1st Credit & LCS Battle - court papers received - help

[Undercover-Elsa]

Aye they think they're a law unto themselves.

The thread the part 18 template came from is quite old, and was in line with thinking at the time, since when it's been clarified as info only. Still sometimes they do respond voluntarily, my main concern being whether, to the letter of the law, a judge would enforce anything but info requested.

For future ref, here's the latest thinking / template for part 18:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?255329-CPR-part-18-vs-CPR-31.14-Confused-well-read-here

 

Anyway, lets wait and see, in the meantime relax and have a good weekend

[newman]

Well the post has just been and nothing has arrived from 1st Credit - surprise surprise. - Whats the feeling girls and boys - I gave them until 13:00 hrs today to respond to the 2nd CPR request so should i now just send off the CPR31:14 request which only then gives them 7 days to respond to this and then if they dont respond then apply to the court for a strike out.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I would say YES.

[newman]

Cheers Brig

 

I did state iin my letter that if they didnt respond by today I would report them to the court and submit a N244 to force disclosure but as Elsa has already commented it may be more effective to go straight for the 31:14. This is going to gie them enough problems as it is so I shall send this off by the end of play today.

 

I will no doubt make some comment in my 31:14 request regarding the fact that they have ignored answering the specific questions I asked as well as making reference to this in any defence I need to submit:)

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Great well let's see what occurs,

 

Brig.

[Undercover-Elsa]

Send it. They are being arrogant and obstructive. How DARE you defend, you naughty debtor???

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

ONE MUST DO WHAT ONE IS TOLD that's

what the DCA's believe:madgrin:

[newman]

Send it. They are being arrogant and obstructive. How DARE you defend, you naughty debtor???

 

Cheers Elsa - and wont it be brought out in my letter to them that they are being obstructive!

 

Well this will have to wait until tomorrow as I have just got in and now just about to go off to local forest for a walk with the family - choice between to these towrags or spending qualtiy time with my family mmmmmm who gets my attention!! No competition. I will post up the CPr31:14 later for comments before I post it off to them.

 

I am really looking forward to them keeping on being ignorant & Arrogant so that a judge can throw this out and then it will be compensation time!!! :)

[newman]

OK boys and girls here it is - my CPR 31:14 request along with an intro which I am sure they are going to love

 

All suggestions welcome.

 

I would ideally like to be able to fax this to them tomorrow and then follow this up with RD and I will change the date of compliance accordingly depending on when I actually can fax it.

 

LCS Solicitors, The Omnibus Building, Lesbourne Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 7JP

29/07/2011

Dear Sir,

 

Re: (1st Credit ) v (Wxxxxxxx : Sxxxxx) Case No/LCS REF: Mxxxxxxx/xxxxxx/xx

 

Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14. This request follows mention of these documents in your client's response to my recent CPR part 18 request. I would have been able to submit this 31.14 request much sooner if had your client had fully particularised his claim; however as the particulars of claim they submitted were so vague this has wasted a lot of time. It also seems that your client feels it is perfectly reasonable to waste even more time as they have totally disregarded a second formal CPR 18 request which was faxed to your company on the 21-07-2011 and followed up with a recorded delivery letter the same day, which was received at your office on the 25-07-2011 and was signed for by P Bloomfield at 08:20:00.

 

Your client was asked very specifically two questions numbered 1 (1a) and 2 in my CPR 18 request which only required yes or no as answers, however, they chose to totally avoid answering these questions and have instead provided answers to questions I have not asked. I note that your client feels that they have already provided a copy of the agreement in 2010 and they have stated that this is the document they intend to rely on in court, However, I would point out that in 2010 I received two different lots of photocopied papers at the same time, both purporting to be my agreements, however as neither of these “agreements” gave any reference to account numbers, it is therefore impossible to tell which “agreement” they are referring to in their response. Both of the photocopied documents comprised reconstituted agreements bearing no signatures and as such do not prove that either of them is my actual original agreement and furthermore both bear errors which prove their inaccuracy.

