The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.
1. Paragraphs 1 is noted and accepted that the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with Vanquis.I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.
2. Paragraph 2 is denied. The claimant pleads that the defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue. Given that the claimant has failed to comply with my CPR 31.14 request and failed to evidence such fact and would not be in a position as Assignee of debt to know the details of any alleged breach. The defendant has never received a Default Notice from the original creditor. As the claimants plead in their particulars precise knowledge of the default, they are put to strict proof to evidence such fact.
3. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.
4. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:
(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and
(b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and
(c) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and
(d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;
5. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.
6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
7. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.
8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
I will get my son to upload the video when he gets in.
No down hill slope just a small gradient and from the turning he came out of its maybe 15 shops until the traffic lights.
Maybe it didn't get faster but he feels like it did (not clear on the video)
I'm picking him up from work tonight I'll pay attention to the gradient when I go back.
He'd only changed up to 2nd so he wasn't driving fast
Upside he knows now to always be prepared for ice
Not sure why you keep changing your point 1 back to .....
1. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.
1. Paragraphs 1 is noted and accepted that the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with Vanquis.I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.
We you the court the claimant already knows ......The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. its on the claim form.
Keep it as post #59 add post #66 renumber job done.
Hi all
Update, so they still have not provided any statements/documents etc regarding the account (I have the original SAR though) and since the beginning of October I have received a letter stating that they believe the debit is not SB because a payment of £340 was made April/May 2014 (this is credit and refund mentioned earlier in the thread). They have so far not received the statements etc from the bank but will forward them on due course, but if I should contact them to arrange a payment plan.
I have since had a offer of a 50% settlement and then last week a 75% settlement. My view is that they are just hoping I will bite and pay them something but that is not going to happen, I have not communicated to them since that single telephone conversation back in July.
The one thing I have noticed when I use Check My File is that the account status was changed November 7th to Query at Equifax, even though the default expired on November 4th so it should have disappeared by now. The original Satans Bank default was removed on time, but the Cabot account reference is still there albeit not negatively impacting my score it just has a status of 'Q' against November and the balance showing. There is no history showing before November it almost looks like a new account was setup with a Query status against it.
Does anybody have any idea of what is going on here? The cynical side of my is thinking they are forcing me to get in touch with them in writing about the account before their incorrectly perceived April/May SB date passes. I know Equifax does take longer for updates compared to the others agencies and in a few weeks it may be gone.
I'm just wondering what peoples views are, personally my credit score is almost in the excellent bracket and I'm not planning to get any credit soon so it makes no difference to me for now.
Caledonian Moving and Storage - Disappearance of Belongings. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/418604-caledonian-moving-and-storage-theft-of-belongings/
Mobile users can now switch providers with one simple text. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/417284-mobile-users-can-now-switch-providers-with-one-simple-text/