Claim Form DLC/Hillies old-MBNA credit card *** Settled by Tomlin Order***

[Alloyz1]

Yes, but not sure how successful they are after a SJ?

 

I presume the court will allow the claimant to address my WS evidence at a hearing so not allow the strike out.

 

??

 

A

[Guest]

claimant stated that they will not oppose set aside (unless they now change their mind!)? so, forthcoming hearing is to confirm the set aside and then re your strike out app'n which they will oppose? if no strike out, then should continue as norm? unless J decides things otherwise?

each parties WS can be addressed.

check with andy

Edited September 13, 2013 by Ford

[Alloyz1]

Hi

 

Just a few questions after a little thought and discussuon:

 

The Notice of hearing of Application states "The hearing of the defendants application for judgement to be set aside will take place at......." No mention of my strike out application. Is that an important omission?

 

Would this hearing possibly continue on to consider the claimants original claim, or would that be a seperate hearing, as currently we have not filled out the DQ and I have not seen any additional evidence from the claimant except the agreement, T&C and DN so would be hard pressed to respond without being able to consider their evidence?

 

If the claimant is not opposing the set aside, could the DJ go against that and let summary judgement stand?

 

Many thanks

 

A

Edited September 13, 2013 by Alloyz1

[Ganymede]

No it's not an important omission and nothing to worry about as long as your application asks for a strike out.

 

The judge will probably give directions for filing DQs etc at the hearing if he doesn't strike out the Claimant's claim.

 

There's no way to predict what will happen so best be as prepared as possible.

[Alloyz1]

Appreciate that Ganymede, I think I have everything in order but would appreciate someone having a look at my WS to make sure there is no obvious errors.

 

I have submitted my WS as evidence to support my application to set aside and strike out, but we have not got to the DQ or disclosure stage yet in the original claim, so presume I could alter it as it has not been submitted in response to the original claim?

[Ganymede]

Appreciate that Ganymede, I think I have everything in order but would appreciate someone having a look at my WS to make sure there is no obvious errors.

 

I have submitted my WS as evidence to support my application to set aside and strike out, but we have not got to the DQ or disclosure stage yet in the original claim, so presume I could alter it as it has not been submitted in response to the original claim?

 

 

 

Sorry when is your application being heard?

[Alloyz1]

1st Oct

[Ganymede]

Ok so you have a few weeks.

 

You can't really amend the WS served with the application but as a LiP you could just play dumb and serve a new WS on the Claimant and the Court as soon as possible if that's what you want to do.

[Alloyz1]

I think the WS is good to use tbh.

 

Its frustrating when you find minor grammatical errors though!

 

Thanks Gany, appreciate your input

 

A

[Ganymede]

I think the WS is good to use tbh.

 

Its frustrating when you find minor grammatical errors though!

 

Thanks Gany, appreciate your input

 

A

 

 

 

If it's only minor spelling and grammar I wouldn't worry about it.

[AndyOrch]

Responding to your PM Alloyz.

 

I see Gany has clarified your queries.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Alloyz1]

Appreciate that Andy

 

A

[Guest]

alloyz

have a look for eg at cpr rule 3.4 and associated practice direction 3a, which is the basis of your SO application. if they negate that ie show 'reasonable grounds' for bringing their claim, then J wouldn't ordinarily strike out their claim?

Edited September 15, 2013 by Ford

[Alloyz1]

Hi ford

 

The set aside is the main part of the application, if I got strike out as well that would be a bonus! I will submit my WS proves they have no case.

 

I don't expect to get SO to be honest, but you never know and at least it makes the claimant work for it!

 

A

[AndyOrch]

" I will submit my WS proves they have no case."

 

Your WS should prove that you have a defence not that they have no case...they obviously have a case they have an agreement.

[Alloyz1]

Point taken Andy

[Alloyz1]

First time I will ever have been to court!! Quite nervous... Gulp

[AndyOrch]

The word Court conjures up visions of wigs/gowns and witness boxes....think of it more of a room with chairs and tables.

[Alloyz1]

Okay! Thats reassuring.

 

Thanks

A

[Alloyz1]

Hi

 

Set aside and strike out hearing next week.

 

I submitted my WS to support my application to SA and SO.

 

The claimant has now produced a fully compliant set of T&C which addresses every aspect of my WS....... This set has never been produced in 4 years of dispute.....

 

My WS was based around the T&C they had previously produced? They have confirmed twice a different set were in place, until they recieved my WS and now these?

 

Further the OC has confirmed a totally different set were in place...

 

Any advice?

[AndyOrch]

Was this document disclosed at Standard Disclosure N265? pre judgment...have they permission to introduce it as evidence?

[Alloyz1]

We have not reached Standard Disclosure as yet.

 

They went for SJ and attained it. I did not recieve any application or supporting evidence at that stage, just a DO stating SJ.

 

I filed application to SA and SO and supported this with my WS.

 

Only after I filed this has this new compliant set of T&C been included

[AndyOrch]

Mmmmm I see .....as I have stated earlier in your thread Alloyz defences based on T&C or Default Notices are a gamble and weak...It may have been wise to accept their offer of settlement when they broached it.

 

REgards

 

Andy

[Alloyz1]

I sent a letter OC with the T&C claimant is relying on (or was relying on) asking if these were in force at the time of signing.

 

They have replied with 'no' and supplied the set in force at the time of signing (the OC set have never been provided by the claimant! and is not the claimants first or new set!)

 

I may need to change a few things with my defence I think

[Alloyz1]

Apologies, the above post is a bit of a panicked ramble...

 

I have this morning emailed the claimant a copy of the letter I have from the OC confirming which T&C were in force at the time the agreement was signed. The letter included the T&C the OC refers to.

 

The letter therefore confirms none of the T&C the claimant relies on are the correct ones.

 

Further, the T&C stated by the OC as the ones in force at the time I signed the agreement are not compliant with CCA74.

 

Lets see what I get back.... Very interresting Monday morning

 

A