Robinson Way / IND,claimform - citi card 'debt'

[colinsunderland]

give me 2 mins andy,

Apparently the SW was made by a debt account manager for the claimant.

However she works for IND as her address is the same, and I spoke to her on IND's number today

[colinsunderland]

 

 

[colinsunderland]

OK, I think they are the pages missing, and I've send andy a pm with the LBA

 

The person who wrore the WS states she is a debt account manager for the claimant, She definately works for IND Ltd as I spoke to her on the phone today.

RW have always been the claimant, yet told me on the phone they have no details about the case and didn't start the action, that was their agent, IND Ltd.

[AndyOrch]

Thanks Colin

 

Ok we have established the NoA , Robbers and IND are one and the same but the Claimant is Robbers as they are the assignee from Liverpool.Continue with your skeleton Colin I envisage that they will be totally unprepared should the hearing happen tomorrow.I assume that the DJ may well adjourn for further time.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[colinsunderland]

thanks andy, so is this ok

 

IN THE SUNDERLAND COUNTY COURT

CLAIM NO xx

ROBINSON WAY LTD V xx

1. I sold my property at xx on 23rd December 2010. I had no access to mail at that address after that date.

2. Claimant states Letter Before action was sent on 7th November 2011 to that address, and that all correspondence after that date also went to xx.

3. I did not receive any of this correspondence, including the summons sent from the court.

4. IND Ltd admits in their witness statement I was no longer residing at the address in February 2012.

5. Had I been aware of the claim I would have defended it.

6. I note the claimant requests a 21 day adjournment. I would strongly oppose this as I would suggest the claimant should have had documents essential to the claim before starting any action. In any event they have already had over 6 months to get these documents.

7. The claimant states a copy of the particulars of claim have been served on me. This relates to the ones sent in November 2011 and as such I still haven’t had sight of them.

8. With regard to point 20 of the witness statement, if the judgement is set aside then it would be up to the claimant to resubmit any claim if they so desire.

9. As they have already stated they need 28 days to get a small amount of paperwork, I respectfully submit they would not be able to supply full disclosure within 14 days.

10. If the court does order I file a defence I respectfully ask the court the Claimant be ordered to disclose all document he intends to rely, including but not limited to:

(a) Original agreement including terms and conditions

(b) Any default notice and proof of service

© Notice of Allocation

(d) Original summons

(e) Full statements of the account since opened.

 

Should I mention at all about IND doing the WS rather than RW?

[AndyOrch]

" Should I mention at all about IND doing the WS rather than RW? "

 

 

Absolutely they are a collection agent or so they profess.The WS is inadmissible unless they have proof that they are one and the same.

 

Andy

[colinsunderland]

ok, so should I put that into the statement above, if so where and how would I approach it? Sorry for all the questions.

[Mike_hawk]

Not entirely confident its [iND] credentials would allow it a right of audience either

 

Phil

[colinsunderland]

ok, thats totally over my head, what is right of audience

[AndyOrch]

"I am a debt account manager for the Claimant " Is she qualified and employed by the Claimant to state these facts and act as an expert witness?

 

IND are not Solicitors or Litigators

 

Just add it to the beginning or near point 4 you also need to state that you only received this WS 3 days before the hearing.

[AndyOrch]

ok, thats totally over my head, what is right of audience

 

See above:roll:

[colinsunderland]

How about at the very start, point 1

 

1. I would submit the court rule the witness statement provided as inadmissable as it was written by IND Ltd who are not the claimant in this case. I rang IND on 26th June 2012 and spoke to Julie Simpson, and the address given in the witness statement is IND's address.

 

2. If the court does admit the witness statement I would submit the following

[Mike_hawk]

PD 27........ 3.1 of the link below, may be worth bringing to the courts attention, throw plenty of mud and see how much sticks ;-)

 

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/pdf/practice_directions/pd_part27.pdf

[AndyOrch]

How about at the very start, point 1

 

1. I would submit the court rule the witness statement provided as inadmissable as it was written by IND Ltd who are not the claimant in this case. I rang IND on 26th June 2012 and spoke to Julie Simpson, and the address given in the witness statement is IND's address.

