Morgans/Cabot claim form - on citi Card debt with a recon *** Claim Dismissed by Consent***

[AndyOrch]

Quite correct it is between parties but you have it on record now that hey have failed to comply. So now you can if you wish make application N244 to have their statement of case struck out.

Cost you £40/£80 and this is done via the N244 (It may require an hearing)

 

Andy

[AndyOrch]

Pursuant to CPR3.4©

 

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part03#IDAMLWS

[molly13]

Thank you very much for that Andy.

Unfortunately, I can't afford any court fees just at the moment, but as you say, it is now on record.

 

I will now complete my pre-trial checklist and get it out of the way, although I have got a couple more weeks to do so.

 

What I don't understand is why they would twice not comply with a court order? They are supposedly a legal firm, I am not, and I managed to comply with the court order quite comfortably on time.

But as someone else said in a previous post " welcome to the murky world of DCA's", I suppose it is hardly surprising.

 

Thanks again.

 

Regards

Molly:-)

[AndyOrch]

Thats a shame Molly can you not qualify for exemption? This is a nice opportunity to dispense with the matter, perhaps try without an hearing?

 

Andy

[molly13]

Hi

 

I don't know if I have a problem or not, but... still no WS from Morgans...2 weeks past date.

 

Having thought about the last post, re.application for striking out Statement of Case...I have managed to get some money together for the Court fee. However, just to make sure that the WS had not got 'lost' in the post I phoned what I thought was Morgan today to check, but turns out to be acompany called Wrighthassell? (I think). I was told that they have been passed all of Morgan's files, and this happened about 3/4 weeks ago. The woman I spoke to was obviously just someone answering the phone and didn't know anything.

 

I phoned the Court, they had not heard anything either.

 

If Cabot have changed solicitors in the middle of all this where do I stand with this?Should I not have been told?

Morgan was ordered to disclose and send WS, but only sent disclosure.

 

Now I'm really,really confused:sad:

 

Help, please..

 

Regards

Molly:-)

[the_shadow]

hmm, if they have changed then yes a notification should have been sent to the court and yourself...

 

Wrighthassell

 

http://www.wrighthassall.co.uk/

[molly13]

Thanks Shadow...

 

I only found out by ringing Morgan's phone number... took an age to get answered.. maybe being redirected. The woman did not say the company name.. I had to ask!

 

So where does this leave me in regards to the application in regards to non-compliance with court order?

 

Molly:-)

[the_shadow]

I have no idea why the telephone number goes elsewhere perhaps they have an agreement for any overspill of work to be farmed out to this other solicitor or perhaps one is acting on behalf of morgans in this case.

 

Fact is you have been advised on court papers that Morgans are the opposing solicitors, along with this should be a registered address and a contact number. That company are the ones any application is raised against in the absence of a change of solicitors notification from them and the court.

 

If you apply and it turns out someone else is dealing you would be entitled to claim the costs of application back from the solicitors in question imho as they have not provided you with the required notification, its not enough just to let the court know.

 

S.

[molly13]

Thank you so much Shadow.

 

Also I was just wondering what happens about the witness they have mentioned in th AQ and who also signed the disclosure statement as an employee of Morgan's??

 

Molly

[AndyOrch]

Could be the reason the WS has been withheld, change in Sols.Molly do you feel confident enough to have a go at striking out?

 

Change of solicitor – duty to give notice

42.2

(1) This rule applies where –

(a) a party for whom a solicitor is acting wants to change his solicitor;

(b) a party, after having conducted the claim in person, appoints a solicitor to act on his behalf (except where the solicitor is appointed only to act as an advocate for a hearing); or

© a party, after having conducted the claim by a solicitor, intends to act in person.

(2) Where this rule applies, the party or his solicitor (where one is acting) must –

(a) file notice of the change; and

(b) serve notice of the change on every other party and, where paragraph (1)(a) or © applies, on the former solicitor.

(3) The notice must state the party’s new address for service.

(4) The notice filed at court must state that notice has been served as required by paragraph (2)(b).

(5) Subject to paragraph (6), where a party has changed his solicitor or intends to act in person, the former solicitor will be considered to be the party’s solicitor unless and until –

(a) notice is filed and served in accordance with paragraph (2); or

(b) the court makes an order under rule 42.3 and the order is served as required by paragraph (3) of that rule.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[robcag]

Could be the reason the WS has been withheld, change in Sols.

 

 

Or even the other way round!

 

I've had this happen to me once or twice and I think it's a tactic/excuse used by the enemy when they've fouled up or failed to do something as ordered.

 

Just my opinion though!

 

Rob

[AndyOrch]

If its a change of Sols Rob then any WS would be inadmissible, Statement of Truth by the ex Solicitor.

[robcag]

If its a change of Sols Rob then any WS would be inadmissible, Statement of Truth by the ex Solicitor.

 

Good point Andy, I think you mentioned that further up the thread.

 

I was just pointing out some of the games they play. I once had a change of solicitors, but then almost immediately they changed back to the original solicitors. My take on it was that were abusing the system just to cover their tracks because they had made a cock-up.

 

Rob

[molly13]

Hi again

 

Thanks for responses.

 

Andy thank you, I think I'm prepared for going for striking out, but I think I'll need some help please, I'm not too sure what to put in the form and I'm also not too sure of doing a draft order, if I also have to do that:oops:

I must admit that I am slightly apprehensive, in case they oppose and I end up with the costs.

 

As it stands now, who would sign and submit their pre-trial checklist? I checked with the Court and it's not been submitted yet.

