Court Claim Marlin/restons - Lloyds TSB bank account

[andmf]

Just a thought, how could their claim proceed if they have no proof of how the debt accrued? Can they rely purely on the Notices of Assignment alone?

[AndyOrch]

Not entirely they will have to disclose evidence of the agreement/statements as the claim proceeds...hence Restons pressure on you to throw the towel in (before it gets to that stage).

 

Judgments can be obtained on the balance of probabilities but it has to be backed up with some evidence (Account History/agreement/statements etc).

 

Sit tight you will get another Restons special shortly.

 

Andy

[andmf]

With regards to my defence I just put in a holding defence as I didnt have enough information from their POC, will I be able to change this should I need to?

[AndyOrch]

Yes but if your holding defence is good enough and puts them to strict proof you may not need to and they may discontinue.

[andmf]

Hi All just got the court docs through:

 

Application Notice:

 

3. What order are you asking the court to make and why?

 

An ex-parte Order to:

 

1. Lift the stay on these proceedings.

 

2. Stike out the defence pursuant to CPR 3.4(2) on the basis that it discloses no reasonable grounds for defending the claim and/or is an abuse of the Court process, or

 

3. Enter Judgement for the sum of £1617.22.

 

Alternatively if the court is not minded to deal with this application on an ex-parte basis, the Claimant seeks an order:

 

1. To lift the stay on thses proceedings, and

 

2. Strike out the defence pursuant to CPR 3.4(2) on the basis that it disclosesno reasonable grounds for defending the claim and/or is an abuse of the Court process; or

 

3. In the alternative to (2) above an order for Summary Judgement against the defendant under CPR 24.4. The defendant has no real prospect of successfully defending the claimand there is no other compelling reason why the case should be disposed of at a trail; and

 

4. An order that the defendant do pay the Claimants costs on a contractual (indemnity) basis, pursuant to CPR 44.5

 

Attached to the papers are their witness statement, reconstited copies of the letter of assignment from Lloyds and Marlin II. And....

A printout page 1-23 of copies of bank statements from 27/12/07 to 05/12/08. (These are not copies or original statements they have an internet web page address on the bottom) so have been taken from somewhere on the internet. However going off them my last spend on this account was 20/05/08 taking the balance to 245.54 DR. The rest of the statments after that are entirely O/D Fees and Returned DD Fees taking it up to a balance at the end of 1136.82.

 

Now I realise why I moved away from Lloyds!!!

 

So can they use internet based printouts as evidence as statements?

Still no Facility Agreement?

Also I'm sure I read somewhere that when a debt is sold, all charges and fees have to be removed, is that right? therefore this claim is well over the odds.

 

Also on the application notice its states that if the respondent to this application for summary judgment wishes to rely on written evidence at the hearing, it must file a witness statement and serve copies on the claimants solicitors Mssr Rectums of Warrington at least seven days before the date set for the summary judgement hearing.

 

Any comments and help much appreciated. Court date is 31 March so I'm going to have to move on this one now. After my letters for statements and no response then they send this hmmmmm. Talk about abuse of the court system.

[andmf]

I think I have it

 

from thier POC

 

The Particulars of Claim are as follows:

The Claimant claims payment of the overdue balance due from the Defendant under a contractbetween the Defendant and Lloyds TSB bank PLC

dated on or about 28/02/1986 and assigned to the claimant on 31/10/2012 in the sum of £1136.82

 

So if they mention it in their POC they have to provide it yes?

 

nowhere in their Docs is a facility agreement or T&C or contract so even if they have statements they have not mentioned in their POC but do not have the "Contract" they are not proving their claim?

[AndyOrch]

Hi responding to your PM

 

So now you need to respond to their application and serve your WS not less than 7 days pre hearing as to why your defence is not an abuse of process and as to why their claim is.

That their application should be dismissed and that they should provide the documentation requested which their claim relies upon.

