Court Claim lowell/Carter - shop direct - but not our account ***Claim Dismissed / Costs***

[Gia]

My son received court papers today that state:

 

This claim is for 377.92

the amount due under an agreement between the original creditor and the defendant

to provide finance and / or services / goods.

 

 

The debt was assigned to / purchased by Lowell portfolio 1 Ltd. on 27/ 02/2009.

And notice served pursuant to the law of property Act 1925.

 

Particulars / shop direct and an account number. They also claim 8% interest.

 

A few years ago we were receiving letters from shop direct, we told them they have the wrong person.

No one has ever had a mail order catalogue in this house.

 

 

Eventually after them ignoring the issue of the wrong account

we sent a CCA request which they totally ignored.

We heard no more except one or two letters from Lowell during the last few years which we ignored

as the account was in dispute with the original creditor for not supplying a CCA.

 

I intend fully defending the claim but could use some help as this account is fraudulent.

 

 

Looking at the date of purchase feb 2009 and the previous time we were dealing with shop direct

this fraudulent account would also appear to be statute barred.

[AndyOrch]

Hi Gia

 

If you could read and complete the following posting your responses here...then we have all the relevant information to advise you further.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-April-2014**(2-Viewing)-nbsp

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Gia]

Thank you Andyorch.

 

What is the claim for – This is what it says on the claim form

 

This claim is for 377.92

the amount due under an agreement between the original creditor and the defendant

to provide finance and / or services / goods.

 

The debt was assigned to / purchased by Lowell portfolio 1 Ltd. on 27/ 02/2009.

And notice served pursuant to the law of property Act 1925.

Particulars / shop direct and an account number. They also claim 8% statutory interest pursuant to s 69 of county court Act. .

What is the value of the claim? £377.92

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

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

Not my son's agreement he never had an account with any catalogue company.

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. Lowell Portfolio 1 purchased the debt on 27/02/09.

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? No

 

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

Why did you cease payments:- Never made any payments

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved?

 

 

Yes, we got letters from shop direct,

contacted them told them we had no account,

received no goods from them.

They ignored us so we sent a CCA request for a copy so we could see the signature,

we also requested statements and proof of delivery slips for any items they said they were claiming for.

They never responded.

So I wrote again stating not our account and it is in dispute, and their lack of CCA.

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt managementicon plan? No other than the above mentioned letters.

[AndyOrch]

Thats fine GIa.......

 

 

If not already you need to acknowledge the claim....you can do this on line using the MCOL service once you have registered and obtained a username.....your password is already on the claim.

 

Defend all....and we can draft a suitable defence in the next couple of days for you to submit.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Gia]

Thank you. I will acknowledge now and tick I will be defending all of the claim.

[dx100uk]

don't forget to send a CCA request and CPR to lowells

[Gia]

don't forget to send a CCA request and CPR to lowells

 

I will get a CCA and CPR request off in the morning. Should it be to Lowells or Bryan Carter who issued the claim?

[dx100uk]

both to lowells

as carter simply replies with rubbish

if you go read other carter/lowell threads here

in the FLI forum

 

 

dx

[Gia]

both to lowells

as carter simply replies with rubbish

if you go read other carter/lowell threads here

in the FLI forum

 

 

dx

 

Thanks

[Gia]

My son just checked his credit report and this account was opened on 10/11/07 the default date is 15/12/08.

 

His credit record is perfect but for this default on this account that is not even his. Lowell are going to pay big time for ruining his otherwise impeccable credit record for 6 years

 

CCA request was sent yesterday I hope they are able to provide statements of accounts and signed delivery slips.

[dx100uk]

I would expect it was shop direct that defaulted it before they sold it.

 

 

dx

[Gia]

I would expect it was shop direct that defaulted it before they sold it.

 

 

dx

 

yes, the original default would have been put by Shop Direct. It changed to Lowell after they purchased it in 2009. My son was not even 18 when that account was opened with Shop Direct.

[Gia]

No response to CCA request as yet. Court papers dated the 24 October so got some time before defence is due in.

[Gia]

No response to CCA request as yet. Court papers dated the 24 October so got some time before defence is due in.

 

Well no response to the CCA request, so they are now in default.

 

I will go with a statute barred defence, as the default is due to drop off on 15/12/14 and for it to have been defaulted it would have to have been a minimum of 3 months in arrears I believe. Therefore, making it statute barred now.

[dx100uk]

Well no response to the CCA request, so they are now in default.

 

I will go with a statute barred defence, as the default is due to drop off on 15/12/14 and for it to have been defaulted it would have to have been a minimum of 3 months in arrears I believe. Therefore, making it statute barred now.

 

 

the claimform stopped the clock

 

 

dx

[oleg]

Are you presuming that payments into the account must have ceased well before Oct 24 in order for the D N to have been issued by Dec 8: in other words, that it must have been S B by the time the claim was issued?

 

Please bear in mind that if you entered a simple S B defence, any point of the claim that you do not deny is taken by the court as acknowledged. In other words, this will legitimately have been your son's account after all.

 

Moreover, you would be damaging your intention to screw whoever trashed his credit file. You can't acknowledge it for one purpose and deny it for another.

[Gia]

Are you presuming that payments into the account must have ceased well before Oct 24 in order for the D N to have been issued by Dec 8: in other words, that it must have been S B by the time the claim was issued?

