Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • they cant 'take away' anything, what ever makes you believe that?  dx  
    • The text on the N1SDT Claim Form 1.The claim is for breaching the terms and conditions set on private land. 2. The defendant's vehicle, NumberPlate, was identified in the Leeds Bradford Airport Roadways on the 28/07/2023 in breach of the advertised terms and conditions; namely Stopping in a zone where stopping is prohibited 3.At all material times the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver. 4. The terms and conditions upon  entering private land were clearly displayed at the entrance and in prominent locations 5. The sign was the offer and the act of entering private land was the acceptance of the offer hereby entering into a contract by conduct. 6.The signs specifically detail the terms and conditions and the consequences of failure to comply,  namely a parking charge notice will be issued, and the Defendant has failed to settle the outstanding liability. 7.The claimant seeks the recovery of the parking charge notice, contractual costs and interest.   This is what I am thinking of for the wording of my defence The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and are generic in nature which fails to comply with CPR 16.4. 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. Paragraph 1 is denied. It is denied that the Defendant ever entered into a contract to breach any terms and conditions of the stated private land. 2. Paragraph 2 and 4 are denied. As held by the Upper Tax Tribunal in Vehicle Control Services Limited v HMRC [2012] UKUT 129 (TCC), any contract requires offer and acceptance. The Claimant was only contracted to provide car park management services and is not capable of entering into a contract with the Defendant on its own account, as the car park is owned by and the terms of entry set by the landowner. 3. It is admitted that Defendant is the recorded keeper of the vehicle. 4.  Paragraph 6 is denied the claimant has yet to evidence that their contract with the landowner supersedes  Leeds Bradford airport byelaws. Further it is denied that the Claimant’s signage is capable of creating a legally binding contract. 5. Paragraph 7 is denied, there are no contractual costs and interest cannot be accrued on a speculative charge.   I'm not sure whether point 4 is correct as I think this side road is not covered by byelaws? Any other suggestions/corrections would be appreciated.
    • Dear EVRi parcelnet LTD t/a evri   evri parcelnet isnt a thing also you say defendant's response which is a bit of a weird format.   Something like   Dear EVRi, Claim no xxxx In your defence you said you could not access tracking. Please see attached receipt and label Regards
    • Welcome to the Forum I have moved your topic to the appropriate forum  Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues Please continue to post here.   Andy
    • Please provide advice on the following situation: I rented out my property to four students for 16 months until March 2024. Initially, the property was in very good condition, but now it needs extensive renovation. This includes redoing the bathroom, replacing the kitchen, removing wallpaper, and redecorating due to significant mould growth. The tenants also left their furniture on the grass, which is owned by the local authority. As a landlord, I've met all legal requirements. It seems the damage was caused by poor ventilation—windows were always closed, and heating wasn't used. There was also a bathroom leak fixed by reapplying silicone. I tried to claim insurance, but it was denied, citing tenant behaviour as the cause by looking at the photos, which isn't covered. The deposit barely covers the repair costs, or else I'll have to pursue money claims, which I've never done before and am unsure about its legal complications or costs. Any thoughts on this?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

3rd claim of 3 MKDP Credit Card***Claim Dismissed***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3027 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

This is the third claim of 3 received.

 

Name of the Claimant - MKDP llp originally HSBC

 

Date of issue 24/07/2014

 

Date of issue 24/07/2014 + 19 days ( 5 day for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 11/08/2014 + 14 days to submit defence = 25/08/2014 (33 days in total)

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? Please type out their particulars of claim (verbatim) less any identifiable data and round the amounts up/down.

 

The claimant claims the sum of 3xxx being monies due from the defendant to the claimant under a regulated agreement originally between the defendant and HSBC bank PLC. The defendants account number was xxxxxx and was assigned to the claimant on 08/12/2011, notice of this has been provided to the defendant. The defendant has failed to make payments in accordance with the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served pursuant to the consumer credit act 1974. The claimant claims the sum 3xxx and costs. The claimant has complied, as far as is nessasary, with the pre-action conduct practice direction.

 

What is the value of the claim? 3700

 

Is the claim for a current or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? Credit card

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? 12/03/2007

 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Purchased from HSBC by MKDP llp 08/12/2011

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? No

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Cant remember, but the apparent default date is 03/08/2008

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? No

 

Why did you cease payments:- Ill health, loss of job, low income.

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? HSBC we unhelpful and basically said there was nothing that could be done.

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Attempted to, they said I could not afford to.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 124
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I have just realised, as of today this account is statue barred, the default date was 3/08/2008. Would this be in my defence? I ask because they submitted the claim before this date. But they have the wrong default date as jan 2009.

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

The statute bar clock stopped at the date the claim was issued.

Nevertheless, it may well still be worth pursuing s b in your defence, based on the date of your last payment, as this most often does the trick for most courts, and most claimants realise that. If you don't have statements don't worry. The Opposition would have to prove it is not s b if your defence maintains that it is.