You should put them to proof to explain their penalty charges and fees and costs incurred.

 

In response to the above no they don't have to remove or adjust any fees on the assignment.The penalties were placed whilst it was with the OC.

Yes they refer to a contract...a contract is an agreement....an overdraft facility agreement complete with its T&Cs.If there is no agreement then that would imply that the overdraft was unauthorised and the debt was inflated by the OC fully aware that you did not have this facility.

 

Run through their WS paragraph by paragraph and refute their points as to why you disagree and why your defence does has merit and legal argument and why the claim should proceed.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[oleg]

Interesting that you signed in 1986 an agreement with LloydsTSB, a bank which was created in 1995.

[andmf]

Here's my Statement let me know what you think

 

Statement of

Mr xxxx xxxx

 

Statement dated

XXth March 2014

 

Claim No. xxxxxx

 

IN THE xxxx county court

 

BETWEEN:

 

Marlin II Europe Limited

Claimant

And

Mr xxx xxx

Defendant

 

WITNESS STATEMENT

 

I, xxxx xxxx, make this statement in response to the statement of xxxxxx, of Restons Solicitors, dated 6th February 2014.

 

1. In response to point 1 of the above mentioned statement I issued the claimant with a CCA request dated 28th February 2013 by recorded mail which has never been acknowledged nor timescale adhered to which has hindered a full and proper defence to this claim. Exhibited to this witness statement at AF1.

2. In response to point 2 of the above mentioned witness statement to date no Facility agreement and full Terms and conditions have been provided by the Claimant or their solicitors. As requested in my CPR 31.14 request dated 1st March 2013. Exhibited to this witness statement at AF2.

3. In response to point 3 of the above mentioned witness statement if Marlin II Europe Limited have been assigned all rights and duties under the account they have not provided the defendant with Notices of Default, Notice of Termination or any other documents required in respect of my CCA request.

4. In response to point 4 of the above mentioned witness statement no mention of Statements of Account are mentioned in their particulars of claim therefore these cannot be relied upon. If they are to be relied upon the Claimant is put on strict proof to explain their penalty charges and fees and costs incurred.

5. In response to point 7 of the above mentioned witness statement I refute this statement as I have contacted the Claimants Solicitors with a CPR Request on 1st March 2013 to which I have had no response.

6. In response to point 8 of the above mentioned witness statement, and in view of the above points I respectfully ask the court to dismiss this claim and award costs to the defendant as a litigant in person for 20 hours work on the basis that:

(i) The claimant has been given two opportunities to provide the correct documents for this claim and has failed to do so, in this the claimant and their solicitors, I respectfully submit have acted entirely unreasonably and have abused the Court Process. This gives the claim no merit.

(ii) The costs sought are, in my respectful submission, reasonable and proportionate.

7. If the court is not minded to dismiss this claim, then I respectfully ask it be adjourned and a trial date set.

8. This witness statement is based on the Claimants Particulars of Claim and the above mentioned Witness Statement. Should the Claimant produce documents as requested then the Defendant respectfully reserves the right to amend his defence.

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are True.

[andmf]

Can I use any of the below to back up my statement?

 

The Defendant notes that Under CPR 16 part 7.3 “where a claim is based upon a written agreement; (1) a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should be attached or served with the particulars of claim”, no such document or contract was attached to the Particulars of claim served by the claimant.

s127(3) of the CCA1974 provides that the court may not make an enforcement order unless a document containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor

 

If therefore any of the prescribed terms is missing, or incorrect, the agreement is not enforceable against the debtor, and the court is precluded from making an enforcement order.

 

(N.B - For the avoidance of doubt the 2006 Consumer Credit Act does not change the above legislation……

 

The Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Commencement No. 2 and Transitional Provisions and Savings) Order 2007 (No. 123 (C. 6))

Citation

1. This Order may be cited as the Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Commencement No.2 and Transitional Provisions) Order 2007.

