Claim form received Arrow Global - MBNA card 'debt'

[about time]

Hi all,

 

Me again

 

Name of claimant: Arrow Global

Date of issue – 21/10/14

 

Date of issue 21/10 + 19 days ( 5 day for service + 14 days to acknowledge) = 8th Nov + 14 days to submit defence = 22nd Nov (33 days in total) -

 

What is the claim for –

 

The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500

being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement

between the Defendant and MBNA and assigned to the Claimant.

Notice of the assignment 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.

AND the Claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of this claim.

 

What is the value of the claim? 8,000

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? Feb 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. Debt purchaser

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Not that I remember

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not that I remember

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? Not that I remember

Why did you cease payments:- 2009

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? DMP entered into in 2010 but failed after 2 months

I'll get the CPR and CCA letters off this weekend.

 

Thanks in advance,

 

AT

[AndyOrch]

Just bumping this back up for you AT in view of no responses.....Although Im sure you are au fait with the process by now.

 

Andy

[about time]

Thanks Andy, and yes, sadly you are right!! Still a lot to learn though!

[about time]

Evening,

 

I've had no response to my CCA request to Arrow, or my CPR to Blake Lapthorn. Both signed for the letters on 2 weeks ago. I need to submit my defence in the next couple of days, Andy, am I being lazy using the one for MKDP (with some tweaks and the addition of a note re proof of pre-action protocol) or should I start from scratch. PoC's and amended defence below:

Particulars of Claim

 

1.The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and MBNA and assigned to the Claimant.

 

2.Notice of the assignment has been provided to the Defendant.

 

3.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.

 

AND the claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of the claim.

 

Proposed Defence

 

1. It is admitted that I the defendant have held accounts with MBNA in the past but will contend that all balances have been cleared.

 

2. The defendant has absolutely no knowledge of any debt residue and on the 31st October 2014 requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond within the deadline set.

 

3. Without clarification of the claimants claim, the defendant is extremely disadvantaged and the claimants claim appears to be without merit. The defendant asks to be allowed to submit a complete defence should the claimant provide copies of the original documents he will rely on.

 

4. The particulars of claim are vague and unsubstantiated 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 or contract 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;

(d) show how the Claimant has complied with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 with regard to pre-action protocol.

 

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

 

6. Furthermore, if 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 and196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and Section 82 (a) of the Consumer CreditAct 1974.

 

7. The claimant has failed to comply with sections 111 AND 1V of the pre action conduct "practice directions". And the defendant has no knowledge of the Claimants assertion that they have complied.

 

8. For avoidance of doubt, the defendant is unable to plead effectively, or at all, to the particulars of claim Without further clarification/disclosure

 

9. 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.

 

 

What do you think?

 

AT

Edited November 17, 2014 by Andyorch
Particulars numbered and hilighted

[AndyOrch]

Almost........check their 1/2/3 and then read yours in response.They dont match.

 

Andy

[about time]

Ok, have re-jigged it to what I think is the right order....

 

Particulars of Claim

 

1.The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and MBNAicon and assigned to the Claimant.

 

2.Notice of the assignment has been provided to the Defendant.

 

3.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 crediticon act 1974.

 

AND the claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of the claim.

 

Proposed Defence

 

1.

(i) It is admitted that I the defendant have held accounts with MBNA in the past but will contend that all balances have been cleared.

 

(ii) The defendant has absolutely no knowledge of any debt residue and on the 31st October 2014 requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond within the deadline set.

 

 

2. If 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 and 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and Section 82 (a) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

3. The particulars of claim are vague and unsubstantiated 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 or contract 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;

(d) show how the Claimant has complied with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 with regard to pre-action protocol.

 

 

4. Without clarification of the claimants claim, the defendant is extremely disadvantaged and the claimants claim appears to be without merit. The defendant asks to be allowed to submit a complete defence should the claimant provide copies of the original documents he will rely on.

 

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

 

6. The claimant has failed to comply with sections 111 AND 1V of the pre action conduct "practice directions". And the defendant has no knowledge of the Claimants assertion that they have complied.

 

7. For avoidance of doubt, the defendant is unable to plead effectively, or at all, to the particulars of claim Without further clarification/disclosure

 

8. 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.

 

Have I cracked it?

 

Thanks Andy,

 

AT

[AndyOrch]

Almost...have balances been cleared ? What about their point 3 ? Not sure where you pulled no 7 from its irrelevant and not required.

[about time]

7 was from the MKDP one but I have removed it, and I think I see where their 3 wasn't being addressed properly. Do the changes I've made work? I took the point out regarding cleared balances - is there a danger that by including it I assume some of the burden of proof?

 

Particulars of Claim

 

1.The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and MBNA and assigned to the Claimant.

 

2.Notice of the assignment has been provided to the Defendant.

 

3.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.

 

AND the claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of the claim.

