Capquest/? claimform - LLoyds Credit card 'debt'

[AndyOrch]

Of course you can submit it on MCOL thats what your password on the claim form is for...once you have registered to use the service.

You dont attach anything to defence ( you cant anyway using MCOL).

 

My opinion its a little lengthy and screams this defence is based on them not disclosing but nothing about why I dispute the debt.

 

This bit is good (I recognise it well )

 

"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.

 

I have in the past had financial dealings with Lloydsi banking group .

 

I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment being terminated from either the Claimant or lloyds.

 

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; "

 

Downhill from there on IMHO.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[fishfood1]

hi

 

 

can my defence be posted even though I submitted acknowledgement online. im having problems signing into MCOL its saying to ring help desk (tried that hopeless) even though I put all correct details in

 

 

thanks

[Guest]

yes, can be posted, best with recorded or at least signed for. usually easier online though, mcol seems to sometimes play up at weekends!

have you amended yr defence as andy suggests?

you're deadline is the 1st?

[fishfood1]

hi ford

 

 

im just looking at it now

 

im in a right old flap now since MCOL decided to shut me out arghhh...

 

yes was just going to use the top which andy agreed with

 

was going to add that I had not received any defaults or letters or any form of correspondence from CQ or Lloyds.

 

I ve not lived at that address for 5 years and no mail has been passed to me by my ex (he says none ever dropped through the door).

 

If I cant get on later to MCOL I will post next day delivery tomorrow as its due Tuesday. (date on claim form 28/3)

 

 

thanks

[Guest]

issue date 28/2? so, the 2nd inclusive? if in doubt check with the court on monday first thing.

can even submit defence by email. ensure use their correct address if doing so.

[fishfood1]

hi ford

 

 

am sure its the 1/4 defence date, your right about MCOL playing up at weekends!

 

 

here's my defence it is similar to another threads defence. the debt was from my old address were my ex still lives I must of changed address with Lloyds further down the line. do I need to say anything about this at this stage?.

 

 

thanks

 

 

Defence

 

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.

 

I have in the past had financial dealings with lloyds banking group .

 

it is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment being terminated from either the Claimant or lloyds. it is denied I have ever been in receipt of any default notice(s) having been served or statutory demands/notice(s) from either the claimant or lloyds banking group

 

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;

[AndyOrch]

Hi this is a claim for an overdraft benlucy378 ?

 

Andy

[fishfood1]

hi andy

 

 

 

 

no its regarding a loan with Lloyds which has been assigned to CQ

 

 

thanks

[AndyOrch]

You must put them to strict proof to disclose...edit to suit (dates CPR CCA) etc dont add/remove paragraphs.

 

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.

[fishfood1]

thanks andy im so very grateful )

[fishfood1]

hi Andy

 

ive amended to suit, is it ok just date and original creditor

 

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 Lloyds.

 

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 Lloyds.

 

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, dated 10/3/2014 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 dated 28/02/2014, 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, dated 10/3/2014 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.

 

thanks again Andy

[AndyOrch]

[fishfood1]

thank you so much my shoulders feel a little lighter now )) you are a superstar and CAG )))

[fishfood1]

hi andy just a quick one im not counterclaiming am I? just on MCOL now thanks

[AndyOrch]

No

[fishfood1]

hi

 

I know its a while since I was last on the site.

 

I never heard anything from the courts or capquest until july/aug this year

 

sending me a financial situation form to fill in my outgoings

 

I have written to them and asked about settling the debt since they sent this it was about getting a consent order.

 

I have made an offer and they say once I return the out goings form they will consider the offer.

 

im saying 20% of the original debt.

 

I was curious as to why I never heard anything from the courts.

 

I didn't get anything from capquest with regards to the signed agreements etc....

 

many thanks

[fishfood1]

hi just to add along with the recent forms they have sent documents and it was a loan and signed agreement all photocopies.

[Guest]

fishfood

this is benlucy's thread. are you one and the same?

[fishfood1]

hi

 

 

ooh not sure what's happened am benlucy378 regarding capquest. I have been on another Forum and I was registered on their as fishfood1 when I come to log in it said benlucy378 not found.

[dx100uk]

Can you scan up upload what they have sent?

 

Until/unless they pay to lift the stay and the court write to you

 

I.d not be paying a penny

[fishfood1]

,

 

 

 

.

Edited October 15, 2015 by fishfood1

[dx100uk]

willy waving

 

 

as post 70 please

 

 

dx

[fishfood1]

hello

as per post 70 hoping I've done it correct

thanks

[Guest]

 

I was curious as to why I never heard anything from the courts.

 

s

 

 

it gets stayed automatically if they dont respond within the 28 odd days after receiving your defence from the court. this is usually stated by the court when they confirm receipt of a defence.

 

looks like claimant let it stay at the time as they didnt have any docs. now they have some, they are pursuing via a con order.

issue now is whether what they have is likely to be enforceable in small claims court. whether you want to try and settle, and if no settlement reached, whether they are prepared to apply to lift the stay and proceed.

[dx100uk]

please pop those images into a multipage word doc

then file save as .pdf