 

In my second CPR 18 request I requested a response by 13:00hrs on the 28-07-2011 and your client’s evasiveness and time wasting are unacceptable, have been noted and will be reported to the court and will also be documented in any defence statement I may have to enter.

 

As I'm sure you are aware, an accurately reconstructed agreement, sans signatures, is acceptable as a response to a section 77-79 request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. However, as the OFT guidelines confirm, an original signed, executed agreement containing all the prescribed terms is still required in order for the agreement to be enforced in court. I therefore require a copy of any signed agreement relating to the alleged account. A reconstruction is unacceptable and will not suffice.

 

Similarly, your client simply states that I was informed that a default notice was issued, however no documentary evidence of this has ever been produced or received. Hence I include this in my request along with strict proof of postage of the aforementioned default notice.

 

CPR 31.14 Request.

Please supply verified and legible copies of the documents listed below:

1. The Agreement.

A copy of the original signed, executed agreement pertaining to this account. You will appreciate that in an ordinary case and by reason of the provisions of CPR PD 16 para 7.3, where a claim is based upon a written agreement, a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should have been attached to or served with the particulars of claim and the original(s) should be available at the hearing.

 

A copy of the terms and conditions at inception and as varied should also be included.

 

2. The Default Notice.

A true copy of the default notice and/or a copy of the relevant comms log showing issue is required along with strict proof of postage is also required.

 

3. The Termination Notice

 

4. The Notice of Assignment

 

You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties and ensure that the document(s) I have requested are copied to and received by me within seven (7) days of receiving this letter. Your CPR 31 duties extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for the originals of the documents I have requested, the better for you to be able to verify the document's authenticity and to provide me with a legible copy.

 

Further, where I have requested a copy of a document, the original of which is now in the possession of another person, you will have a right to possession of that document if you have mentioned it in your case. You must take immediate steps to recover and preserve it for the purpose of this case.

 

Where I have mentioned a document and there is in your possession more than one version of that same document owing to a modification, obliteration or other marking or feature, each version will be a separate document and you must provide a copy of each version of it to me. Your obligations extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for any version(s) to include an obligation to recover and preserve such version(s) which are now in the possession of a third party.

 

In accordance with CPR 31.15© I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.

 

If you require more time in which to comply with this request you must tell me in writing. You must tell me before the time for compliance with this request has expired. In telling me you require more time you must tell me what steps you have taken and propose to take in order to comply with this request and also state a date by when you will comply with this request.

 

In addition, your statement must be accompanied with a statement that you agree to an extension of the time for me to file my defence. Your extension of time must be not less than 14 days from the date when you say you will have complied with my request and you must state the new date for filing my defence.

 

If you are unable to comply with this request and believe that you will never be able to comply with this request you must tell me in writing.

 

Please note that if you should fail to comply with this request, fail to request more time or fail to agree to an extension of time for the filing of my defence by 9am on Friday 5th August 2011, I will make an immediate application to the court for an order that the proceedings be struck out or stayed for non-compliance and a summary costs order.

 

I do hope this will not be necessary and look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Wxxxxxx:Sxxxxx

Edited July 28, 2011 by newman

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

That seems ok to me, I am sure they will

have to get someone to explain it all to

them,it's a bit more advanced than Janet

& John book 1.

[newman]

OK - I amended the CPR31:14 a little and have now faxed it off to LCS and sent it RD too. So they have until mid day next friday to respond. Let's see what transpires eh!

 

29/07/2011

 

Dear Sir,

 

Re: (1st Credit ) v (William : Stokoe) Case No/LCS REF: Mxxxxx/xxxxxx/xx

 

CPR 31.14 Request.

 

Please treat this letter as my request made under CPR 31.14. This request follows mention of these documents in your clients response to my recent CPR Part 18 request. I would have been able to submit this 31.14 request much sooner if had your client had fully particularised his claim; however as the particulars of claim they submitted were so vague this was not possible and has wasted a lot of time. It also seems that your client feels it is perfectly reasonable to waste even more time by totally disregarding a second formal CPR 18 request which was faxed to your company on the 21-07-2011 and followed up with a recorded delivery letter the same day, which was received at your office on the 25-07-2011 and was signed for by P Bloomfield at 08:20:00.