Interpretation

2. In this Order “the 2006 Act” means the Consumer Credit Act 2006.

Commencement

3. — (1) The provisions of the 2006 Act specified in Schedule 1 shall come into force on 31st January 2007.

(2) The provisions of the 2006 Act specified in Schedule 2 shall come into force on 6th April 2007.

Transitional Provisions

4. Subject to article 5, section 1 of the 2006 Act shall have no effect for the purposes of the 1974 Act, in relation to agreements made before 6th April 2007. (cont)

5. Section 1 of the 2006 Act shall have effect for the purposes of the definitions of “debtor” and “hirer” in section 189(1) of the 1974 Act wherever those expressions are used in—

a)

sections 77A, 78(4A), 86A, 86B, 86C, 86D, 86E, 86F, 129(1)(ba) 129A, 130A and 187A of the 1974 Act;

(b)

section 143(b) of the 1974 Act in respect of an application under section 129(1)(ba) of that Act; and

©

section 185(2) to (2C) of the 1974 Act insofar as it relates to a dispensing notice from a debtor authorising a creditor not to comply in the debtor's case with section 77A of that Act,

in relation to agreements made before 6 April 2007)

 

REFERENCE TO CASE LAW

 

As the creditor has not provided the credit agreement Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2003] UKHL 40 states that:


‘….the effect of the failure to comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 was that the entire agreement ………….. was unenforceable. The statutory bar on its enforcement extended to First County Trusts's right to recover the total sum payable on redemption, which included the principal as well as interest.’

 

SUMMARY OF WILSON v FIRST COUNTY TRUST LTD (2003) UKHL 40

 

THE WILSON CASE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IN THE EVENT OF NO ACCEPTABLE CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENT THEN THE CREDITOR COULD NOT RECOVER MONIES OWED UNDER ORDINARY CONTRACT LAW REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY COULD PROVE THE DEBT EXISTED OR NOT – THIS WAS THE DECISION OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE BINDING IN THIS COURT

 

The law states that without a prescribed agreement the courts may not enforce under 127(3) and

 

1.In the case of Dimond v Lovell [2000] UKHL 27, Lord Hoffmann said , at page 1131:-

 

“Parliament intended that if a consumer credit agreement was improperly executed, then subject to the enforcement powers of the court, the debtor should not have to pay.”

 

2.Sir Andrew Morritt, Vice Chancellor in Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2001] EWCA Civ 633 said at para 26 that in the case of an unenforceable agreement:-

 

“The creditor must…be taken to have made a voluntary disposition, or gift, of the loan monies to the debtor. The creditor had chosen to part with the monies in circumstances in which it was never entitled to have them repaid;”

 

I refer to LORD NICHOLLS OF BIRKENHEAD in the House of Lords Wilson v First County Trust Ltd - [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) paragraph 29

” The court's powers under section 127(1) are subject to significant qualification in two types of cases. The first type is where section 61(1)(a), regarding signing of agreements, is not complied with. In such cases the court 'shall not make' an enforcement order unless a document, whether or not in the prescribed form, containing all the prescribed terms, was signed by the debtor: section 127(3). Thus, signature of a document containing all the prescribed terms is an essential prerequisite to the court's power to make an enforcement order.”

 

If the agreements are, as I expect, unenforceable by law or if no written agreement exists, then the respondent was in error when it stated that a liquidated and legally enforceable sum was due to the respondent at the time the demand was issued.

 

no default notice required by s87 (1) Consumer Credit act 1974 has been attached to the demand.

It is denied that any Default Notice in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant

Notwithstanding the above points, I put the claimant to strict proof that any default notice sent to me was valid. I note that to be valid, a default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope, dating and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237)

Service of a default notice is a statutory requirement as laid out in sections 87,88 and 89 Consumer Credit Act 1974. Section 87 makes it clear that a default notice must be served before a creditor can seek to terminate the agreement or demand repayment of sums due to a breach of the agreement. therefore without a valid default notice, I suggest the claimants case falls flat and cannot proceed and to do so is clearly contrary to the Consumer Credit Act 1974

Section 87(1) of the CCA 1974 says:

87.--(1) Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a default notice) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,--
(a) to terminate the agreement, or
(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum....

