1st Credit/ Moon Beever Claim Form old M+S Card 'debt'

[AndyOrch]

Please dont submit that....read here and have a look at defences with success

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?190-DCA-Legal-Successes

[kilnerd]

ok...

 

The particulars of the claim are as follows:

 

1.The Claimant claims the sum of 2,293.29 being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated credit card agreement on 21/06/1997, originally between the Defendant and M&S Financial Services.

 

2.On 29/05/2012, the defendant defaulted on the agreement with the outstanding balance of 2,293.29

 

3.The Defendant's account number was************* and was assigned to the Claimant on 30/04/2014, notice of this has been provided to the Defendant.

 

The Claimant claims the sum of 2,404.79 and costs.The Claimant has complied, as far necessary, with the pre-action conduct practice direction.

 

Proposed 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 clearly not correct, M&S Financial Services is a subsidary of Marks & Spencers. M&S did not accept credit cards in-store until 2000 and did not issue their own through M&S Finance until 2003.

 

3.Paragraph 2 is denied as there was no credit card agreement.

 

4.Paragraph 3 is noted however I have no recollection of being served with any Notice of Assignment.

 

5.It is also denied I have been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the consumer credit Act 1974.As the Assignee of this alleged debt the claimant would not be aware whether one had been served or not.

 

6.The Claimant has not complied, as far necessary, with any pre-action conduct practice direction.They have never contacted me with regards to this alleged debt nor have I ever heard of them up until receipt of this claim.

 

 

7.Notwithstanding the above a request was made under the customer 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.

 

A further request made via CPR 31.14, after the claim had been issued, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The Claimants representative issued a reply that they will forward the request on to the claimant

 

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;

 

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

 

9. 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.

 

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.

 

11. 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.

Edited January 23, 2015 by Andyorch
Point 4 tweaked

[AndyOrch]

There you go you can do it:wink:...just check your point 4 I have tweaked it slightly.

 

Andy

[oleg]

Reset your numbers Kil. Some are out of order.

[kilnerd]

ah ****! Submitted it. Doesn't look like I can amend it.

[oleg]

Only by email but not worth it since the flaws are not fatal. However , a tip. When dealing with legal, always chec k, double check and check some more, especially if it's your first time.

[dx100uk]

sorry don't know why but I never saw this thread...

 

 

GE money funded the M+S in-store card that was issued for purchases like a credit card well back into the 1980's

 

 

when satans bank bought GE capital, all the store cards were made into credit cards

 

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17670803

 

 

I believe this should blow the case right out the water?

 

 

I assume since all this happened you have moved several times?

so never got any paperwork anyway? on anything over the years?

 

 

dx

[kilnerd]

Thanks, but never had any type of card, store or credit, with them.

[oleg]

In #4 you mentioned a "weird" loan. Do you remember anything more than its being "weird"?

 

The particulars of claim include an account no.. You could ask M&S whether that account is still on their systems and, if not, where it would have gone to - eg Abbey [now Santander]. Your aim is to get details solely for your own enlightenment.

 

Moon Bovver have to prove the account, not you to disprove. If you have trouble investigating, they're likely to do so too.

 

My own hunch is that admin at 1st Cred just assumed it to be a card rather than, eg, a personal loan.

[dx100uk]

But I did have some weird loan with them at about that time

 

 

that would be the store card thingy.

 

 

you had a set limit loan, and you could use the 'card' upto that set limit to by other stuff to your total

 

 

I think I've some paperwork somewhere

though not an M+S only it was GE capital and another of these 'cards'

 

 

dx

[dx100uk]

ah I se oleg has spotted the same.

 

 

dx