 

In my second CPR 18 request I requested a response by 13:00hrs on the 28-07-2011 and your client’s evasiveness and time wasting are unacceptable, have been noted and will be reported to the court and will also be documented in any defence statement I may have to enter. Your clients are currently displaying the same arrogant and obstructive attitude they have employed since I started to deal with them in 2007, which is frankly unacceptable and I am sure any judge will take a very dim view of their blatant disregard of Civil Procedure rules not to mention their unlawful actions since 2007.

 

In my Part 18 request, questions numbered 1 (1a) and 2 only required yes or no as answers, however, your client chose to totally avoid answering these questions and have instead provided answers to questions I have not asked. I note that your client feels that they have already provided a copy of the agreement in 2010 and they have stated that this is the document they intend to rely on in court, however, I would point out that in 2010 I received two different lots of photocopied papers in the same envelope, both purporting to be my agreements, however as neither of these “agreements” gave any reference to account numbers, it is therefore impossible to tell which “agreement” they are referring to in their response. Both sets of photocopies comprised reconstituted agreements bearing no signatures and as such do not prove that either of them is my actual original agreement and furthermore both bear errors which prove their inaccuracy.

 

As I'm sure you are aware, an accurately reconstructed agreement, sans signatures, is acceptable as a response to a section 77-79 request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. However, as the OFT guidelines confirm, an original signed, executed agreement containing all the prescribed terms is still required in order for the agreement to be enforced in court. I therefore require a copy of any signed agreement relating to the alleged account. A reconstruction is unacceptable and will not suffice.

 

Similarly, your client simply states that I was informed that a default notice was issued, however no documentary evidence of this has ever been produced by your client nor has a default notice ever been received by me. Hence I include this in my request along with strict proof of postage of the aforementioned default notice.

 

In my letters dated 27-06-2011 & 05-07-2011, I offered your client a conditional agreement and I categorically stated that I would be very happy to settle any financial obligation I might lawfully owe as soon as I received the documentation requested, which has removed any controversy and means that you no longer have any ultimate recourse to a court of law in this matter, because there is no controversy upon which it could adjudicate. As stated previously you do of course always have the option of dragging these conditions into a court of law only to be told that they are, indeed, perfectly lawful. That is, of course, always your prerogative should you decide to waste your time.

 

As your client has chosen to disregard my letters we are now in a lawfully binding tacit agreement and should you decide to pursue this matter further I will have no hesitation in enforcing the terms detailed in my notice dated 12-07-2011.

 

 

CPR 31.14 Request.

Please supply verified and legible copies of the documents listed below:

1. The Agreement.

A copy of the original signed, executed agreement pertaining to this account. You will appreciate that in an ordinary case and by reason of the provisions of CPR PD 16 para 7.3, where a claim is based upon a written agreement, a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should have been attached to or served with the particulars of claim and the original(s) should be available at the hearing.

 

A copy of the terms and conditions at inception and as varied should also be included.

2. The Default Notice.

A true copy of the default notice and/or a copy of the relevant comms log showing issue is required along with strict proof of postage is also required.

3. The Termination Notice

4. The Notice of Assignment

5. Verification of your claim against me (a sworn affidavit or a hand signed invoice in accordance Bills of Exchange

Act (1882) );

6. A Copy of a lawful contract signed by both parties and therefore binding both parties.

7. Validation of the debt (the actual accounting)

 

You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties and ensure that the document(s) I have requested are copied to and received by me within seven (7) days of receiving this letter. Your CPR 31 duties extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for the originals of the documents I have requested, the better for you to be able to verify the document's authenticity and to provide me with a legible copy.