 

2. If the court does admit the witness statement I would submit the following

 

 

[AndyOrch]

Correct Phil

 

Information overload now Colin:madgrin:

[colinsunderland]

PD 27........ 3.1 of the link below, may be worth bringing to the courts attention, throw plenty of mud and see how much sticks ;-)

 

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/pdf/practice_directions/pd_part27.pdf

 

Thanks, not sure I should bring that up as I don't expect anyone to be there and if it is then it will probably be a local solicitor. If I ask who the client is and they say IND thta would probably be interesting though

 

Correct Phil

 

Information overload now Colin:madgrin:

 

Yep, just a bit lol

[colinsunderland]

OK, final draft, do I need anything else at the end, date, signature etc?

 

1. I would submit the court rule the witness statement provided as inadmissible as it was written by IND Ltd who are not the claimant in this case. I rang IND on 26th June 2012 and spoke to Julie Simpson, and the address given in the witness statement is IND's address.

2. If the court does admit the witness statement I would submit the following

3. I sold my property at xx on 23rd December 2010. I had no access to mail at that address after that date.

4. Claimant states Letter Before action was sent on 7th November 2011 to that address, and that all correspondence after that date also went to xx.

5. I did not receive any of this correspondence, including the summons sent from the court.

6. IND Ltd admits in their witness statement I was no longer residing at the address in February 2012.

7. Had I been aware of the claim I would have defended it.

8. I note the claimant requests a 21 day adjournment. I would strongly oppose this as I would suggest the claimant should have had documents essential to the claim before starting any action. In any event they have already had over 6 months to get these documents.

9. The claimant states a copy of the particulars of claim have been served on me. This relates to the ones sent in November 2011 and as such I still haven’t had sight of them.

10. With regard to point 20 of the witness statement, I respectfully submit if the judgement is set aside then it would be up to the claimant to resubmit any claim if they so desire.

11. As they have already stated they need 28 days to get a small amount of paperwork, I respectfully submit they would not be able to supply full disclosure within 14 days.

12. If the court does order I file a defence I respectfully ask the court the Claimant be ordered to disclose all document he intends to rely, including but not limited to:

(a) Original agreement including terms and conditions

(b) Any default notice and proof of service

© Notice of Allocation No Allocation Default Judgment

(d) Original summons

(e) Full statements of the account since opened.

Edited June 26, 2012 by Andyorch
Andy Orch correction to post

[AndyOrch]

Now you are thinking along the correct lines Colin this is how murky this whole industry is.Every legal document should have the name of Robbers on it, IND are nothing to do with this

allegedly:roll:

 

Ok Guys I have to log off now early start in the morning, Colin best of luck if it is still scheduled for tomorrow ,update your thread with the developments.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Mike_hawk]

Hi Colin

 

You need to play the same tactics as the other side, the option left open to them is to either open themselves up to the courts discretion/test or...... admit they are a party corporate

 

Are they an agent?..... if so the w/s is hearsay and can be tested fairly vigorously, or are they body/party corporate....... if so why mislead the court and imply they are an agent.

 

Sometimes you need to read between the lines

 

Phil

[colinsunderland]

Are RW in administration? They don't seem to have a consumer credit licence, does that affect this at all?

 

Actually reading more it seems they are ok, couldn't find a ccl for them though

Edited June 26, 2012 by colinsunderland

[Mike_hawk]

Hi Colin

 

They do...... it's IND's involvement you need to press, deny them relief at every opportunity

 

Phil

 

Application / Licence Details

 

 

 

 

 

Licence Number:0630388

Licence Status:Current

 

 

Current Applicant / Licensee:

 

Business NameCompany Registration NumberRobinson Way Limited06976081

 

 

Categories:

 

Consumer credit Credit brokerage Debt administration Debt collecting

 

 

Right To Canvass Off Trade Premises:No

 

 

 

Trading Name(s) (Current):

 

Chase Solutions Express Debt Collecting Services

 

 

Issued Date: 21-Aug-2009

Date Maintenance Payment Due: 20-Aug-2014

 

 

 

Legal Formation:

 

Body Corporate (incorporated inside UK)

 

 

Current Individuals that run the organisation:

 

NamePositionGraham Prosser William Grant Murray

 

 

Current Organisations that run the organisation:

 

NameCompany Registration NumberPositionRWC 2009 Limited (In Creditors' Voluntary Liquidation) formerly Robinson, Way & Company Limited885896

 

 

Nature of Business:

 

Other

 

 

Current Address(es):

 

