Mr Nunnyrose's Lloyds CC, no CCA***Set A Side***and now Discontinued***

[nunnyrose]

yes, the court did, but today I have a letter from their solicitor "We enclose by way of service the following documents"

the enclosures are obviously just copies of the notice of hearing and application notice.

 

I'm struggling a bit with my letter to the court but will post up my amended draft shortly if you wouldn't mind having a quick look

[nunnyrose]

amended draft

 

 

I have received an Application notice and a General Form of Judgment or Order for the above claim number. I telephoned the court offices today who have advised me that I should write to inform the court that:-

 

I am a litigant in person with no legal representative.

 

I object to the claimants request for Relief from sanctions pursuant to CPR 3.9 from the order dated 9th March 2015 as I can see no reason why an extension of time is necessary.

 

A redacted letter was supplied to the claimant’s solicitors by way of my Application to Set Aside on 2nd February 2015.The redacted letter showed enough information to prove that there was no debt.

The Notice of Hearing for setting aside was 3rd February 2015 informing all parties that the hearing would take place on 9th March 2015

There was no evidence given at the hearing on 9th March 2015 that the claimant had made any attempt to request information from the original creditor. They had had over a month to collect information but chose to rely on my redacted letter.

I too relied upon the redacted letter, previously supplied to the court and the claimants solicitor, and this was presented by me as evidence at the hearing were by both Deputy District Judge XXX and the claimants’ barrister confirmed and agreed that there was no debt.

 

This resulted in the Order being made that:

• The judgment against me was set aside

• The claimant must file and serve amended Particulars of Claim by 4pm on 7th April 2015. In default, the claim will stand struck out.

 

This gave the claimant a further 28 days to gather the information.

With respect, if an extension of time is allowed the only outcome will be a duplicate of information already supplied. The claimant will not be in a position to file and serve an amended Particulars of Claim.

[nunnyrose]

... and I get your point Andy, I wont send a copy to Solicitors

[AndyOrch]

Need to add their application since 7th April and bring it up to date.

[nunnyrose]

Need to add their application since 7th April and bring it up to date.

 

Thanks Andy, sometimes I cant see the forest for the trees !

[AndyOrch]

Just detail their application and what order they seek and why you intend to make application to object...then your CS is up to date and also supporting your application.

 

Regards#

Andy

[nunnyrose]

Done! thanks

[nunnyrose]

Could some kind knowledgeable soul have a look at my case summary. I've got to get this delivered early next week and I've been working really really hard on it but would like some encouragement/criticism.......

 

Case Summary

 

25th August 1999: The Defendant and Lloyds TSB (the Bank) entered into an agreement regulated by the consumer credit Act 1974 for Credit Card ending in number XXXX. PPI was added as a condition of acceptance.

October 2001: The Bank converted the credit card to account ending in number XXXX

September 2003: The defendant stopped using the card for transactions and made monthly payments in an effort to clear the outstanding balance of approx. £3XXX

November 2008: The defendant entered into a debt management plan. The interest was frozen and the bank cancelled the PPI policy

April 2009: The Bank passed the account to their recoveries team, the balance was £4xxx

January 2011: The defendant cancelled Debt Management Plan

August 2011: The defendant made a formal request pursuant to s.77/78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA request) for a true copy of the credit agreement for account number ending (2nd No.). This request, to date has not been complied with.

20th March 2012: The defendant made a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998 to the bank for all information held in relation to any dealings the defendant had had with the bank. To date this has not been fully complied with.

5th November 2012: The defendant wrote to the Bank regarding mis- selling of the PPI policy.

24th June 2014: The account was assigned to Cabot Financial Ltd (the claimant)

3rd December 2014: The claimant instructed Restons solicitors.

29th December 2014: The defendant received a County Court Claim Form issued 22nd December 2014.

14th January 2015: Judgment was awarded, in default for the claimant.

15th January 2015: The defendants claim for PPI was upheld by the Bank, the account was recalculated from 1999 which put the account into credit at April 2009 resulting in indebtedness to the defendant.

2nd February 2015: The defendant received notification of the CCJ and applied for a set aside hearing.

9th March 2015: The Judgment was set aside and the claimant was ordered to file and serve amended particulars of claim by 7th April. In default the claim would be struck out.

31st March 2015: The claimant made an application for Relief from Sanction pursuant to CPR 3.9 from the order dated 9th March,

1st May 2015: The defendant wrote to the court with his objections as he felt an extension of time should not be necessary.

2) Itemised List of Issues:

I'm struggling with this

 

3) Draft Order or Direction Sort:

 

“IT IS ORDERED THAT:-

 

1. The Claimant's application for Relief from Sanctions is dismissed.

2. The Claim against the defendant is struck out.

 

 

4) Up to date time estimate, if there is to be a Final Hearing:

struggling here to

 

Thanks in advance

Edited May 22, 2015 by nunnyrose
bits added

[citizenB]

Will leave message for andyorch for you.

[citizenB]

When they changed the account number, did they change the type of card you had ?

[nunnyrose]

When they changed the account number, did they change the type of card you had ?

 

yes CB, I think so. The 1st card was an Asset card, I think just mastercard. The 2nd card was both mastercard and Visa I think. I originally put in separate PPI claims for each card, but it then became apparent that card 2 followed on from card 1.