 

Further, where I have requested a copy of a document, the original of which is now in the possession of another person, you will have a right to possession of that document if you have mentioned it in your case. You must take immediate steps to recover and preserve it for the purpose of this case.

 

Where I have mentioned a document and there is in your possession more than one version of that same document owing to a modification, obliteration or other marking or feature, each version will be a separate document and you must provide a copy of each version of it to me. Your obligations extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for any version(s) to include an obligation to recover and preserve such version(s) which are now in the possession of a third party.

 

In accordance with CPR 31.15© I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.

 

If you require more time in which to comply with this request you must tell me in writing. You must tell me before the time for compliance with this request has expired. In telling me you require more time you must tell me what steps you have taken and propose to take in order to comply with this request and also state a date by when you will comply with this request.

 

In addition, your statement must be accompanied with a statement that you agree to an extension of the time for me to file my defence. Your extension of time must be not less than 14 days from the date when you say you will have complied with my request and you must state the new date for filing my defence.

 

If you are unable to comply with this request and believe that you will never be able to comply with this request you must tell me in writing.

 

Please note that if you should fail to comply with this request, fail to request more time or fail to agree to an extension of time for the filing of my defence by 12:00 noon on Friday 5th August 2011, I will make an immediate application to the court for an order that the proceedings be struck out or stayed for non-compliance and a summary costs order.

 

I do hope this will not be necessary and look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Wxxxxxx : Sxxxxxx

 

[Undercover-Elsa]

Not sure about the tacit agreement para, but it's been sent now. I'd strongly advise keeping Freeman of the Land theories out of the court process, Newman. Your choice though

[newman]

Not sure about the tacit agreement para, but it's been sent now. I'd strongly advise keeping Freeman of the Land theories out of the court process, Newman. Your choice though

 

Hi Elsa

 

thanks for your comment. I dont know if you read that far back in this thread but I said weeks ago that I was taking a two pronged approach to this matter as in both this forum and the get out of debt free forum many people are having successes with both approaches and at the end of the day, it doesnt matter how we win but winning is what this is about now. This bunch of low lifes have decided to have a fight and I will fight with whatever I have at my disposal to try to win.

 

I do take your point about keeping other processes out of court but we are not in court yet and I am hoping that we wont get anywhere near the court. The 11 page report I have prepared is full of factual details about the way this bunch has acted and I am feeling confident that even the point about the non issuance of a default notice should be enough to get this thrown out, let alone the fact that it is looking very certain that they dont have a signed agreement.

 

As far as I can see I have not asked them for anything that I am not lawfully entitled to receive and if this makes them squirm or heaven forbid actually have to do some work for once then as far as I am concerned allis fair in love and war

 

If we do ever get anywhere near a court I want to have as much ammunition against them as possible and by making the conditional agreement I have and stating that I will hopour all my lawful obligations I cannot see this will be shown in a negative light in court if it ever gets that far.

 

Actually a lot of the information I have discovered about the laws of our land and what contracts are based on is fascinating and the solicitors out there that know this stuff very well are actually joining the ever growing band of people who are fighting back against the likes of 1st Credit.

 

I know that the DCA's hate these consumer forums such as CAG and GOODF and others but from where i am standing if it wasn't for people like you and all the others on both forums who really know their stuff then I would have been sunk by now

 

Huge thanks again to everyone that has helped me in this process - you all deserve huge hugs and medals - a drink in the local at the very least

[Undercover-Elsa]

Mines a brandy...

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Make that a double for me.

[Undercover-Elsa]

Who said anything about singles??

[newman]

After all this is over I am going to need a few drinks I can tell you :)

 

Ok now that this has gone off - can ypou lovely peoiple tell me what the procedure is that I would need to go through to apply to get this struck out or stayed f they decide to do nowt or if they cant come up with the goods within the next 7 days?

 

THis would be helpful to understand as I dont want to waste any time if by next Friday they havent complied with the request. I want to strike while the iron is hot and not let this one get away.

