Brian Carter/orange claim form, but i dont owe them, they owe me???

[andonandon]

Hi,

I've been using this forum for years and have found it beyond helpful, but until now i've had nothing to add.

 

Its a pretty steep learning curve and I wish I could have helped but it seems I may need some advice myself today.

 

I've recieved a county court claim form (similar to some of the others ive seen on here from the same people) but Im unsure exactly how to set out my defence.

 

There is plenty of info on here for the standard defences and I wouldn't normally ask but In this instance I really dont owe them, and in fact I consider orange (or whoever owns the account now) as owing money to myself.

The amount is just a couple of hundred quid, and I could probably afford to pay it but I wont on principle.

 

It relates to a mobile phone contract I had with orange which went bad 5 1/2 years ago (nearly made it lol).

I kept eveything and remember all the telephone conversations vividly.

 

The problems came from a phonecall I recieved from one of their indian call centres.

I could undertand very little of what the guy was saying but he offered me £5 worth of free international calls for a month.

I (stupidly) said yes.

 

While he was in there, unbeknownst to me, he removed all add-ons from my monthly bill.

This was around this time in 2006, maybe august (i have records at home).

 

The phone was one of the original smart-phones and one of the bundles was for data.

this was back when data cost a lot, maybe £5 per meg, and the phone was similar to a modern phone in how it used data so the bundle was essential. Typically my bills were around £52 if memory serves me.

 

My bills were taken by direct debit and I didnt notice anything was wrong untill months later, perhaps november/december.

In the mean time they had been taking £80-90 or more per month from my account.

I noticed because my bank had sent me an unpaid direct debit letter.

 

I rang orange and they demanded I pay this ~£80 bill.

I refused, found out about the removed bundle and started complaining.

 

They admitted fault and offered to refund one months worth of overcharging (I think it was £20).

But still demanded I pay the £80 as the refund would be applied to my next bill.

 

Even though they admitted fault they were unwilling to refund the full amount on the basis that I should have told (caught) them sooner.

Its like saying: we know you're a mass murderer, but seeing as we didn't catch you earlier, we will only prosecute you for the last one!

 

I said I was unwilling to pay and that they should disconnect me (I was out of contract).

My phone was subsequently disconnected, incoming and outgoing, but they continued to bill me for a futher 2 months ending up with the total bill of around £200.

This was for service I did not recieve.

And the overcharging amount was well in excess of the £80 demanded from me initially.

Hence why I believe they owe me.

 

The question is, Im not sure whether to pusue this line of defence, or just the standard 'I know nothing' defence. I understand it may be more risky, but I see how much hassle the other stlyes of defence have caused people. I doubt they have any real records as its changed hands a few times over the years.

 

I appeiciate any help you can give me, and you will probably see more of me in the coming months as a few deadlines are approaching nicely. But I would hate to have a ccj from the one debt I know for a fact I dont owe.

[AndyOrch]

Hi Andon

 

If you post the details of their P.o.C (verbatim).Judging from the above post you seem to have a substantive paper trail to enable a fully particularised defence.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[andonandon]

Thankyou, here goes:

 

THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS 186.17

BEING THE BALANCE OF CONSIDERATION

OUTSTANDING TO IT UNDER ACCOUNT

NUMBER A**********

IN RESPECT OF SERVICES RENDERED

TO THE DEFENDANT.

 

THE CLAIMANT ALSO CLAIMS INTEREST

THEREON PURSUANT TO S.69 COUNTY

COURT ACT 1984 LIMITED TO ONE YEAR

TO THE DATE HEREOF AT THE RATE OF

8% PER ANNUM AMOUNTING TO 0.00.

 

Ill check the account number and see if it tallies up when i get home form work later. They have added on the usual £65 costs to the total. The claimant is listed as:

 

ARROW GLOBAL GUERNSEY LIMITED

LA PLAIDERIE HOUSE

LA PLAIDERIE

ST PETER PORT

GUERNSEY GY1 1WG

 

Issue date is the 16th of this month, recieved today.

 

I think I may have had some correspondance from them, and frederickson. They have also aquired a number of mine from somewhere that MUST be a breach of the data protection act. The sim card is in an alarm system not a phone but it shows what number called it. AFAIK its not registered to me, it was bought by my other half with cash and the number didnt show on my bank statement when I topped it up so god only knows how they found it. but thats a separate issue.

 

Im not looking for a 'free lunch' just a few pointers to help me decide which way to take it, I appreitiate any help you can give me.

[42man]

In which case you defend in full, write concisely and clearly without waffle about the situation and the final shot should be 'The claimants claim to any relief is denied.' either that or you could put in a counter claim.

[andonandon]

Hi, im about to submit my defence on this, but i might need a little advice.

 

Upon checking the amounts in detail, they arent quite as easy to proove as I first thought, theres no evidence of the larger bundle ever being on there so it wont be as easy to proove going down that route. the amounts of the bills show unusual activity though.

 

So I asked for any relevant information they could get and got some back but im not really sure if they have provided enough to stand up in court, my defence needs to be in by the end of the week and I think i need a few pointers.

Ill now list what I asked for, and their responses:

 

1. the service agreement

 

they said:

it was the policy of orange mobile to issue agreements and t+c's on or around the date of the contract and statements throughout the duration of the agreement.

(I cant find anything of the sort and I keep everything)

 

2. the notice of assignment

 

they provided one, but it's a made up one as it doesent match the one I have (the dates are wrong and such like, and its a photocopy??? hmm...)

 

3. the original default notice

 

they said: the original default notice would have been sent to me by the original creditor (i cant find one anywhere)

 

4. the credit agreement

 

in the particulars of claim they were quite vauge so I was unsure what it was they were refering to, they said its for 'service and not credit'. (not sure how I can owe them without credit though lol)

 

5. the notice of sums in arrears

 

this appears to have fallen on deaf ears and has not been mentioned in any of the 3 letters I have recieved from them, does it only refer to cca agreements? but surely there must be some credit involved, otherwise how would they have given me an expensive phone to be effectively paid for on a monthly basis for a 12 month 'contract', the monthly bills being far higher than they would be on a lessor phone? this may be a separate issue.

 

 

They have provided a statement of account showing debits, credits and balance with my name and address covering a number of years.

 

Is what they have provided airtight and will I have to pay? or should I submit my defence as I initially intended (being only able to disprove about half of the debt now), or is there a full defence in there somewhere?

[ScarletPimpernel]

What services have Arrow Global rendered to the defendant?

[andonandon]

Apart from a few headaches and many lost work hours you mean?lol. If this is a valid defence ill be happy to go that route, my only concern is the notice of assignment

[andonandon]

So im thinking something like this:

 

1. The claimant Arrrow Global Guensey Ltd have not rendered any services to the defendant.

 

2. When asked for a copy of any service agreement(s) relating to the alledged debt none were provided.

 

I therefore do not achnowledge this debt or any part thereof.

 

The Claimants claim to relief is denied.

 

I believe that the contents of this defence are true.

 

 

Sound good? too much? too little? This is all a bit new to me!