Section 88 says that the DN must be in the prescribed form and the associated regulation say what that form is. 

Thus, if the DN is not in the prescribed form, it is invalid and, under s87, the lender has no right of action.

Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119

 

The amount detailed in the Claimant’s claim, which is likely to include penalty charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Accordingly, the inclusion of penalty charges in the purported Notice of Assignment renders it entirely legally unenforceable. The Claimant has failed to comply with section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, by furnishing a Notice of Assignment in respect of that which is denied, that is inaccurate, W.F.Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke [1956].

 

2.10 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. claiming collection costs from a debtor in the absence of express

contractual or other legal provision

b. misleading debtors into believing they are legally liable to pay

collection charges when this is not the case, for example, when there

is no contractual provision

c. not giving an indication in credit agreements of the amount of any

charges payable on default

d. applying unreasonable charges, for example, charges not based on actual

and necessary costs

e. applying charges which are disproportionate to the main debt.

[AndyOrch]

Hi responding to your PM.

 

Your WS should be tweaked slightly as to oppose the claimants application...that is what it is in response to.Make it more informal ..it reads like a defence in its present state.

In your own words and why you dispute the claim/application.

 

They are applying to strike out your defence and if that fails then they are applying for summary judgment...take a read of CPR 3/CPR 24 to get a feel of what their application relies on.

 

You can refer to Case Law but do not include it (attach as exhibits).

 

Regards

 

Andy

[andmf]

I need some help with this now guys, I need to get the WS completed before tomorrow night so I can get it copied on Thurs and sent on Friday so I meet the deadline

 

Regards

 

andmf

[andmf]

2nd Version, hope this is better - I'm not very good at these I dont think

 

Statement of

Mr xxxx xxxx

 

Statement dated

XXth March 2014

 

Claim No. xxxxxx

 

IN THE xxxx County Court

 

BETWEEN:

 

Marlin II Europe Limited

Claimant

And

Mr xxx xxx

Defendant

 

WITNESS STATEMENT

 

I, xxxx xxxx, make this statement in response to the statement of xxxxxx, of Restons Solicitors, dated 6th February 2014.

 

2. To date no Facility agreement or Terms and Conditions have been shown to the defendant as mentioned in the claimants Particulars of Claim, despite the defendant requesting copies from both the claimant via a CCA request dated 28th February 2013 which was sent by recorded mail and signed for by the claimant on 2nd March 2013 according to the Royal Mail Website (Attached at XX1). Further to this I sent a CPR 31.14 request to the Claimants Solicitors (Attached at XX2) to which I have had no response whatsoever and I feel this has shown the Claimant and their Solicitors, to have acted unreasonably and have hindered me giving a proper defence to this claim, and they themselves are abusing the court process.

 

3. I believe that in the absence of a signed facility agreement, the claim cannot continue and the claimants in this action are abusing the court process by trying to get people to pay monies which they are not entitled to by threatening further costs if the defendant doesn’t admit to the claim. Please see attached case study in regards to agreements (XX3).

 

4. The claimants have delayed these proceedings at every available opportunity, and in doing this I believe their claim has no merit. I believe this claim is grossly inflated and I put the claimants to strict proof to explain their charges and fees set out on the statements they have previously submitted to support this application. Please see attached case study with regards to penalty charges being included in a notice of assignment (XX4).

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are True.

 

XX1 = CCA letter to Marlin

 

XX2= CPR 31.4 Letter to Restons

 

XX3 = As the creditor has not provided the credit agreement Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2003] UKHL 40 states that:


‘….the effect of the failure to comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 was that the entire agreement ………….. was unenforceable. The statutory bar on its enforcement extended to First County Trusts's right to recover the total sum payable on redemption, which included the principal as well as interest.’