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi Newman,

I attach my recently finished full compilation of the main legal process threads by Pt.surfaceagentx20 etc. Should be helpful.

Elsa x

pt-legal issues-compilation.pdf

[newman]

Thanks for that Elsa.

 

I will have a good look through this tomorrow

 

xx

[newman]

Hi Elsa

 

I have just read through this and it is excellent. I actually have about 80% of this in a document I put together but it is all over the place so it is excellent to have this in the format you have put it in.

 

Well lets see what happens to all of this, this week - if these guys dont have the paperwork I requested then I really hope they will just have the decency to say they dont have it and then give up. They have until mid day on Friday to send me the paperwork requested so I am waiting with baited breath!!!!

 

Thanks again Elsa

[newman]

## UPDATE ##

 

Well this is a very interesting turn of events - I have just received a letter from LCS in response to my last letter which was my CPR31:14 request and in a nutshell the cheeky monkeys have totally rejected my CPR 31:14 request in its entirety and are refusing to comply with by tryoing to say they already have complied with it.

 

I will post up the original letter later as I am really tied up this morning but here is the text of their letter without the headings.

 

Can you lovely people advise me how to respond to this letter? - I have made some very quick comments in red and I will come back to this later but today is a very full day so it will be this afternoon at the earliest.

 

I just need to know what to do now - do I now go for a N244 or should I write back to them?

 

Thanks everyone.

 

Dear Sir

 

1st Credit (Finance) Ltd. v Sxxxxxx

 

We write further to the above and to your 29 July 2011 letter received on 01 August - This was faxed to them on the 29th so they had a copy of it then not the 1st Aug -

2011.

 

We reply as follows:-

 

1. you are wrong that our client replied to your part 18 request - we replied on 19July2011; Pedantic or what?

 

2. you are again wrong in your suggestion that your request has been delayed by the claim form particularisation. Indeed such a suggestion is rejected since it clearly lacks any merit;

 

3. the claim is particularised and it is not vague. Please state whether you deny entering into an agreement with Citifinancial Europe plc;

 

4. would you please explain why you sent a second part 18 request when we replied on 19 July 2011. We invite you to cease corresponding with our client and instead to correspond with ourselves I havent been writing to their client - I have only written to them since they had the case passed to them so I have no idea what they mean by this statement. In the light of this the purported waste of time is rejected.

 

We take the view that you are simply wasting your own time by writing to our client when you know we are instructed and are corresponding with you; again no idea what they mean by this statement as I have clearly addressed all of my letters to LCS - are they getting confused as they are really only part of 1st Credit

 

5. your second paragraph is rejected since it is clearly disingenuous and lacks any merit. The purported time limit is rejected. Would you please send the purported second part 18 request to us; This was sent to them received on the 27-07-11 at 08:20hrs and signed for by a P Bloomfield - are they totally stupid or what?? - I have alll the proof of deliveries and the signatures for the letters they received

 

6. we refer to your third paragraph, first sentence and again the reference our client is wrong and rejected. We have responded to the part 18 request and we reiterate its contents. We have read the remainder of your paragraph and these are matters for you; They still havent actually answered yes or no to my first two questions - are they avoiding answering these questions because they dont have the documentation I wonder

 

7. we refer to your fourth paragraph and take the view you are wrong, but again this is a matter for you. We refer to Carey v HSBC plc 2010 and paragraph 119; Advice needed here guys

 

8. we further take the view that you are able to file and serve a defence in the absence of a default notice; I do have a very extensive defence prepared that I obtained from another thread which was all to do with a dodgy defence notice being issued. Interesting that they have changed from categorically claiming that a DN was sent out to now stating I can submit a defence in the absence of a DN

 

9. we refer to your sixth paragraph and and also to your 12 July 2011 letter. The 12 July 2011 letter and its entire contents are rejected since it is without any merit in either fact or law. In order to assist you there is no agreement and consequently there are no fees either agreed or otherwise that are or maybe payable. Thus the purported fee schedule is rejected.