 

 

Hi Rob.... Yes that has happened to me too in the good old Marlin days (MC),they wanted a quick CO, but didn't get it, thanks to Andy's excellent info:razz:

 

Regards

 

Molly:-)

[molly13]

Hi again,

 

Andy, realistically what are the chance of this being struck out?

 

(Had I not made the call this afternoon I would be none the wiser now that Morgan does not seem to exist any more.)

 

I have printed off N244 and am just attempting to fill it in:

 

At 3....what order etc..... do I just put Strike Out claim because

 

The Claimant has failed to comply withcourt order dated xxx:

 

Direction 2) Disclosure of documents;

 

a) Both parties shall give to each other standard disclosure of documents by serving copies together with a disclosure statement by 4 pm on x xMay 2012.

 

The Claimant has failed to disclose a document, listed at 7, and has to date not supplied said document.

 

I enclose copies of the Claimant’s Standard Disclosure and covering letter dated x x May 2012.

 

 

Direction 3) Both parties shall, by 4pm on x x June 2012, serve on each other the witness statement of themselves and of all witnesses (other than expert witnesses) on whom they intend to rely.

 

The Claimant has failed to serve its witness statement on me.

 

Do I mention the change of Solicitor?

 

4...Do I have to attach a draft order... If so what do I write here please?

 

10 Evidence relied on... which of the 3 boxes do I tick?

 

I know I can try for without a hearing,but how likely is that?

The question of costs does bother me.

 

Sorry for all the questions, but I feel a bit out of my depth.

 

Regards

 

Molly:-)

[AndyOrch]

Hi Molly

 

Yes you need to include draft Directions:-

 

In the XXXXXXXX County Court

Claim No.XXXXXXXXXX

 

 

Before DJ XXXXXXXXXX

 

Dated xxth June 2012

 

 

Claimant XXXXXXXX

 

and

 

Defendant XXXXXXXXX

 

 

 

Draft Order

 

 

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

 

1. The DJ strike out a statement of case for a failure to comply with a rule, practice direction or court order dated xxxxxx pursuant to CPR 3.4(2)©.

2 The Claimant has failed to comply with Standard Disclosure and Exchange of Witness Statements

3. The Claimant do pay the Claimant’s costs in this application and Costs in the case, in the sum of £XXXXXXX within 14 days.

 

Finish Order

 

 

Molly you shouldn't need any evidence submitted with the strike out.It will no doubt require a hearing .Dont refer to the Change of Sols for now.

I cant state for certainty it will be struck out but it will force the matter to either a Strike out or an Unless Order.

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

[molly13]

Thank you very much for that Andy. Much appreciated:-)

 

As an aside, what happens if their pre-trial checklist,and fee, is not received by the court on the due date?

 

 

Thanks so much for your help,again.

 

Regards

 

Molly:-)

[AndyOrch]

Well again its a further sanction on their part, reading between the lines here its apparent that there is some kind of switch over in Sols and your claim has been mislaid in the system.

All the better for you though!!!

 

Regards

 

Andy

[molly13]

here's hoping

Thanks again

 

Molly:-)

[spamheed]

Please note that Cabot/Morgan's Deeds of Assignment (DOA) are normally so redacted as to be completely unreadable.

 

However, they do and will produce them and attempt to have "a private word" with the judge to explain the commercially sensitive nature of the information held in the document to justify such redaction'

 

You should object to any attempt to show the unredacted part of the purported assignment to the trial judge at the hearing. Any attempt to do so would raise a human rights issue concerning the keeping secret of relevant evidence from one party whilst sharing it with the trial judge behind the other party’s back.

 

The redacted part of the purported assignment would not need to be shown to the Judge if it was not relevant to the issues between the parties. The Defence would need to be amended with wasted costs for the Defendant if any such application was to be made in this litigation or any attempt be made to rely on redacted content.

 

On the basis of the un-redacted part of the purported assignment, certainly on the copy sent to me in my case, it was clear that the DOA covered multiple accounts ie a block of agreements sold to Cabot and at no time referred to my account in isolation, the date the DOA was signed was also materially different to the alleged date of assignment

 

It may be too late in the day to deny the validity in law or evidence of the ‘representation’ of a notice of assignment. If it is a true copy it should be pleaded as such and the pleading verified by statement of truth. It is not pleaded as such and so it is not a true copy. Its inclusion in a pleading is an abuse of the process of the court, but it should be beared in mind that this document has no merit of its own and has not been pleaded as a true copy

 

 

some good advice offered on this though

Edited June 19, 2012 by spamheed
added a bit

[AndyOrch]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?354633-Have-Morgan-Solicitors-Gone-Bust-Or-Cabot&p=3876440#post3876440

 

In the debt forums.

 

Andy

[molly13]

Thanks for that information spamheed, that is very useful.

 

Molly:-)

 

And thanks Andy for the link

[molly13]

...

morgan001.pdf

claim001.pdf

Edited June 28, 2012 by molly13

[molly13]

Hi,

 

On Monday I recived a letter from the Court stating : Application to be heard on notice to the claimant. So still waiting on that one.

 

However, today I have received a letter from Wright Hassall enclosing notice of change of Sols. and also their completed pre-trial check list (late) stating that they have complied with the directions already given!! They are showing the same Witness as the one on the AQ from Morgan.

 

But.. I have still not received any WS whatsoever

 

Also enclosed in the letter was an offer 'Without Prejudice Save as to Costs' letter, offering a reduced F&F, together with an I&E form!

 

So where do I go from here please?

 

Also can I ask someone to delete the attachements in the previous post, posted there in error.... thanks:oops:

 

Any help appreciated as always.

 

Regards

 

Molly:-)

[AndyOrch]

Have you submitted your N170 Molly?