SUMMARY OF WILSON v FIRST COUNTY TRUST LTD (2003) UKHL 40

THE WILSON CASE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IN THE EVENT OF NO ACCEPTABLE CONSUMER CREDIT AGREEMENT THEN THE CREDITOR COULD NOT RECOVER MONIES OWED UNDER ORDINARY CONTRACT LAW REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THEY COULD PROVE THE DEBT EXISTED OR NOT – THIS WAS THE DECISION OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS AND SHOULD THEREFORE BE BINDING IN THIS COURT

 

XX4= The amount detailed in the Claimant’s claim, which is likely to include penalty charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Accordingly, the inclusion of penalty charges in the purported Notice of Assignment renders it entirely legally unenforceable. The Claimant has failed to comply with section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, by furnishing a Notice of Assignment in respect of that which is denied, that is inaccurate, W.F.Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke [1956].

 

Any pointers in the right direction - is this better than the last one - or where I should be going would be much welcomed

[AndyOrch]

The content arevery much your own words and contentions so its difficult to advise what's correct what's incorrect...its should be an in-depth explanation of your defence and rebutle of their WS in support of their application.

 

I dont think you cover the reasons as to why their application should fail...as already advised using the CPR as your armoury.

 

It also needs a conclusion :-

 

In the circumstances the court is invited to conclude that there are reasonable grounds to suppose that I will be able to successfully defend the Claimant’s claim at trial and that the Claimant’s application for summary judgment against me should be dismissed .

 

Date: xx March 2014

 

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true

 

 

Signature

 

Regards

 

Andy

[AndyOrch]

There may be a WS included in the following successful case.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?241052-Irwin-Mitchell-NastyWest-overdraft-claim-***-Won-With-Costs***

[andmf]

OK I have done a bit more reading

- on their POC they state the debt arises from a contract between me and LLoyds,

 

however on their witness statement it is a current account facility,

 

does this then fall under CCA 1974?

in which case they must provide an agrrement to succeed with their claim?

 

the thread quoted above is very good,

 

do you think it would be prudent of me to attach an amended defence along the same lines to my witness statement

thus giving me more leverage to progress to trial?

 

Obviously its a different set of circumstances however I feel that both are running pretty parallel.

[AndyOrch]

OK I have done a bit more reading

- on their POC they state the debt arises from a contract between me and LLoyds,

 

however on their witness statement it is a current account facility,

 

does this then fall under CCA 1974?

in which case they must provide an agrrement to succeed with their claim?

 

the thread quoted above is very good,

 

do you think it would be prudent of me to attach an amended defence along the same lines to my witness statement

thus giving me more leverage to progress to trial?

 

Obviously its a different set of circumstances however I feel that both are running pretty parallel.

 

Agreements covered by a s74(3) determination, and satisfying the relevant conditions, are exempt from most Part V rules including s61(1) on execution. However, the Agreements Regulations will apply to any document embodying such an agreement, and to any term expressed in writing.

 

Are all bank overdrafts exempt?

 

The s74 determination in respect of bank overdrafts (see Q1.4) applies subject to the following conditions:

 

the creditor must inform the OFT in writing of his general intention to enter into such agreements;

the debtor must be informed, at or before the time an agreement is concluded, of the following:

the credit limit (if any) the annual rate of interest and any charges applicable, and the conditions under which these may be varied

the procedure for terminating the agreement;

 

the above information must be confirmed in writing.

 

Furthermore, where a debtor overdraws a current account with the tacit agreement of the creditor, and the account remains overdrawn for more than three months, the creditor must inform the debtor in writing not later than seven days after the end of that period of the annual rate of interest and any charges applicable.