 

Please bear in mind that if you entered a simple S B defence, any point of the claim that you do not deny is taken by the court as acknowledged. In other words, this will legitimately have been your son's account after all.

 

Moreover, you would be damaging your intention to screw whoever trashed his credit file. You can't acknowledge it for one purpose and deny it for another.

 

The default began on 15/12/08

I believe it is highly unlikely that a default would have been issued on 15/12/08 if any payment had been made in late October 08.

 

 

If I am right for a default to have been issued in December 08 at least three payments would have to have been in arrears,

making any last payment made (if any were) September 2008.

 

 

I believe the account was statute barred before the court claim was issued on 24/10/14.

 

I get where your going with the credit file trashing,

but my son is fed up of all of it,

and just wants it over and done with asap.

 

If I do a statute barred defence, can I also deny knowledge of the account and mention their CCA request default, that I made to see the signature on it?

[dx100uk]

no wrong route

use the no paperwork/holding

 

put them to strict proof of him owning the account etc etc.

 

then when you win

 

you demand the default removal.

 

though you might want toinclude this in the defence somewhere

 

not sure

 

p'haps andyorch can give a pointer.

 

dx

[Gia]

Ok I have a few days to file the defence so will wait for now.

[oleg]

No matter how fed up you or son are of this uninvited mess,

you would be unwise to attempt to brush it away using speculation about last payment dates

on a debt you know nothing about??

 

 

It is not his payments so how, if challenged, would you respond if the claimant had evidence of a payment beyond 24 Oct?

 

 

Not all creditors respect the ICO guidance on minimum 3 missed payments before D N.

 

You must, as said, use a holding / no paperwork defence.

 

 

Plenty of examples in financial legal section which you can adapt to your situation.

Post your proposed defence on here for checking /editing.

 

Once that battle has been won,

removal of incorrect info on son's credit file should be easy as pie

and you are well placed to demand compensation - under threat of legal action - from O C.

 

We all get sick of the injustice of the justice system but Patience is the only way through. No quick fixes.

[Gia]

I need to get the defence in this weekend, so will the following suffice?

 

POC

 

1.The claimants claim is for the sum of £493.14 being monies due from the defendant to the claimant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 between the defendant and Shop Direct under account reference xxxxxxxxxxx.

 

2. And assigned to the claimant on 27/02/2009 notice of which has been given to the defendant.

 

3. The claim includes statutory interest pursuant to s.69 of the County Court Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum (a daily rate of 0.51) from the date of the assignment of the agreement to date but limited to a maximum of one year amounting to £30.22.

Defence

1. Paragraph 1 is neither admitted or denied with regards to the defendant entering into an agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim (‘the Agreement’) the Claimant has yet to disclose any such agreement.

 

2. 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.

 

3. Paragraph 1 is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 by first class post on October 31st 2014. The defendant has received no reply to the request. Furthermore, a request was made pursuant to the CCA 1974 section 78 on 31st October 2014 by first class post and as at this date the claimant has failed to comply and is therefore in default of the said request:

 

Therefore with the court's permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

 

(b) show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for;

 

© show how the agreement was legally terminated to allow the claimant relief.

 

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

 

5. On the alternative, 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 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

5. 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.

 

Should I also add that its highly likely the account is statute barred and put them to strict proof that its not ???

[dx100uk]

swap 1 & 2

 

 

remove the repeated bit start of point 3

 

 

forget the SB bit

[Gia]

Lowell have received my defence and responded with their

" we are continuing with the claim letter."

 

 

I have also received a response from BC the same one others on here have had,

which asks that we agree a full and final settlement, and a Tomlin Order to sign.

 

So tempted to respond to both Lowell and BC declining their kind offer as they have not proved ownership of the account,

and remind them they are in default of the CCA request and that they will need to produce it in court,

along with statements of account which will show the last date any payment was made.

Which could prove the account to be statute barred.

 

 

Might also be a good idea to tell them we want to go to court,

so when the debt is proved to be someone else's we will be asking for costs as litigant in person

and sending them court papers for compensation for his credit file trashing.

[oleg]

No point / gain / value corresponding with them.

 

You keep mentioning S B but, for an account that's nothing to do with your son, that is immaterial.

 

As advised before, just be patient.

[Gia]

Just a bit of an update, and could use some advice on what to do next.

 

I have been clearing out old files and lo and behold I came across a file on Shop Direct concerning this account.

 

 

I sent a SARN to them in 2008 when we discovered the existence of this account and disputed it.

 

 

The paperwork from the SARN confirms that only one order was ever placed with them when the account was opened

and it was not delivered to our address.

 

 

Paperwork also confirms they held no signed agreement only an online application with a tick box for signature.

 

 

They also confirmed that no payment has ever been made on the account since it was opened

and I can now prove without doubt that this account as well as being fraudulent is well and truly statute barred.

 

In light of the above should I notify Lowell / Carter/ The Court of this as it is an absolute defence,

maybe even ask the Court if I can submit an amended defence and supply them with the evidence.

 

 

Make complaints to the regulatory bodies about Lowell issuing proceedings on a statute barred debt,

then issue our own proceedings against Shop Direct / Lowell for the damage to my son's credit files?