Robbersway/Hagarty Claimform - Secure Plus Loan debt - Faulty default notice?

[Guest]

[QyUOTE=Ford;3764495]'default records should show the original amount of the default...'

see eg p13 etc default guidance pdf here http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?323570-Default-Info

 

Thanks Ford, I will try and argue the case with the cra's but I won't hold out much hope. The only ones that will make an adjustment is callcredit. The other two request you contact the debt holder and they alone will be able to adjust the record.

 

a default amount on cra file should not include any later interest/charges regardless. and they should know that (as callcredit acknowledge?).

if o/c,cra's don't amend then can consider a notice of correction etc, complaint to ico.

Edited March 22, 2012 by Ford

[DD maker]

Hi again,

 

I've received a letter from IND re the N244 court order and they are not going to send me copies of documents needed for me to defend the claim. Still no payment by RW of my N244 application costs as ordered by the court either. The court order was for RW to comply by tomorrow, defence after a further 2 weeks.

 

The following is my N244 application draft order, the court order and IND's response.

 

Any suggestions on what I can do now?

 

 

 

[Guest]

so, to date, they have not complied with para 1 of the court Order? re copy agreement...?

have they applied for set aside/vary, ie filed it with court, and sent you a copy of their application (as mentioned in the order)?

[Guest]

ps, as for docs referred/mentioned - the poc mention a loan account number, which would require a written agreement (document)! just as the 'notice of assignment' mentioned would require a doc (as they themselves confirm)!? also, court ordered copies!

anyway, need to find out, perhaps from the court, whether they have filed an objection with court in time. or obtained an extension?

Edited March 29, 2012 by Ford

[DD maker]

Hi Ford,

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

No, so far they have not complied with para 1 of the order. I will phone the court tomorrow and ask if they have applied for a set aside or variation but I have not received any notification about this (the 7 day limit for them to apply would have expired Monday/Tuesday this week).

 

It seems (to me anyway) quite clear that the judge expects them to provide the docs as most of para 2 was not ordered for disclosure as the information would be there in the docs from para 1.

 

IND sent a copy of the 'notice of assignment' with their letter (shown below) - seems to me to be very late to provide notice of assignment (dated Feb 2012 - 2 weeks before the claim was made) as the account was sold by the OC in 2008!! Their NOA says assigned by OC effective 2009 and POC is claiming interest from 2007 - before they even purchased the account. Can they do this?

 

 

 

When I call the court should I point out that the claimant (via IND) have refused the order of the court (followed up by a posted statement to that affect)?

[Guest]

oops, post edited

Edited March 29, 2012 by Ford

[DD maker]

oops, post edited

 

Not sure anyone would want to use their account:-)

[Guest]

yes, court said that 'bulk' of your para 2 would be satisfied by para 1 of the order.

re interest, 5 years worth should be a non starter. up to the J though. if it comes to it, can dispute this without prejudice in your defence depending on circumstances and what transpires.

yes, as you say, their notice of assignment is late.

see what court says tomorrow re order

Edited March 29, 2012 by Ford

[Guest]

Not sure anyone would want to use their account:-)

[DD maker]

Well, spoke to the court today. The young lad on the phone seemed surprised to see an order from the court like my N244 one (I think they must be seeing more now with the tactics used by RW, Hegarty and IND).

 

It has been confirmed that RW have not applied for a set aside or variation.

 

He gave the impression that the judge would probably strike out the claim - though he naturally cannot give legal advice.

 

I will post a letter to the court (CC to Hegarty) on Monday informing them of RW's disregard of the court order (refusal to provide docs) with a copy of IND's letter (I'll also mention the non-payment of my costs) and respectfully request they either issue further instruction or strike out the claim.

[Guest]

hi

ok. so, it seems that they have partly complied with the order re copy notice of assignment that they rely on. and it could be that they try and rely on their letter re the rest eg didn't mention an agreement...? (but, why didn't they object to the order to the court, as per that 'reason' in their letter? costs perhaps?)

you have submitted a defence? and have permission to submit an amended defence if required by the date ordered by the court?

did the court say to write as you say? or are you making an actual 'application' to strike out re non compliance?

Edited April 1, 2012 by Ford

[gezwee]

Hi DD

 

I would point out that Robinson Way Ltd did not exist prior to 30th September 2009, prior to that they traded as Robinson Way & co 2009 Ltd...... if the muppets at IND are dumb enough to ignore an order of the court and rely on innacuracy of assignment they only have themselves to blame when the case is struck out.