.

However, leave that until we've seen what you get back from M K D P in response to your CCA and CPR requests. For now you just need to acknowledge service within 19 calendar days of the date of issue of the claim form.

.

 

I'm in a rush atm so hope I've not been able to go through your history in detail. If I've missed anything or boo-boobed, others will no doubt put you straight.

Link to post
Share on other sites

" But they have the wrong default date as jan 2009."

 

Where have you sourced this from willintonboots...CRA,s?

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent ...keep that handy and we can pop that in your defence.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I missed this point when I answered. I read but brain didn't register. Exactly what I meant when I said I was in a hurry. Anyway andyeagleeyes has kindly picked it up.

Pls note also what I've written on your no. 1 thread regarding parallelity of process at this stage of matters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I missed this point when I answered. I read but brain didn't register. Exactly what I meant when I said I was in a hurry. Anyway andyeagleeyes has kindly picked it up.

Pls note also what I've written on your no. 1 thread regarding parallelity of process at this stage of matters.

 

No problem, I appreciate all that you have supported and advised so far. I will get these letter sent off tomorrow. In the mean time I am going to do some research on the defence side of things. Just not sure exactly where to start.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Claim was issued on the 24th July and you state the true default date was 3rd August 2008 so their 9th Jan 2009 is really irrelevant.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just and update- MKDP have signed for both recorded delivery letters. One for a CCA request and they've taken payment from my account by cashing a cheque I sent them. I made it clear what the £1 was for. Also the CPR request they have also signed for. I have had no response at all as yet.

Should I start drafting a defence? Getting a little anxious on what the next step should be.

Thanks :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

. It's now a waiting game to see what they come up with and then 3 or 4 days prior to deadline compose your defence tailored to what they've sent. You can in the meantime study other cases to familiarise yourself with defences.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is my defence for this account - if anyone has time to run through it I would be very grateful.

I am grateful anyway so far for the amount of support and help I have gained here. I will be making a donation to the site as I fully support it 100%!

 

 

In the Northampton (CCBC) county court

 

 

Claim number xxxxxxx

 

 

Between

 

 

MKDP LLP

 

and

 

 

xxxxxxxx– Defendant

 

 

 

 

DEFENCE

 

 

1. I, xxxxxxxxx of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx am The Defendant in this action and make the following statement as my defence to the claim made by MKDP LLP

 

2. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim and put The Claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

3. The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim are vague and fail to disclose any cause of action; they appear to be an abuse of the process in that they fail to deal with the basic rules of pleading in accordance with the civil procedure rules. (Even allowing for the constraints of the bulk issue system)

 

4. No documents supporting the claim in the particulars have been offered which The Defendant needs to establish what agreement it is that this action is based upon and so The Claimant's claim appears without merit.

 

5. On receipt of the claim form The Defendant sent a CPR 31.14 request for a copy of the agreement, default notice, notice of assignment and a statement of account showing how the amount claimed has been reached which form the basis of this claim.

 

 

6. The Defendant also sent a formal request pursuant to s.77/78 of the consumer credit Act 1974 for a copy of the agreement.

 

7. It has been confirmed via the Royal Mail website that the above letters were received and signed for.

 

8. To date the claimant responded to the CPR 31.14 request stating they are unable to fulfill the defendant’s request at the current time and have requested up to 8 weeks to obtain the requested documents.

 

9. To date no response has been received from The Claimant for the request of Consumer credit act 1974 agreement.

 

10. As a result, the Claimants claim does not contain sufficient particulars to permit me to file a properly particularised and pleaded defence. I am at a disadvantage to respond to this claim. Consequently, I deny all allegations on the particulars of claim and put the Claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

11. It is denied that I have an agreement with MKDP LLP.

 

12. If, which is not admitted, such an agreement exists, the precise terms and date of any such agreement are not admitted. I do not have in my possession any such agreement and am not therefore able to comment thereon. The Claimant is put to strict proof as to the date and terms of such agreement.

 

13. Without admission that any cause of action is shown by The Claimant it is denied that I am indebted to The Claimant as alleged or at all.

 

14. It is alleged the Claimant has an agreement and there has been an Assignment. Within the proof of claim it was stated that there had been an assignment to the Claimant on a date which was given as 08/12/2011. As such it is contended that no such Notice of Assignment has been served pursuant to Section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925. Without a Notice of Assignment, The Assignment is merely equitable and The Claimant is put to strict proof to disclose this and prove that this claim can commence in their own name.

 

 

15. AND the Defendant

 

Seeks an order that The Claimant’s action is struck out or otherwise is dismissed on the grounds that any claim cannot succeed.

 

i. Alternatively if the court decides not to strike out The Claimant’s case, it is requested that The Court orders full disclosure of the requested documents pursuant to the civil procedure Rules.