Address TypeAddressCorrespondenceLondon Scottish House, Quays Reach, Carolina Way, Salford, M50 2ZYPrincipal Place Of BusinessLondon Scottish House, Quays Reach, Carolina Way, Salford, M50 2ZYRegistered OfficeLondon Scottish House, Quays Reach, Carolina Way, Salford, M50 2ZY

 

 

Historic Address(es):

 

Address TypeAddressPrincipal Place Of BusinessLondon Scottish House, Quays Reach, Carolina Way, Salford, M50 2ZY

[Mike_hawk]

Hi colin

 

Depending what time your hearing is you could try the following, hand a copy to the usher when you arrive in the waiting room

 

Check with Andy in the morning if time allows, I won't be able to get on here until the evening so best of luck

 

Edit.......just realised you received their w/s on Saturday, deemed service would be Monday [1 day short unless the d/j allows]. Adjusted .3 below

CPR 2.8 link for reference http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part02

 

Phil

 

__________________________

Statement: Relief from Sanctions

Defendant: xxxxx

Exhibits: xxxxx

Date: xxxxx

Claim Number: xxxxx

 

IN THE xxxxxxxxx county court

 

BETWEEN:

 

xxxxxxxxxxx (CLAIMANT)

and

xxxxxxxxxxx (DEFENDANT)

 

 

WITNESS STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS CPR 3.9

 

I, xxxxx, of xxxx WILL SAY AS FOLLOWS:

 

1. I am a litigant in person of the above address.

 

2. I represent myself as the Defendant against xxxxxxxx.

 

3. I make this statement on the second [2] available business day following third party [iND limited] deemed service of hearsay evidence.

 

4. The case is currently prejudiced by third party post default judgment application and supporting hearsay evidence.

 

5. The Defendant is not aware of any application to the court by I.N.D limited to act for the Claimant, no supporting notice of change having been served. No relief pursuant to PD 27[3.2] having been sought.

 

6. In the interests of justice the Defendant believes that; the third party having admitted that it holds no copy judgment or record of this case, any supporting evidence, or any body corporate responsibility should be barred from any right of audience.

 

7. In claiming relief; the Defendant respectfully requests that should the court not strike out the third party application [in absence of claimant attendance], the Defendant should not be sanctioned should the court order any remedy available to it.

 

8. In making this statement, I attach exhibit marked xx as evidence. **attach relevant hi-lited sections of their w/s**

 

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.

 

Signed: xxxxxxxxx

Edited June 27, 2012 by Mike_hawk

[citizenB]

Yes, you need to pop a statement of truth at the bottom or it wont be accepted..

 

x

Statement of Truth

 

I believe the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true

signature

Dated

[colinsunderland]

just an update

 

Case was adjourned. RW were ordered to provided 12 months statements from 28/12/05, along with copy of credit agreement and Default Notice. I have to submit a new WS within 14 days of 28 days from now.

 

Hey Julie Simpson, just so you know, even though you have read this and got RW to fax a letter to the court stating you work for them at their Peterborough offce, we both know that is misleading . You were in the IND offices when I spoke to you yesterday. You are also the point of contact for people applying for jobs within IND, for example here

http://www.dgjobs.co.uk/CASE-OFFICER-for-IND-Limited-PCH-48556.html

 

CASE OFFICER for IND Limited

Job Location: PETERBOROUGH PE1. Job Wage/Salary: £14,000 TO £17,000 PER ANNUM. SOC: 4150.

Job Hours: 37.5 PER WEEK, MONDAY TO FRIDAY 9AM - 5.30PM. JCP Ref: PCH/48556.

 

Job Description: The successful candidate will be required to perform daily administrative and case management tasks and have the ability to effectively communicate with customers and the court service. You will have a responsible attitude, remain calm under pressure and have a flexible approach to the work in hand. A good working knowledge of a computer-working environment is an advantage. DO NOT TELEPHONE, ONLY APPLY VIA EMAIL.

 

How to Apply: You can apply for this job by sending a CV/written application to Julie Simpson at IND Limited, 48 Broadway, PETERBOROUGH, PE1 1YW or to [email protected]. (More jobs from [email protected]) .

Edited June 27, 2012 by citizenB
substituted word

[Mike_hawk]

That's a reasonable result for the day, pretty much as you requested.

 

As far as the rest of your post, and assuming IND wish to continue acting in some capacity, you should put the question you've raised above directly to them. Did the court serve you a copy of the fax?

 

Phil