Shoesmiths Claim Form For Natwest loan, 7 days to reply !

[Old Cogger]

Only if they wish to respond within the 28 days otherwise it is stayed.

 

O.K. Thankyou.

[citizenB]

That clarified for me as well andy. I assumed it was automatically transferred once the claimaint confirmed their intention to proceed.

[dck321]

Yes...... whether it is true will be confirmed when (if ) you receive an AQ (Allocation Questionnaire)

 

Ok thanks a lot For the advice

[dck321]

Hi have just received the alocation questionaire, and am a bit stumped how to answer it,

any help will be welcome

[AndyOrch]

Post #59 dck :- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?374588-Sigmaspv1-N1-old-HSBC-OD./page3 Edit to suit.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[dck321]

thank you

 

shall i answer all questions the same (obviously apart from the personal details etc)

[AndyOrch]

The majority yes except "other " or G that is unique to each claim.

[dck321]

Brill thanks

[dck321]

hi i have recieve this letter today

stating: we enclose a copy of our letter that has today been filed with the court for your records.

 

 

 

thanks

 

Damian

[AndyOrch]

Hi dck

 

Shoos are now delaying the process of filling their AQ by requesting a stay to try to narrow the issues in line with the overriding objective CPR1.

 

You can read that in two ways yes its genuine and they will approach you to try to resolve matters

 

or there is something in the defence that has unsettled them/struck a nerve ....time will tell.

 

If the Court disallows the stay then you are in your rights to request strike out pursuant to CPR 26.

 

(8) Where a party does not file an allocation questionnaire by the date specified, the court will make such order as it considers appropriate, including –

 

(a) an order for directions;

(b) an order striking out the claim;

(c) an order striking out the defence and entering judgment; or

(d) listing the case for a case management conference.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[dck321]

Hi Andy

 

have received yet another letter from the court?

[DonkeyB]

Well, they haven’t got long to ‘narrow the issues’. I’m guessing you have heard no more from them?

 

After this stay, they would need your agreement for any further delay in complying.

[citizenB]

A "Proper Officer" ? What is one of them ?

 

Have Shoosmiths made any contact with you in respect of their last letter to the court and you regarding "narrowing the issues" ? If it comes to the point where you need to complete your AQ, then I think you need to raise this issue..

 

That on DATE the claimant requested a stay of one month in order to narrow issues etc, yet they have made no contact with you at all.

[AndyOrch]

Hi dck

 

Standard procedure once both parties have selected settle within the AQ...it neither parties have attempted to mediate then you either approach or request further extension or file a further AQ...stating no settle and you can state why!!!.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[dck321]

Hi I have just received this letter (which is a duplicate of the last one)

once again shoosmiths are requesting another stay to narrow the issues

for a month but have yet to make any contact at all:?:

[DonkeyB]

I imagine their problem is that they want to avoid completing their AQ because they have a sticking point with their case. This should have been sorted BEFORE they brought court action. It is not your fault. You are ready for trial, providing they provide the requisite documents to back their case.

 

The overriding objective is not just about cost – it is about justice, and you are now being prejudiced by these unnecessary and unexplained delays. They have not identified the issues they are trying to narrow – their PoC is clear, as is your defence.

 

Refer back to Andy’s post #60 – I think you should oppose the request and apply for a strike out of their case. You need to contact the court asap.

[dck321]

hi

 

thanks will read through and then contact the court

 

thank you

[dck321]

hi

 

have read through the post and am about to ring the court do i request for a strike out over the phone stating the reasons given in yours and andys posts or will they just give me another form to fill in.

if so i will go and collect today.

 

thank you

[DonkeyB]

I think you may need eventually to put in an application on an N244, but in the meantime I think it’s wise to inform the court that you oppose any further extension as you have received no contact from the claimant, and have no idea what the issues are. Point out that, under CPR, the claimant now requires your permission for any further extension or delay. If you are lucky, the court may agree with you, and write saying all parties should now file AQs.

 

Last time around, their letter and request was dealt with by a court officer – you don’t want that happening again.

 

Can you send a fax to the court to confirm any conversation you may have?

[dck321]

Thanks

 

have just spoke to the court they originally told me that i could not refuse a stay as we have both agreed to settle, but after i stated the CPR she put me on hold to speak to her line manager!!! she stated that they had not yet recieved the copy of the letter (but it is not suprising as i received mine on saturday.)

 

after several minutes she came back and said i was absolutely right and she would put on the system that their request for a stay has been refused by the deffendant.

 

She also told me to send an email confirming the conversation and any other points i wished to make to the court defendants email address which will automatically get added to the case

 

wil wait and see what happens next

 

Thanks

[DonkeyB]

Fantastic. Well done. I think she had assumed AQs had been entered and both parties agreed to try and settle, but of course that is NOT the case.

 

Bear in mind that things will have to happen now – either they enter their AQ and continue (as do you) – and your defence is extremely strong – or they give up.

 

In your email just reiterate the points we’ve been through on here.

 

– You have entered a defence

– You stand by your defence

– The claimant has admitted on the phone that they litigated because they claim you had not completed an I&E (you were not asked to, nor sent one), and the claimant did not follow pre-action protocols

– You have continued with the agreed payments which may bring rise to estoppel

– The claimant asked the court for time to narrow the issues, but you have received no contact from the claimant about the supposed ‘issues’, and neither has the court

– You are prejudiced because you want your defence to be heard in a court

– The claimant is acting unreasonably in requesting a further stay without providing good reason, as well as their failure to try and bypass CPR in failing to request your agreement, and there is no reason why AQs cannot now be completed

– In the light of the above, you do not agree to a further stay, and respectfully ask that the court denies the claimant’s request for a further delay, and orders that AQs be filed.

Edited April 2, 2013 by DonkeyB

[DonkeyB]

Some of the above isn’t actually relevant to your request to deny, but it rams your case home.

[citizenB]

They really take the mickey dont they ?

[DonkeyB]

Shoosmiths are not usually this cavalier or careless.

[dck321]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]43073[/ATTACH]

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]43074[/ATTACH]

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]43072[/ATTACH]

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]43071[/ATTACH]

 

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]43070[/ATTACH]

 

 

 

once again hope these are better

Edited April 11, 2013 by citizenB
reorganised attachments