carter/lowells claim form HBOS Overdraft - could be SB'd? - help

[bdcarr]

Yes I thought that but wanted to check I wasnt shooting myself in the foot.

 

Strange to assign when court proceedings have commenced.

 

Any particular questions I should be asking apart from the obvious?

[AndyOrch]

No not really except that if it as been assigned (and Freddy's are not just acting/collecting) then invite them to withdraw the claim as they are no longer the legal owners of the debt.

[bdcarr]

Thx

 

Asked a variety of questions and doubt I will receive anything back quickly

[bdcarr]

Well no surprise that Im not getting a straight answer.

 

Bryan Carters Solicitors (BCS) work with Fredricksons, and are working on Lowell's behalf.

 

Although Lowell own the right to collect the debt, you will need to request the additional information from BCS directly.

 

BCS refuse to give any information and if lowell are the claimant then surely they need to provide the details too.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Lowell are awkward to say the least!

 

 

Freds usually only collect/manage accounts, on behalf of debt purchasers.

 

 

Any one of the parties should be able to answer your questions, if they are not doing so

complain to Ms Sara de Tute, Director of Legal & Compliance at The Lowell Group.

[AndyOrch]

I personally would just concentrate on claim......try to avoid all the cloak and dagger of theses companies trying to hide behind each other.

[bdcarr]

Thanks both for advice.

 

I am just trying to gather a copy of the documentation to prove if it is valid but no one is helping from Lowell or BC in providing the information required. I know it was an overdraft and I know it was an account set up in 1995. I really did think it was defaulted in 2006 along with the loan and I it wasnt on my credit report until sept of 2013.

 

Halifax/Bank of Scotland sent me a lettern(dated 15th July 2013) telling me it assigned the debt to Lowell.

 

It still beggars belief that a debt that allegedly defaulted in june 2008 and I only just receive the assignment in 2013.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Default and assignment/sale are two separate matters, debts are sold in bulk not individually so sale will be delayed until a significant portfolio has been amassed.

[bdcarr]

Thanks Brigadier

 

I know it has gone via Wetcloths back in 2008, Nelson & Partners twice and Lowell twice. All in the last 5 years.

[bdcarr]

Evening CAG,

 

Standard letter received from BC stating still want to settle out of court and a copy of the direction.

[bdcarr]

I have received a response from the courts today as follows:

 

1. The defence is struct out on the grounds that it fails to disclose adequate particulars of the defence. Unless by the 9th of April. the defendant files with the court, and serves the Claimant with, a further defence that discloses full and adequate particulars of a defence to the claim, the claimant may apply to enter judgment by lodgement of N205 or by application for judgment.

 

HELP - Whats my next move?

[AndyOrch]

What defence did you submit? What were their particulars ?

 

Regards

 

Andy

[bdcarr]

Good question: I believed I had submitted as below but could be wrong.....would I be best submitting this again.

 

defence

1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and 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. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had financial dealings with HBOS . 3.Paragraph 2 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served last year from either the Claimant or HBOS. 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 with the Claimant; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and © show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

5. On receipt of this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 77/78 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 section 77/78 request and remain in default and with regards to my CPR 31.14 request have stated that they are under no obligation to disclose any documentation on which their claim is based.

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.

[AndyOrch]

Has the court struck it out of their own initiative ?

 

" The defence is struct out on the grounds that it fails to disclose adequate particulars of the defence"

 

Is it not meant to be the claim is struck out ...never heard of a defence requiring adequate particulars of the defence ?

 

Also as its one of my defences ......none have ever been struck out

 

Andy

[bdcarr]

Yes the court has, I have to submit another or judgement will be made...

[AndyOrch]

Well please teach me how to draft a defence with adequate particulars of the defence.....Makes no sense ...bad English.

 

You cant be more particularised than the above draft ....its the claimants particulars that are vague that the courts usually strike out.

[bdcarr]

Received the following - Thanks Andy for your help

 

The claimant shall by 22nd of May file with the court and serve the defendant with

 

1) Copy of the original agreement that forms the basis of the original debt

2) Copy of statements of account that show the original transactions on which the claim is based, limited to the last ten pages of active transactions

3) Copy of the notice of assignent(s) alleged to have been served on the defendant

4) A statement verified by statement of truth setting out ho the figure of £650.74 is calculated and, in the event that there has been more than one assignment of debt, setting out the history of the debt and its assignment

5) The claimant will be restricted at any hearing to reliance on the documents disclosed. If the claimant is unable to produce any document(s) as listed above it must file and serve a statement explaining what search has been made and why it cannot be produced.

6) If the claimant fails to comply with the entirety above of this order, its claim will stand automatically struck out.

[AndyOrch]

So it was the claimants particulars and not your defence?

 

Nice directions above which fit perfectly to the defence I drafted for you:-)

 

Regards

 

Andy

[oleg]

Agreed. They are truly excellent, well crafted Directions. I wonder if some of the stipulations could even be adopted / adapted into defences in certain cases. I mean by way of gracefully "suggesting" some of these actions and caveats to the court.

Forgive me for butting in on your thread bdcarr, I will now butt out again.

[bdcarr]

no probs Oleg

 

Please use where applicable.

[bdcarr]

Well nothing received yet and not to tempt fate but as the debt becomes statue barred on the 17th June 2014. Would SB come into play or as the proceedings started prior, would this supersede the SB status.

[ims21]

The issue of a claim stops the clock so if they have issued before the SB date then SB won't come into it.

[bdcarr]

D-Day tomorrow, not heard anything so what should i expect next....obviously got to give a few days

[citizenB]

I dont think MCOL send out letters saying that the claim is stayed - so after the 28 days has passed, you could perhaps wait a few more days to be on the safe side and then telephone MCOL and ask the status of the account.

 

If they advise it has been stayed, then either side can then apply to the court to lift the stay to proceed.. either the claimant because they have proof that it isnt SB'd or that they want to proceed or the defendant to have the claim struck out.

 

Unfortunately, there will be a charge for this unless you are exempt for one reason or another.

[AndyOrch]

The thread is at Directions stage CB ...the poster is referring to the following :-

 

The claimant shall by 22nd of May file with the court and serve the defendant with

 

1) Copy of the original agreement that forms the basis of the original debt

2) Copy of statements of account that show the original transactions on which the claim is based, limited to the last ten pages of active transactions

3) Copy of the notice of assignent(s) alleged to have been served on the defendant

4) A statement verified by statement of truth setting out ho the figure of £650.74 is calculated and, in the event that there has been more than one assignment of debt, setting out the history of the debt and its assignment

5) The claimant will be restricted at any hearing to reliance on the documents disclosed. If the claimant is unable to produce any document(s) as listed above it must file and serve a statement explaining what search has been made and why it cannot be produced.

6) If the claimant fails to comply with the entirety above of this order, its claim will stand automatically struck out.

 

Regards

 

Andy