Cabot/Morgans claimform - 2 debts cap1 card + Barclaycard - *** Settled on F&FS ***

[heathrow]

I think she has been like me; spent many hours reading through posts to try and reach the right conclusions about how to proceed with a defence. Do we know how she has got on?

This whole debt collection business is a sham (rather like the banks). I tried to get changes before Parliament about a year ago but had no response from several letters to Jack Straw (well, why should I sound surprised?) and my local Tory took up the issue but got nowhere. It is time that selling debts was made illegal because it has given birth to all kinds of pariahs that are profiteeting from those of us that are less fortunate. But, isn't greed behind most of the problems in this country? Sorry; rant over.

[AndyOrch]

Hi Heathrow

 

You are quite right and I thoroughly agree.

Ok lets proceed the defence is sufficient at this stage I assume this is a Northampton CCBC summons and if so all references with regards to documents not attached pointless as they are not required to action that.I would therefore remove any reference to that.

With little knowledge of your case i assume from your defence that they have added two debts from two OCs together.Have you requested copies of these agreements? If so from whom?

 

Regards

 

Andy

[heathrow]

Yes this is a Northampton bulk centre document and follows the normal Cabot/Morgan pattern as other have described by giving only the basic information.

PARTICULARS OF CLAIM

The claimant is the assignee of Debt(s) from

Capital One

Credit card reference xxxxxxxx

Barclaycard

Credit card reference xxxxxx

Notice of Assignment having been given to the Defendant in writing.

Despite demand for payment £xxxxx remains due. The claimant claims £xxxxx and interest

Under the s.69 County Courts Act and costs.

I have written a letter to be posted tomorrow to Morgans requesting under CPR 31.14 copies of the agreements, demands for payment and the notices of assignment. The action relating to one of these credit cards has come out of the blue; the other they sent two different letters on Barclaycard letterheadings for the same account but with different amounts that Cabot claim to be notices of assignment. They look too contrived to me to be real.

 

Does this help?

 

Regards

 

Heathrow

[heathrow]

I have revised the defence as per below. Are there any other parts that you feel should be deleted?

 

1. I xxxxxxxxxxx, am the defendant in this action and make the following statement as a defence to the claim made by Cabot Financial (UK) Limited.

 

2. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim and put the Claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

3. The Defendant notes that the Claimant has combined two separate account sums in their particulars of claim in an attempt to conveniently wholly dispose of them in the same proceedings under CPR 7.3, however each sum involves separate accounts with their own original lender, account references, terms, conditions and legal status and cannot possibly be “conveniently” disposed of in a single claim, therefore CPR 7.3 cannot apply in this instance.

 

4. a) The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the contracts referred to, the method the Claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, or any default notices issued or any other matters necessary to substantiate the Claimant's claim.

b) A copy of the purported 'assignment' that the Claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim, and which appears to form the basis upon which these proceedings have been brought, has not been served on the Defendant for clarification.

 

5. The Claimant did not send a letter relating to one of these two claims before action applicable to this action as required under the Pre-Action Protocols.

 

6. The Claimant has so far failed to disclose and clarify appropriate information to support the Particulars of Claim, requested pursuant to CPR 31, which leaves the Defendant at a disadvantage and unable to plead effectively or at all. Even if the Defendant were able to plead they should be allowed to plead effectively to each account on its’ own merit. The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Claim as it stands.

 

7. Because the Claimant has not provided any documents to support the particulars of claim and as such have shown no provision within the terms and conditions of either account which would allow interest to be applied after the termination of either account, therefore as the Claimant has not provided proof of the debt or the sums claimed the Defendant denies the Claimants claim for interest pursuant to S.69 of the County Court Act 1984.

 

8. The Defendant has written to the Claimant for an extension of deadline for filing a defence pursuant to CPR 15.5, however the Claimant has not, thus far acknowledged or agreed to the request which in turn has also put the Defendant at a disadvantage for filing a defence, by not allowing enough time to file a suitably amended defence once requested points of clarification have been received.

 

9. The Defendant denies that they are indebted to the Claimant for the sum of £xxxxx, including costs and puts the Claimant to strict proof of this sum.

[AndyOrch]

I think a small section on the assignment may be beneficial Heathrow otherwise very good:wink:

 

Regards

 

Andy

[AndyOrch]

I see you have touched on the assignment but you need to refer to 2 assignments and 2 of everything through out the defence over complicate this as they have tried to simplify it

[heathrow]

Thanks Andy for your assistance.

I realise I have got longer to file my defence at is 14 days from service fo the claim and NOT as i had thought 14 days from issue date. So a bit more time is good to get this right.

The following shows the defence with the changes I have made following your advice. I should be receiving the County Court practice book today so this will also be useful to get my head round a few things.

 

4. a) The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the contracts referred to, the method the Claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, or any default notices issued or any other matters necessary to substantiate the Claimant's claim.

b) A copy of one of the two purported 'assignments' that the Claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim, and which appears to form the basis upon which these proceedings have been brought, has not been served or provided for clarification. On the other account mentioned in the Particulars of Claim two different letters have been received on 12 November quoting different amounts and assignment dates for the same account which the Claimant claims to be ‘notices of assignment’.

5. The Claimant did not send a letter before action for one of the two claims applicable to this action as required under the Pre-Action Protocols.