 

Pickthall case may interest you......

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/543.html

 

Unclean hands springs to mind

 

Gez

Edited April 1, 2012 by gezwee

[DD maker]

Hi Ford,

 

I submitted a 'holding defence' in-case my N244 application was refused - basically putting RW on strict proof that they had a valid claim, requesting permission to amend defence once docs were disclosed.

 

RW did not object to the court order and as such I believe they are in default of the order.

 

RW in IND's letter may claim that the docs are not mentioned in the POC but the court order clearly states to provide the docs mentioned in the POC - namely the agreement and assignment. Clearly the judge has decided these docs are mentioned and required to be disclosed.

 

I'm not going to make a formal 'application to strike out' (I presume this would be another N244 application). My original N244 requested a strike out for non compliance but wasn't in the court order. I will just write to the court advising them of RW non-compliance and request further directions from them re the case, stay or stike out at the court's discretion.

 

 

Gez,

 

I am aware that RW Ltd didn't exist until 30th Sep 2009 (previously RW & Co 2009 Ltd - company created on 29th July 2009).

 

Interesting link you posted - I will read more fully later today when I have more time. Skim reading is the gist that basically the claimant cannot amend their claim to 'fit' the actual dates assignment took place after the claim has been defended?

 

 

 

Many thanks for all of your continuing support.

[DD maker]

Hi All,

 

Draft of my letter to the court below. Any and all observations suggestions gratefully received.

 

 

 

IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT, Claim No: *****

Between: ROBINSON WAY LTD (Claimant) v ****** (Defendant)

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

I would like to bring to the attention of the court the Claimants disregard of the court order made by Deputy District Judge ***** dated **** March 2012 (stamped by the court on **** March) – referred to as ‘the order’ for disclosure of documents that would enable the Defendant to prepare a proper defence and the determination of the claim.

 

• In a letter dated **** March 2012, IND Ltd (agent of the Claimant) have refused to disclose all of the documents as ordered in ‘the order’ [attached to this letter marked ‘A’].

 

• To date the Claimant has not paid the Defendant the court fee incurred by the Defendant of £45.00 as instructed in ‘the order’.

 

I respectfully request that the court avail itself of any/all of the following with regard to CPR Part 3,

 

• Issue further instructions to the Claimant regarding disclosure of documents as per ‘the order’ and advise the Defendant regarding time for filling a full defence.

 

• Put a ‘Stay’ on the claim until such time the Claimant complies with ‘the order’.

 

• Strike out the claim for the Claimant’s non-compliance with ‘the order’.

 

• Instruct the Claimant to pay the Defendant’s court fee incurred as instructed in ‘the order’.

 

 

A copy of this letter has been posted to the Claimant’s address for sending documents as shown in the claim form.

[gezwee]

Hi DD

 

I have a suspicion the court will require an application from you, they do very little of their own volition if there's an option for a fee paid service. If it falls to an application to resolve this, you may as well spend the £80.00 on a strike out and put them to test on the assignment.

 

There's nothing wrong with your letter, if anything it probably affords the claimant far more latitude than they should hope to expect given their conduct.

 

Pickthall........ you have the gist of it. Claimant seeking equitable remedy must come with clean hands, in basic terms, they cannot benefit from their own unfair actions or wrongdoing.

 

Gez

[DD maker]

Thanks gezwee,

 

I guess I'm showing the court how reasonable I'm being to the Claimant in not jusgt going for an order to strike out - as opposed to the Claimant / IND ignoring the court order.

 

I'm slightly concerned that if I was to send an N244 application fro strike out that it would be refused and £80 down the drain.

 

I think I will just send the letter and see what happens. My holding defence via MCOL means that RW have until 11th or 12th March to pay a fee if they wish to continue.

[Guest]

hi

yes, i agree that they have 'mentioned' an agreement (as posted previously). it may speak volumes that they wont send a copy of one, simply on the reliance that they didn't mention it! ie, they can't (wont) send one cause they don't have one? if they had one, it would not be unreasonable for them to send a copy as ordered? don't recall atm, is this matter subject to s127 (3) cca? has a reconstitution been sent?

it seems that they've partly complied with the order in sending a copy nofa that they rely on?

with an application, it may be that the court will give them extra time to comply and if not then strike, or they may say strike straight away. but, as gez says would think that such a request would ordinarily require an application. but, there is of course the courts general/case management powers (cpr 3) which could work either way, for or against?