 

Proposed Defence

 

1.

(i) It is admitted that I the defendant have held accounts with MBNA in the past.The particulars of claim are vague and unsubstantiated with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant

 

(ii) The defendant has absolutely no knowledge of any debt residue and on the 31st October 2014 requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has failed to respond.

 

2. 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 and 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and Section 82 (a) of the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

3. It is denied with regard to the Claimant having served a Default notice and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement or contract with the Claimant; and

(b) show and evidence the nature of the breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears pursuant to the CCA1974

© 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;

(e) show how the Claimant has complied with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 with regard to pre-action protocol.

 

4. Without clarification of the claimants claim, the defendant is extremely disadvantaged and the claimants claim appears to be unsubstantiated

 

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

 

6. The claimant has failed to comply with sections 111 AND 1V of the pre action conduct "practice directions". And the defendant has no knowledge of the Claimants assertion that they have complied.

 

7. 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.

 

Continued thanks!!

 

AT

Edited November 18, 2014 by Andyorch
Defence tweaked

[AndyOrch]

Defence tweaked......AT have you not requested a copy of the agreement by way of a section 78 request?

[about time]

Thank you Andy, yes CCA section 78 request sent to Arrow on 31/10, signed for on 3/11, had a letter back dated 11/11 saying that they received it on 10/11 and are requesting documents from the original creditor and will be in touch. As I have proof that the request was signed for on 3/11 and they haven't given me a timescale for when they will respond, are they in breach of this request?

 

Do you think I should submit the defence now or wait until Friday to see if anything else shows up? The claim was issued on 21st Oct so I calculated that I have until Sunday to file it but don't want to wait until the last minute.

 

AT

[AndyOrch]

Your defence due date is Saturday 21st....but you must submit it Friday by 4.00pm.

 

Re your last post if you have made request using section 78 why have you not included it in your defence?...it is by far your most important point.

[about time]

Um, not sure why!! So shall I add something along the lines of

 

Particulars of Claim

 

1.The Claimants claim is for the sum of 7,500 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement between the Defendant and MBNA and assigned to the Claimant.

 

2.Notice of the assignment has been provided to the Defendant.

 

3.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.

 

AND the claimant claims the sum of 7,500 TOGETHER with the costs of the claim.

 

Proposed Defence

 

1.

(i) It is admitted that I the defendant have held accounts with MBNA in the past.The particulars of claim are vague and unsubstantiated with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant

 

(ii) The defendant has absolutely no knowledge of any debt residue and on the 31st October 2014 requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant's legal representative has failed to respond.

 

(iii) The Defendant requested a copy of the alleged agreement from the Claimant by way of a request under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 on 31st October 2014. This letter was signed for as received on the 3rd November. A letter was received from the claimant dated 11th November 2014 in which the Claimant advised they were seeking documentation from "the originating creditor". The Claimant has not advised a date by when they will be able to comply with this request and so is now in breach of this request. The Defendant believes that this shows that their Claim is unsubstantiated and without merit.

 

2. 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 and 196 of the Law of Property Act 1925 and Section 82 (a) of the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

3. It is denied with regard to the Claimant having served a Default notice and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement or contract with the Claimant; and

(b) show and evidence the nature of the breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears pursuant to the CCA1974

© 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;

(e) show how the Claimant has complied with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 with regard to pre-action protocol.

 

4. Without clarification of the claimants claim, the defendant is extremely disadvantaged and the claimants claim appears to be unsubstantiated

 

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

 

6. The claimant has failed to comply with sections 111 AND 1V of the pre action conduct "practice directions". And the defendant has no knowledge of the Claimants assertion that they have complied.

 

7. 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.

 

Thank you for your perseverance!! Deadline for submission noted.

 

AT

[AndyOrch]

[about time]

Hoorah! I'll get it submitted. Many thanks Andy, have a good day.

 

AT

[about time]

Hi!

 

Firstly Happy New Year and hope you are all well!

 

Secondly, having thought that this issue was long dead, and having seen that the default had dropped off at the beginning of this week I was surprised to receive a bundle of documents through today. The solicitors have sent an agreement; t's & c's; CC statements; a notification of account transfer; reconstituted letter from MBNA notifying transfer (undated); log of transactions.

 

They've said claim is stayed (which I already knew) and want to hear in 21 days with a completed i&e form.

 

From what I've read up there doesn't look to be a time limit within which they had to respond but do I have grounds to get it struck out based on the fact that over a year has passed?

 

If not I'm inclined to sit it out and wait for them to reinstate the claim. Does anyone have any thoughts on that/better ideas?

 

Thanks

 

AT

[AndyOrch]

" From what I've read up there doesn't look to be a time limit within which they had to respond but do I have grounds to get it struck out based on the fact that over a year has passed? "

 

Not really...wait until they make application to lift the stay then consider your options.

 

Andy