Cabot/Weigtmans Claim Form- Lloyd's loan 'debt'***Claim Discontinued***

[mrcooper]

Hi all

 

I am new here and in the same boat as most by the looks of it

 

I received a Claim form from Northampton last week and at first thought it might just be another DCA trick (having had my alleged debts on the DCA 'merry go round' for so long have kind of gotten used to them playing ping pong)

 

The claim form states the following info:

 

 

Name of the Claimant - CABOT FINANCIAL UK LIMITED

 

Date of issue - 6 FEBRUARY 2015

 

 

 

What is the claim for – the reason theyhave issued the claim?

 

1. The defendant entered into a credit agreement described by theoriganal creditor as LLOYDS BANK- UNSECURED LOAN and having account numberxxxxxxxxxx (‘the account’).

 

2. The Claimant, a UK limited company with company number 3757424, isthe assignee and legal owner of all rights previously enjoyed by the original creditorin respect of the Account.

 

3. The Defendant is indebted to the Claimant in respect of the accountin the sum of 12555.54

 

4. The Claimant claims the said sum of 12555.54 plus costs.

 

 

What is the value of the claim? £12555.54

 

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

 

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

 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assignedand it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Debt purchaser– CABOT -although has gone through at least 6 otherDCA first, initially I tried to negotiate (was refused each time) but couldn't keep up with the speed that they were moving the alleged debts around between them all so gave up about 3 years ago.

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice ofAssignment? Not that I can recall, just letters fromvarious DCA saying no longer dealing with and next DCA will be in contact!

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? No, I don’t think so

 

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

 

Why did you cease payments? Divorce, lost job,relocation, dropped over 16K in wages

 

What was the date of your last payment? About 3 ½ years ago to the original creditor– reduced payments on a voluntary basiswith OC

 

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

 

Did you communicate any financial problemsto the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes, PayPlan originally and then on a voluntary basis for a while until could no longer keep up with the payments (was paying out over £750 to the OC)

 

· Ihave sent a CCA request to Cabot and a CPR31.14 request to Weightmans (theirsols)

 

· Ihave acknowledged Service on MCOL and have indicated that I will defend all.

 

I would like someone to advise as to whether is anything else to do at the moment, Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.

[renegadeimp]

They're calling your bluff.

 

 

They've seen the amount and got greedy.

 

 

Have you cca them.

 

 

Is the debt SB.

 

 

Cabot rarely ever have the paperwork for the debt and if its gone through half a dozen dcas then there definitely is something wrong with it.

[mrcooper]

Thanks renegadeimp for the quick response.

 

 

I know that these amounts are going to be really attractive targets for them (£12k + another one for £19k)

but they'll have a shock as the only thing that I now own are my clothes!

 

 

I rent and don't even have my own car anymore

 

 

so even if they succeed I wish them joy in trying to get £30k out of me before I die

[mrcooper]

Yes, sent a CCA yesterday and CPR to Weightmans as well, unfortunately not SB so can't go down that route.

[mrcooper]

have received a letter from Weightmans in reply to my CPR

 

 

stating that they are just the solicitors for their client (saying the creditor is Marlins?, no mention of Cabot!)

 

 

and that as such they have no documentation on this account and that they will contact their client for the information,

 

 

with a reminder in the last paragraph to 'do not forget to prepare your defence' advisory!

 

Have also received a standard '40 days to find the information' letter from Cabot (not Marlins)

 

I have submitted my defence today (gone down the embarrassed route) so I am hoping that this was the right thing to do

[dx100uk]

who said to go down the embarrassed route

 

 

that's old hat and is no longer current.

[dx100uk]

how did you file via MCOL?

 

 

dx

[mrcooper]

I have had to have an operation since my last post in Feb

and was rapidly running out of time to put in my defence

and panicked so have probably done ti all wrong but this is what I have entered as my defence

 

Re: County Court Claim CABOT Financial UK/ Lloyds Bank – Unsecured Loan

Claim No.

The particulars of the claim are as follows:

 

1. The Claimant claims the sum of 12555.54being monies due from the Defendant to the Claimant under a regulated agreement originallybetween the Defendant and Lloyds Bank.

2. The Defendant's account numberwas. (The Claimant has not provided any other information except to state thatthey are the assignee).

3. The Defendant is indebted to theclaimant in respect of the account in the sum of 12555.54

4. The Claimant claims the sum of 12555.54and costs.

 

Proposed Defence

 

1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are very 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.

The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Particulars of Claim as it stands at present, inter alia: -

 

The claimants' particulars of claims disclose no legal cause of action and they are embarrassing to the defendant as the claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16.

 

 

In this regard I wish to draw the courts attention to the following matters;

a) The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to orproceeding the alleged cause of action.

No particulars are offered in relationto the nature of the written agreement referred to, the method the claimant calculated any outstanding sums due,

or any default notices issued or any other matters necessary to substantiate the claimant's claim.

 

b) Neither a copy of the purported credit agreement that the claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim,

nor a copy ofany evidence of both the scope and nature of any default,

and proof of anyamount outstanding on the alleged accounts, has been provided by the claimant.

 

2. Paragraph 1 is noted and acceptedI have in the past had financial dealings with Lloyds.

I do not recall theprecise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant whois unable to comply.

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied as I amunaware of any legal assignment or Deed of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or the original creditor.

