]

what do you mean by 'it was ordered'? there was a court order involved? why/what happened? what was the order? you say you have a fixed date in september? what for? so, there should have been an allocation?

further case details needed george. no offence, but we can't keep guessing?

imo

Edited June 27, 2011 by Ford

[george brown]

sorry no not ordered by the court as in court order, but when you get all your court papers through it tells each party when they have to have done certain things, they were suppsed to inform me as to what they would rely on in court a month earlier than they did,,,,al the best george

[Guest]

george

again, at what stage is this at? you say that you have a date in september? so, there should've been an allocation? has the court made directions following the allocation? has there been 'standard disclosure'? case clarification needed!!

imo

Edited June 27, 2011 by Ford
typo

[george brown]

there was an allocation ,,,and standard disclosure,disclosure was supposed to be by april 8 according to the courts directions and i recieved it may23.pre trial checklist have to be filled by 1 july court is se4ptember.there is no list as such with the papers from tradepro saying what they intend to bring to court,many thanks george

[comedycircus]

GB, I take it that your account was a sole trader account. Ive had problems with this lot, and quite frankly they havent a clue, based upon my dealings with them. The question of the CCA is quite controversial, and I do know for a fact that Tradepro do not have any original agreements. They have stated to me that they are microfiched and stored - bit stupid really. The document you signed is an application form, and I beieve that further down the page there is a section which states "Your Credit Agreement", section 3 I think it is. This implies that the agreement in its entirety is encompassed in this section, which does not contain the prescribed terms as set down by The 1974 CCAct. It may well be that a Judge will say that an association / agreement did exist, but where are the embodied T & C's whic state that they can charge thier extortionate collec\tion charge which I beleive to be 25%. Do a search on "The 4 Corners Rule" which has been tested in Courts recently. Thier claim for charges and interest should fail but you may have to re-pay the capital. I have teswted this scenario with thier solicitors and they then disinstrcuted them and carried on dealing with the matter themselves. In my case with them I only ever paid back every penny that I ever spent, no interest, no nothing. Im not a legal expert GB, and I dont profess to be, but agrue your case with this lot, they will back down. CDC is thier inhouse collection agents as are the other name which they trade under. Check out thier Consumer Credit Licence. I have made compalints to the OFT about them in the past and they soon put thier house in order as there were other OFT complaints at the time. Hope this helps. Oh yes, nearly forgot, how legible is the copy of CCA which they supplied you ? Does this meet the requirements of a CCA request as to legibility. Have a good read also through the small print on the application form as to who the parties actually are. Read it carefully, and you will note that Tradepro, by the way it is worded are not in fact even party to thier own agreement. We know they are, but the document does not confirm this. The grammar and punctuation and wording is particularly bad as to place doubt on the legality of it. Its the minor detail that always wins cases. Study it carefully. All the best George.

[comedycircus]

George, search on CAG for a thread named Four corners of an agreement