 

6. Because the Claimant has so far failed to disclose and clarify appropriate information to support either of the two assignment mentioned in the Particulars of Claim, requested pursuant to CPR 31, this leaves the Defendant at a disadvantage and unable to plead effectively or at all. Even if the Defendant were able to plead they should be allowed to plead effectively to each account on its’ own merit. The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Claim as it stands.

 

7. Because the Claimant has not provided any documents to support the particulars of claim, and as such have shown no provision within the terms and conditions of either account mentioned therein, which would allow interest to be applied after the termination of either account, therefore as the Claimant has not provided proof of the two debts or the sums claimed the Defendant denies the Claimants claim for interest pursuant to S.69 of the County Court Act 1984.

 

Cheers

[heathrow]

Sorry guys ...some gliches in the system here and the the last post told me to resend and has appeared twice.

[silverfox1961]

Sorry guys ...some gliches in the system here and the the last post told me to resend and has appeared twice.

 

I'll sort that out for you. You will get a message saying post unapproved-ignore it

 

Before you send that defence off, have a read of this "informative" post

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?283443-Embarrased-Defences-and-the-problems-with-them.&p=3192556&viewfull=1#post3192556

[AndyOrch]

Thanks Andy for your assistance.

I realise I have got longer to file my defence at is 14 days from service fo the claim and NOT as i had thought 14 days from issue date. So a bit more time is good to get this right.

The following shows the defence with the changes I have made following your advice. I should be receiving the County Court practice book today so this will also be useful to get my head round a few things.

 

4. a) The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the contracts referred to, the method the Claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, or any default notices issued or any other matters necessary to substantiate the Claimant's claim.

b) A copy of one of the two purported 'assignments' that the Claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim, and which appears to form the basis upon which these proceedings have been brought, has not been served or provided for clarification. On the other account mentioned in the Particulars of Claim two different letters have been received on 12 November quoting different amounts and assignment dates for the same account which the Claimant claims to be ‘notices of assignment’.Not withstanding the restrictions and limitations of the CCBC Northampton

5. The Claimant did not send a letter before action for one of the two claims applicable to this action as required under the Pre-Action Protocols.

 

6. Because the Claimant has so far failed to disclose and clarify appropriate information to support either of the two assignment mentioned in the Particulars of Claim, requested pursuant to CPR 31, this leaves the Defendant at a disadvantage and unable to plead effectively or at all. Even if the Defendant were able to plead they should be allowed to plead effectively to each account on its’ own merit. The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Claim as it stands.

 

7. Because the Claimant has not provided any documents to support the particulars of claim, and as such have shown no provision within the terms and conditions of either account mentioned therein, which would allow interest to be applied after the termination of either account, therefore as the Claimant has not provided proof of the two debts or the sums claimed the Defendant denies the Claimants claim for interest pursuant to S.69 of the County Court Act 1984.

 

Cheers

 

Regards

 

Andy

[heathrow]

Yes, Andy I have read through this thread several times before.What is your point please? Are you saying I should not use the term 'embarrassed defence' and also to add the line you have inserted in red? Sorry to be a bit naive about this but I am getting on in years.

[AndyOrch]

I didnt post a link to a thread Silverfox did, not sure why he did, yours is not an " Embarrassed " defence but a particular good holding defence.

Yes add the line in red i have added.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[silverfox1961]

I didnt post a link to a thread Silverfox did, not sure why he did, yours is not an " Embarrassed " defence but a particular good holding defence.

Yes add the line in red i have added.

 

Regards

 

 

Andy

Don't worry about it. That was a "just in case" link. I noticed in his defence that the "E" word came in and I thought of that thread

[AndyOrch]

I certainly wont worry Silver, just dont want posters being confused with other nonsense threads being created and then Caggers hounding the Site Team to make them Stickies.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[silverfox1961]

I certainly wont worry Silver, just dont want posters being confused with other nonsense threads being created and then Caggers hounding the Site Team to make them Stickies.

 

Regards

 

 

Andy

I couldn't possibly comment

[DonkeyB]

Actually guys it would really help if the admin team bothered to respond to such requests.

[AndyOrch]

couldn't possibly comment

[DonkeyB]

So are you guys saying you disagree with pt2537’s evaluation of embarrassed defences? pt made it clear that it’s a difficult and varied subject with many options – I don’t think it needs such disparaging sideswipes. If you don’t agree, I can only suggest you go to the thread and explain why and join the debate!

[AndyOrch]

So are you guys saying you disagree with pt2537’s evaluation of embarrassed defences? pt made it clear that it’s a difficult and varied subject with many options – I don’t think it needs such disparaging sideswipes. If you don’t agree, I can only suggest you go to the thread and explain why and join the debate!

 

I already have this morning Donkey

[coledog]

I would have thought that it is up to the Cagger with the problem to look at all the available advice on here and make their mind up what is nonsense or not! If someone has bothered to document a possible solution and others think that this is worthy of promenance then the moderators or whoever should take note of this. I see that no-one has written a 'why I like embarrassed defences' thread yet but I would expect that to be treated with the same respect.

[DonkeyB]

I know any, but that’s doesn’t justify the sarky sideswipes – that’s my job!

[AndyOrch]

Yes Coledog wasn't you the one 2 months ago posting " embarrassed defences everywhere" same one for every thread.I gave you some advice then.

[DonkeyB]

I think we’ve all done it at some point. We can all learn new tricks

[AndyOrch]

I think we’ve all done it at some point. We can all learn new tricks

 

 

Ive never, always used particulrised or well drafted Holding Defences.Anyway lets stop ranting in Heathrows thread, I have made my point.

[DonkeyB]

Agree