[nunnyrose]

Ignore the case summary above, I've reworked it as follows, but would still appreciate some feedback

Claim Number : XXXX

 

Claimants Name: Cabot Financial (UK) Limited. Ref:xxxx

 

Defendants Name: Mr NunnyRose, Litigant in Person

 

 

 

Case Summary:

 

1) On xx August 1999 The Defendant entered into an agreement with Lloyds TSB (the Bank) regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for credit card account number 1234. Payment Protection Insurance (PPI) was added as a condition of acceptance. The credit card account was closed in October 2001 and a new credit card facility was opened for account number 5678.

 

2) In August 2011 the Defendant made a formal request by way of a section 78 request for a true copy of the credit agreement for account number ending 5678. This request, to date has not been complied with, and the defendant informed the Bank that the account was in dispute.

On 20th March 2012 the Defendant made a Subject Access Request under the Data Protection Act 1998 to the Bank, for all information held in relation to any dealings the Defendant had had with the bank. To date this has not been fully complied with.

The Defendant wrote to the Bank on 5th November 2012 regarding mis- selling of PPI policy for both accounts.

 

3) On or around 29th December 2014 The Defendant received a County Court Claim Form issued 22nd December 2014, which the Defendant did not respond to and Judgment by default was entered against the Defendant on 14th January 2015. On 15th January 2015 the Defendants’ claim for mis- sold Payment Protection Insurance for both accounts was upheld, and the Bank recalculated the accounts from 1999. This put the claimant back into the position he would have been in had PPI not been added. As a result, as of April 2009 the account was in credit by £1xxx.xx

 

4) On 2nd February 2015 the Defendant applied for a set aside hearing, and the hearing took place on 9th March 2015, where it was agreed by all parties present that there was no debt to the original credititor or to the Claimant. The Judgment was set aside and the claimant was ordered to file and serve amended particulars of claim by 7th April 2015. In default the claim would be struck out.

On 31st March 2015 the Claimant made an application for Relief from Sanction pursuant to CPR 3.9 from the order dated 9th March 2015. The Defendant wrote to the court on 1st May 2015 to object to an extension of time.

 

 

 

 

Itemised List of Issues:

 

It is respectfully submitted the following issues are to be determined:

 

(i) Does the Credit Agreement (CCA) dated on or around 2nd September 1999 and regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as referred to in the Claimants Particulars of Claim relate to credit card account number 4567, which was entered into in October 2001 or does claim relate to credit card account number 1234 entered into in August 1999?

 

 

(ii) Does the redacted letter referred to, and presented at the set aside hearing of 9th March 2015, show a credit balance of £1xxx.xx to the Defendant as of April 2009 thus extinguishing the alleged debt as stated within the Claimants Particulars of Claim?

 

(iii) Does the redacted letter presented at the set aside hearing of 9th March 2015 confirm that the Payment Protection Policy mis-selling applied to both of the above accounts and that the accounts are linked and that the Defendant has been refunded monies owed to him in respect of both accounts?

 

(iv) Is there any more information that can be obtained from the original creditor that would alter that there is no debt owed by the Defendant?

 

 

 

Draft Order or Direction Sort:

 

IT IS ORDERED THAT:-

 

1. The Claimant's application for Relief from Sanctions is dismissed.

2. The Claim against the Defendant is struck out.

 

 

Up to date time estimate, if there is to be a Final Hearing:

still struggling with this, claimant is estimating that a final hearing will take up to 2 hours

 

 

I'm guessing AndyT is away at the moment, haven't seen him posting anywhere for a couple of days

[citizenB]

We are usually thin on the ground around Bank Holiday weekends, nunny

[nunnyrose]

Yes, I can understand that I was hoping somebody with legal knowledge might look in ....

[citizenB]

I am sure andy will look in on you as soon as he can

[citizenB]

Thats fine CB - so now the next stage is to see if the court allow relief from Sanctions...which will be determined at the next hearing.

 

Here you go - sorry nunnyrose.. andy had left a message for me to pass on to you.. I only just noticed

[nunnyrose]

excellent ! Thank you CB

any pointers on what I should put for estimate of time for final hearing?

I've only got tonight to sort it as it has to be delivered tomorrow.

[AndyOrch]

1 hour should be ample NR.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[nunnyrose]

Ta everso, I will report back here after the telephone hearing this week

[nunnyrose]

sorry, another quick question - am I allowed to record the telephone hearing?

[Ganymede]

sorry, another quick question - am I allowed to record the telephone hearing?

 

No. It would be contempt and technically you could face a fine or imprisonment.

[Ganymede]

CPR PD 39A

 

6.2 No party or member of the public may use unofficial recording equipment in any court or judge’s room without the permission of the court. To do so without permission constitutes a contempt of court. [section 9 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981]

 

 

This would apply to telephone hearings also.

[nunnyrose]

I won't be doing that then! Thanks Gany

[Ganymede]

I won't be doing that then! Thanks Gany

 

Good idea.

[nunnyrose]

"EXPLETIVES !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*

 

They got their extension of time quoting Denton + Mitchell

Judge was not opposed to extra time but would not accept the 8 weeks the claimant was requesting as considered they'd had enough time already.

However, granted them a further 28 days to file amended POC or in default claim will be struck out.

 

Feeling really deflated at the moment as this is going to drag on and on.....