 

ii. The Defendant respectfully asks the permission of The Court to amend this defence if or when The Claimant provides full disclosure of the requested documents and allows inspection of the original documents.

 

 

 

 

Statement of Truth

 

I believe that the facts stated in this defence are true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to check a few more recent threads willinton...that one has seen better days.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you need to check a few more recent threads willinton...that one has seen better days.

 

Andy

 

Thanks Andy. I will take another look. There are so many so it's been difficult to choose which template and of course I do not really know what I am doing, to be fair it's only because of the excellent advice I am given here and from reading others experiences that I've manage to do what I have done.

I'll put up revised drafts shortly. I am working away but keep logging on where I can 😃

Link to post
Share on other sites

There are no template defences...each claim is unique and so is a defence.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok here is a revised version - I have taken parts from different cases and amended to my situation. Could you possibly give this a once over? I have to submit very soon. My cut off date is Monday 25th I believe.

 

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. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim and put The Claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

3 Paragraph 1 is denied. I am unaware of any alleged assignment purported to the account number referred to nor ever served any Notice of Assignment.

 

4. Paragraph 2 is denied. As the Assignee of this alleged debt the claimant would not be aware whether a Default Notice pursuant to the consumer credit Act 1974 had been served or not.

 

5.Notwithstanding the above a request was made under the consumer credit Act 1974,by way of a section 77/78 for a copy of the agreement, and on payment of the statutory fee of £1.00; the Claimant is and remains in Default of said s77/78 request. Any Agreement cannot be enforced against the Defendant without an order of the court by the reason of the fact that both the Original Creditor and the Assignee remain in default by reason of Section 78 of the Act.

 

6. The defendant on receipt of the claim form The Defendant sent a CPR 31.14 request for a copy of the agreement, default notice, notice of assignment and a statement of account showing how the amount claimed has been reached which form the basis of this claim.

 

7. . It has been confirmed via the Royal Mail website that the above letters were received and signed for. The claimant has failed to respond.

 

 

8.It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and 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

c) evidence any nature of breach and provide proof of any Default Notice and Notices of Sums in Arrears;and

d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

9. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

10. 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.

 

11. The Agreement cannot be enforced against the Defendant without an order of the court by the reason of the fact that both the Original Creditor and the Assignee remain in default as set out above and by reason of Section 78 of the Act.

 

12. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2. Change "I" to The Defendant.

 

3. The defendant is unaware of any assignment of the purported account and denies receipt of a Notice of Assignment.

 

4. As the purported Assignee . .

 

4. WHAT para 2 ? ?

 

5. Delete everything after "copy of the agreement". Not necessary.

 

7. . . the above mentioned CCA s.77/78 and CPR 31.14 requests were received . .

 

8. . . that the Defendant owes the Claimant any . .

 

11. Unnecessary. Delete.

 

Willin, I am unable to come back until later : hope others can step in if you need help now.

 

Sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2. Change "I" to The Defendant.

 

3. The defendant is unaware of any assignment of the purported account and denies receipt of a Notice of Assignment.

 

4. As the purported Assignee . .

 

4. WHAT para 2 ? ?

 

5. Delete everything after "copy of the agreement". Not necessary.

 

7. . . the above mentioned CCA s.77/78 and CPR 31.14 requests were received . .

 

8. . . that the Defendant owes the Claimant any . .

 

11. Unnecessary. Delete.

 

Willin, I am unable to come back until later : hope others can step in if you need help now.

 

Sorry.

 

Hello,

 

Thanks for your reply. Time is drawing in and naturally I want to make sure this is all ok before I submit, so thank you for your time.

how is this?

 

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. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, The defendant neither admits nor deny any allegation made in The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim and put The Claimant to strict proof thereof.

 

3 Paragraph 1 of the particulars is denied. The defendant is unaware of any alleged assignment purported to the account number referred to nor ever served any Notice of Assignment.

 

4. Paragraph 2 of the particulars is denied. As the proposed Assignee of this alleged debt the claimant would not be aware whether a Default Notice pursuant to the consumer credit Act 1974 had been served or not.

 

5. Notwithstanding the above a request was made under the consumer credit Act 1974, by way of a section 77/78 for a copy of the agreement.

 

6. The defendant on receipt of the claim form The Defendant sent a CPR 31.14 request for a copy of the agreement, default notice, notice of assignment and a statement of account showing how the amount claimed has been reached which form the basis of this claim.

 

7. . It has been confirmed via the Royal Mail website that the above mentioned CCA s.77/78 and CPR 31.14 requests were received 06/08/2014.

 

8.It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owes the claimant any monies and 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

c) evidence any nature of breach and provide proof of any Default Notice and Notices of Sums in Arrears;and

d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

9. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

10. The Agreement cannot be enforced against the Defendant without an order of the court by the reason of the fact that both the Original Creditor and the Assignee remain in default as set out above and by reason of Section 78 of the Act.

 

 

10. 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...