Edited April 1, 2012 by Ford

[tiger66uk]

I think I now understand why northampton have sent my n244 to be heard on notice to the claimant. Ford mentioned it possibly so the courts get them in front of them. DD, I hope you don't mind me noting your thread for ammunition of their ignorance and blatant disregard for the statutes.

[DD maker]

Hi all,

 

Quick update. I called Northampton to see if my letter had been bought to the attention of the court. No definitive answer on that but I was told that the case had been referred back on the 2nd April for a decision by the District Judge as the Claimant was unsure of some details (what detail I do not know).

 

I can only assume the Claimant wants clarification on the N244 order issued by the court on the 16th March (date referred back to the Judge is after the time limit to set aside or vary the order).

 

I guess I just have to wait and see what clarification the Judge gives them (assuming I am informed).

 

My MCOL defence (holding / embarrassed defence pointing out the claimants CPR failures) was received on the 12th March - 28 days from the court service of my defence to the Claimant would be tomorrow or Thursday (allowing 2 days postal time).

 

Does anyone know if they would need to inform the court that they wish to proceed by Thursday or does the N244 order (Claimant to supply docs by 30th March, my defence by 13th April) supersede that time-scale? Does my MCOL defence currently still stand?

 

Many thanks for any opinions.

[DD maker]

Hi all again,

 

Just received a 'General Directions Order' from Northampton dated 10th ...

 

'On 4/4/12 - The case was referred back for directions as the Claimant is querying the previous Judge's order' [RW querying the order to provide docs to me] and the judge orders that 'If any party is unhappy with the order they must make the proper application'

 

I take that as being that RW wanted to set aside or vary the order and asked after the time limit and not using the correct form ,

but maybe also that if I want to request a stay or strike out I must also use the correct form (my letter to the court was recieved on the 4th, the day the judge made this latest order) .

 

 

Does anyone know the answer to the following?

 

Does anyone know if they would need to inform the court that they wish to proceed by Thursday or does the N244 order (Claimant to supply docs by 30th March, my defence by 13th April) supersede that time-scale? Does my MCOL defence currently still stand?

Many thanks for any opinions.

 

I may just have to call the court tomorrow or Monday and find out if the case has been stayed or RW have paid the fee to continue.

[Guest]

hi

you sent a letter to court asking for directions (copy to claimant)? and they obliged. also, claimant is querying something. as mentioned, court has certain general case management powers including allowing an extension re an order despite date passed (cpr 3.1 (2) a ), depends what claimant is doing. but, in any case, they would have to make a formal application for the court to decide on. and yes, as you say, you would prob have to make a formal application re whatever you're after. yes, give the court a call see what they say.

Edited April 12, 2012 by Ford

[bradfordlad]

Hi DD,

 

Just wanted to say I'm really impressed by the way you've managed this claim

 

I wish I'd been able to manage our Bank of Ireland claim so well as they were just as useless as your lot!

 

BL

Edited April 13, 2012 by bradfordlad

[DD maker]

Hi All,

 

Quick update.

 

I called the court today to enquire on the status of RW's claim and to see if they had indeed submitted an application to the court.

 

I was informed that the last event was the court's General Directions Order (see post 70). The Claimant has not made any further applications... the claim is stayed

 

 

So, I feel a small result in so much as they have not continued with what I know will be poor documentation.

 

 

Can anyone point me in the right direction re the court order for them to pay my N244 application fee (post 52).

 

Do I need to send them a Letter Before Action requesting my court fee and how much does it cost to apply to the court (I presume it's another N244) if they ignore the LBA.

Who would I send the LBA to - RW, Hegarty's, or IND Ltd (or all 3)?

Can I also apply in the N244 for strike out of the claim due to non-compliance of the courts order and include updated costs (do these need to be itemised?)

[bradfordlad]

Sorry I cant help DD, but hopefully this post will bump it up for you

[citizenB]

I am not quite sure of the question you are asking?

 

You made an application to the court for something - and are now asking the claimant to pay the cost of that application.

 

Can you explain a little more. I understood that costs are awarded by the court ?

 

Perhaps I have misunderstood.