 

4.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to theClaimant,

the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breachrequested by CPR 31. 14,and remains in default of my section 77 request.

Any Agreement cannot be enforced against the Defendant without an order of thecourt by the reason of the fact that both the Original Creditor

and theAssignee remain in default by reason of Section 78 of the Act.

 

A further request was made via CPR 31.14 on the xxxx 2015, after the claim had been issued,

requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim.

 

 

The Claimant has responded that they are not in possession of any paperwork connected to this claim and that it will take up to 40 days to comply

even though my written request asked for this information over a reasonable timeframe(12+2 days) from receipt.

 

5. In addition, I also requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 77/78 request, copies of the documentsreferred to within the Claimants particulars

to establish what the claim is for to the claimants solicitors, Weightmans LLP, on the assumption that a CountyCourt Claim

would not be entered into by a solicitor if they were not inreceipt of all documentation

and had proof of the claimants right to proceed with this action.

 

 

Weightmans have stated in relation to my 31:14 request thatthey are only acting on their client (the creditors) instructions

and as such do not have any of the documentation upon which the claim is based.

 

6. It is therefore not accepted withregards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant isput 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 andNotices of Sums in Arrears;and

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

 

7. As per Civil Procedure Rule16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the moneyis owed.

 

8. On the alternative, as theClaimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the rightto lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Actand section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

9. 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. By reason of the facts andmatters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the reliefclaimed or any relief.

[mrcooper]

Yep filed via MCOL - thaought that was what I had to do?

[dx100uk]

yes mcol is ok I was hoping you'd posted and we could short circuit that via MCOL>

 

 

deed of assignment - you'll never see that anyway its the notice of assignment.

 

 

should be ok

 

 

see what they do

 

 

dx

[AndyOrch]

That particular of claim mrcooper...is it verbatim ?

 

There is no mention of assignment?

 

Andy

[mrcooper]

Hi Andy - no mention of assignment or dates, see below

 

1. The defendant entered into a credit agreement described by theoriganal creditor as Lloyds BANK- UNSECURED LOAN and having account numberxxxxxxxxxx (‘the account’).

 

2. The Claimant, a UK limited company with company number 3757424, isthe assignee and legal owner of all rights previously enjoyed by the original creditorin respect of the Account.

 

3. The Defendant is indebted to the Claimant in respect of the accountin the sum of 12555.54

 

4. The Claimant claims the said sum of 12555.54 plus costs.

[AndyOrch]

2. The Claimant, a UK limited company with company number 3757424, is the assignee and legal owner of all rights previously enjoyed by the original creditorin respect of the Account.

 

Yes its there...but no mention of informing or serving you notice.

[AndyOrch]

The defence is a tad waffly...but you appear to cover their main points of particulars.

[mrcooper]

Nope - no mention

[mrcooper]

I know it's a bit long winded but I just didn't want to miss anything - never done anything like this before and having read how sneaky they are I thought it best to go for more rather than less

 

Thanks Andy

[AndyOrch]

That is always the danger when you are new to this.... less is more when drafting a defence....vague short and succinct...you only respond to the particulars...with the briefest of response...you expand once they decide to proceed by way of your witness statement...still lets see what transpires.

 

Andy

[Guest]

when you said 'embarrased' defence, thought you meant was one of those older 1 or 2 line ones.

no worries, see what they do. they have around 28 days to decide.

[mrcooper]

Hi DC and Renegadeimp

 

Quick update.

 

 

..after entering my defence Weightmans acknowledged and then

 

 

I came home yesterday to a letter from them saying that their client wished to proceed

and that they would inform the court of this.

 

 

..today brought a letter from Cabot stating that my case was unenforceable ?

 

 

I am assuming a crossover of letters on their behalf..

.will be writing to Weightmans directing them to talk to their client and to halt any court proceedings

 

 

I know that this does not mean that in future they won't go for it again

but would like to thank you for all of the help and advice given.

 

 

I will be watching them and keeping all letters etc.

in case they sell it on or move it to another DCA ! Donation done...well worth it!

[mrcooper]

Also DC100x ..can't get to my other thread but have had the same letter from Cabot about the £19k one as well...unenforceable as well

[dx100uk]

cabot simply stating they cant find the CCA is not closure

 

 

its a std response to a CCA request.

 

 

what other thread?

 

 

dx

[AndyOrch]

Also DC100x ..can't get to my other thread but have had the same letter from Cabot about the £19k one as well...unenforceable as well

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?441525-Marlin-Weightmans-2nd-lloyds-loan-debt

 

With regards to this thread they had until the 10th March to respond and proceed...as you appear not to have received anything from the court the claim should be stayed.....that does not mean its over by any accounts as DX states......they can make application anytime to revive the claim so not quite over yet...but looking favorable:wink:

 

Andy

[mrcooper]

have spoken to Weightmans

who have confirmed that they received notification from their client on 31st March to go proceed with court action

 

 

- He than asked me to copy him the letter from Cabot stating unenforceable

 

 

but I get the impression they will still go ahead anyway

 

 

even though they have provided no documentation whatsoever!

[dx100uk]

willy waving me thinks

 

 

I'd stay off that phone by the way.

[mrcooper]

Thanks Dx and apologies for getting your site name wrong in previous message - will stay off the phone from now on, just wanted to see if they were playing "silly b*****s"

 

Just seems really wrong that a sols would go ahead with absolutely nothing to back up the claim