 

If you wish to pursue the matter then that is a matter for you but in a case 4 months ago based on similar erroneous and disingenuous matters, the claimant lost and was ordered by the court to pay costs in excess of

£10,000.00. Please do confirm whether you still wish to pursue your 12 July 2011 letter; Dont worry about this point

 

10. it follows that your sixth paragraph is rejected, it is meritless;

 

11. your seventh paragraph is rejected and we repeat the contents of number 9 above. We repeat there was not and is not any agreement and thus your threat is rejected as meaningless and meritless;

 

12. we refer to page 2 of your letter, the agreement has previously been sent you and we repeat number 1 of our 19 July 2011 letter. Thank you for confirming receipt of the agreements in 2010 in paragraph 3 of your 29 July 2011 letter;

 

13. we refer to number 12, above, regarding the terms and conditions;

 

14. we refer to number 8, above, regarding the default notice;

 

15. we further take the view that you are able to file and serve a defence in the absence of a termination notice;

 

16. notice of assignment was sent on 11 June 2007 as acknowledged by you in your letter to Citifinancial dated 18 June 2007.

 

17. your number 5 is rejected as irrelevant and meaningless. We refer to the claim form;

 

18. would you please explain number 6;

 

19. the statement of account was included in a letter to you dated 21 April 2010.

 

20. your ninth to thirteenth paragraphs, inclusive merit no reply; So they are refusing to respond?

 

21. we refer to your fourteenth paragraph and the last paragraph of our 19 July 2011 letter, thus your defence is to be filed by 18 August 2011. If you fail to file your defence by 18 August 2011 we will apply for judgment and if unpaid then we will enforce the judgment; Arrogant whatsits

 

22. we refer to your fifteenth, sixteenth and seventeenth paragraphs and in the light of the above none merit a reply. Again refusing to respond to the CPR31:14

 

Yours faithfully

 

LC~

 

LCS SOLICITORS

Principal solicitor R D Marr .

 

LCS Solicitors is the legal division of 1st Credit Limited, registered in England and Wales number 3752940

Registered Office: Hill House, 1 Little New Street, London, EC4A 3TR.

Edited August 3, 2011 by newman

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I see the wonderful R.D. Marr has surfaced on this one,

not the ubiquitous Colin Watt litigation paralegal.

 

I thing you need Elsa to look in again.

 

This is only a set back I think no a disaster, an attempt

to get you to back down.

 

Brig.

[newman]

Thanks Brig

 

Well its interesting to note the mistakes in their letter of which there are several not to mention the fact that they are flatly refusing to comply with the CPR31:14 request. I find this almost unbelievable - they are one of the most arrogant bunch I have come across. Fancy asking me to re send a letter that they have quite clearly received already and which they have signed for.

 

It defies belief it really does.

 

I agree it would be great to have Elsa's comments or another CAG expert on this.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I doubt that Mr. Marr and his tame paralegal have much

workable knowledge of CPR or CPUTR.

 

I am thinking along the lines of a complaint

to their compliance manager regarding the conduct of the case

so far.

 

Brig.

[newman]

Well I need to do something Brig as they have totally disregarded the whole of this CPR 31:14 request as having no merit whatsoever; a phrase they have used 7 times in their response.

 

Having just read their response again I find it incredible that they can make such basic errors when they state twice that I should cease writing to their client and correspond with them instead.

 

they are also taking issue with my statement about having a copy of a signed agreement using the Carey vs HSBC plc 2010 case. This says to me that they definately dont have the signed original otherwise why would they even bring up this case from 2010 relating to a reconstituted document. My whole contention with the paperwork they sent me is that this was something that anyone could have put together and then have simply inserted my details. It does not prove that it was my actual orignal agreement. Surely our legal system cannot rely on any old pieces of photocopied papers as proof that they are the orignal agreements.

 

The more I look at this the more angry I am getting but as I am only a humble LIP I really need some good solid advice in this matter now as to exactly what the next step is I need to take.

 

UUURRGHHHH - not very happy at the moment.