 

You cant amend your defence without the courts permission and submitting it with a WS is not the correct procedure.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[andmf]

OK jst got back in, and Restons Court pack was waiting for me - exactly the same as I got from my local court only 5 days later!! Its a good job my local court are on the ball or I would of had 1 day to get my statement ready. On from last night so if my account was overdrawn for more than 3 months then the determination comes into play? am I reading that right? or if my overdraft was agreed by the bank on an ongoing basis to be reviewed on a set date the determination comes into play? did I read that bit right, I'm getting dizzy.

[andmf]

Another attempt at the witness statement

 

WITNESS STATEMENT

 

I, xxxx xxxx, make this statement in response to the statement of xxxxxx, of Restons Solicitors, dated 6th February 2014.

 

2. To date no Facility agreement or Terms and Conditions have been shown to the defendant as mentioned in the claimants Particulars of Claim, despite the defendant requesting copies from both the claimant via a CCA request dated 28th February 2013 which was sent by recorded mail and signed for by the claimant on 2nd March 2013 according to the Royal Mail Website (Attached at XX1). Further to this I sent a CPR 31.14 request to the Claimants Solicitors (Attached at XX2) to which I have had no response whatsoever and I feel this has shown the Claimant and their Solicitors, to have acted unreasonably and have hindered me giving a proper defence to this claim, and they themselves are abusing the court process.

 

3. I believe that in the absence of a signed facility agreement, and the claimants failure to provide this agreement as relied upon in their particulars of claim, gives me cause to believe the Claimant has no real prospect of succeeding at trial due to the lack of this evidence. Please see attached case studies in regards to agreements (XX3).

 

4. In response to the Claimants Witness statement the Claimants representatives state that the claim is for a Bank Account and in doing so infer that it doesn’t come under any form of agreement rules however, I believe that this account does come under the CCA as per the Director of Fair Tradings Determination under Section 74(1)(b) and it should not be exempt from Section V. The claimants have delayed these proceedings at every available opportunity, they have breached CPR 31.14 and in doing this I believe their claim has no merit.

 

5. In the circumstances the court is invited to conclude that there are reasonable grounds to suppose that I will be able to successfully defend the Claimant’s claim at trial and that the Claimant’s application for summary judgment against me should be dismissed.

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are True

[AndyOrch]

Much better IMHO.......you must remember that your WS is attacking theirs that supports their application for SJ...not the claim in whole...you will submit a further WS to do that should you defeat this application.

 

A simple way to check its validity and format is to look at each of their paragraphs and points and refute and offer alternative argument...which you have touched on above.

Look at the main points they offer as to why it should be struck out or Summary judgment allowed and trash their evidence.

 

Just one point they cant be in breach of a CPR request unless it has been directed by the court.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[andmf]

Thanks for that Andy - your HO means a lot in my household I can tell you, you have helped me from the beginning of this dilema and for that I cannot thank you enough. Going to get it tidied up now and all the bits copied tomorrow so I can get it to Restons for Monday, SD signed for of course. Once again Many Thanks - until the next stage

[AndyOrch]

Your very welcome....please do post your final draft if you get chance.

 

Best of luck

 

Andy

[andmf]

OOer forgot to ask do I need to send a copy of my statement to the court too?

[AndyOrch]

Yes ..Court/Claimant/File

[panther12]

I've not seen the claim form but as it's from restons I can guess it was signed "Restons Solicitors Limited" instead of an individual. Just wondering if it's worth mentioning it in your witness statement as their statement of case has not been verified with a statement of truth in accordance with CPR 22 practice direction 3.10, which says: "A legal representative who signs a statement of truth must sign in his own name and not that of his firm or employer."

 

I'm dealing with a claim from these people on behalf of a friend and asked rectums to replead their client's case with a verified statement of truth in accordance with CPR. They more or less told us to feck off so have now made an application to the court asking to strike out their statement of case as it has not been verified with a statement of truth and as it stands no individual is held accountable. We should hear something from the court in the next week or two.