Cabot/Mortimer Claimform - old Morgan Stanley/Goldfish Credit Card 'debt'

[bubblenskweak]

Thanks Dx, I've had another go at this.

I don't understand (you've not referenced to their numbered paragraphs either), I'm not very good at all this letter writing, could do with a bit of help on this point.

Regards.... Dave

https://files.acrobat.com/a/preview/b381e982-1a50-4586-838f-7813614c5369

[bubblenskweak]

Just in case that didn't work, try this......

Particulars of Claim:

1.By an arrangement with Goldfish Bank Ltd (GFB) and the Defendant, on or around 14/09/2002 (“The Agreement”)

GFB agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit card upon the terms and conditions set out therein.

2.In breach of the Agreement the defendant failed to make the minimum payments due and the Agreement was terminated.

3. The Agreement was assigned to the Claimant.

4.The Claimant therefore claims 3450.00

 

 

 

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. It is denied with regards to an amount due under an agreement (s).

The Claimant/Solicitor has refused to disclose any agreement or statements on which its claim relies upon.

 

 

3. I am unaware of any legal assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars and deny the notice was served pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

 

4. It is denied that the claimant has complied as far as is necessary with the pre action conduct practice direction.

 

Prior to the claim being made, on 14 April 2015 I requested by (registered) letter to Cabot Financial Ltd, a request to supply me with a true signed Consumer Credit Agreement relating to this account. As yet I have had no response.

 

On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14.This was posted on 08 May,2015. To date I have yet to receive a compliant response.

I have received a letter from Mortimer Clarke Solicitors dated 14 May 2015 agreeing to provide an extension of 28 days to file a defence .

To date I have had no further response.

 

 

Therefore with the Courts 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(s) were breached/ terminated to allow the claimant relief.

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

 

 

5. As per civil procedure Rule 16.5, it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

 

6. 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.

 

 

7. 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.

[dx100uk]

like post 19 here

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?433976-cabot-mortimer-claim-form-Vanquis-Credit-Card-debt

[bubblenskweak]

Hi DX, thanks for your swift reply.

Thank you for your advice so far...

Well I've had another go, what do you think of this one ?

Regards...Dave

 

 

Particulars of Claim:

 

1.By an arrangement with Goldfish Bank Ltd (GFB) and the Defendant, on or around 14/09/2002 (“The Agreement”) GFB agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit card upon the terms and conditions set out therein.

 

2. In breach of the Agreement the defendant failed to make the minimum payments due and the Agreement was terminated.

 

3. The Agreement was assigned to the Claimant.

 

4. The Claimant therefore claims 3450.00

 

 

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. The claim is denied with regards to an amount due under an agreement. The Claimant/Solicitor have been unable to disclose any agreement or statements on which its claim relies upon. (paragraph 1 of Particulars of claim)

 

3. I am unaware of any legal assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars and deny the notice was served pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925. (paragraph 2 of Particulars of claim)

 

 

I have requested information pertaining to this claim from Cabot Financial (UK) Limited by way of a Section 77/78 request. To date I have yet to receive a response complying with the request. This was posted on the 27 March 2015 and signed as received on 30 March 2015.

 

On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Mortimer Clarke Solicitors by way of a CPR 31.14. To date I have yet to receive a compliant response. This was posted on the 08 May 2015 and signed as received on the 11 May 2015.

 

 

Therefore with the courts permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) Show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement.

 

(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.

 

(d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

 

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.

 

6. 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 including interest pursuant to S69 of the county court Act. (paragraphs 3,4 and 5 of the Particulars of Claim)

Edited May 25, 2015 by bubblenskweak

[bubblenskweak]

Hi, could someone please check the Defence statement in my last post, as I would like to get it submitted before weekend.

Thanks in anticipation....Dave

[dx100uk]

that looks ok

 

 

wait for andyorch to pop in first. mind

[AndyOrch]

You have not really responded directly to their points 1 & 2

 

1.By an arrangement with Goldfish Bank Ltd (GFB) and the Defendant, on or around 14/09/2002 (“The Agreement”) GFB agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit card upon the terms and conditions set out therein.

 

2. In breach of the Agreement the defendant failed to make the minimum payments due and the Agreement was terminated.

 

Defence is fine after 3 onwards.

 

Andy

[bubblenskweak]

Thanks Andy, not really sure how to respond. Could you please help me with a response to those first 2 points.

Regards...Dave

[AndyOrch]

Let me just take a look at the history......

[AndyOrch]

Okay few points.....

 

If you were making payments to Caboot then you must of been aware the debt was assigned...otherwise you wouldnt pay them.

 

Roughly how much have you paid to them ?

[bubblenskweak]

Hi Andy, until I found out about this forum last year, I was very 'green' as regards to debt and debt collection companies. I thought Cabot were acting for Goldfish, I was unaware they had bought the debt, I have never received any notice of assignment from Cabot. I have been paying them since 2008, started at £15 then went up to £35 in the last 2 years, I would estimate payments made to be roughly £1600.

Regards...Dave

[AndyOrch]

And you stopped payments in March this year after no response to your section 78 request?

[bubblenskweak]

Hi Andy, I stopped payments after reading this forum, and realizing I was being 'Cash Cowed'. Then I sent them section 78 request.

Regards...Dave

[AndyOrch]

And that date would be ?

[bubblenskweak]

Hi Andy request was sent 27 March 2015. I stopped paying around July 2014.

Regards...Dave

[AndyOrch]

Thank you Dave......

 

Okay so the fact that you have been paying this shower puts a slightly different angle on any proposed defence...you state that in all the time you were making payments you never received any statements or acknowledgments for payments...and that you question any alleged balance as incorrect.

 

Last question...and its quite important to the above...do you know the amount outstanding at the time of assignment?

[bubblenskweak]

Hi Andy, I didn't receive a notice of assignment. Give me a moment and I'll see what paperwork I've got regarding the balance....

Regards...Dave

[bubblenskweak]

Hi Andy, struggling to find any info on amount owed when Cabot took over. But I'm sure it was somewhere between £3500 - £3750.

I will continue to try and find something more accurate if possible.

I did find 2 letters I sent to Goldfish, explaining my financial situation, and requesting reduced payments. This was from 2008.

Regards...Dave

[AndyOrch]

Need to clarify precisely....your defence needs to question the alleged amount....the payments you have made since assignment ...the balance at the time they bought the debt.If you can prove that either the figure has not reduced or your payments are not reflected....then the claim is invalid.

[bubblenskweak]

Hi Andy, sorry but can't find any info on assignement balance or payments, been through loads of old letters, nowt there. only have bank statements for last year.

Going to have to go with what I've got, and hope for the best. Should I go with my last defence draft, or does it need changes ?

Regards...Dave

[Guest]

maybe already asked/n/a, but have you been receiving any notices of default sums and/or arrears?

 

any response yet to your cca request?

[bubblenskweak]

Hi Andy, no, not had anything like that for at least 6 years..

No response to CCA Request as yet..

Regards..Dave

[AndyOrch]

Many thanks Dave....okay in view of the fact that you don't know the balance at the time of assignment...or in fact whether your payments made since assignment have reduced said amount claimed, then you will be defending this blind.

 

Yes they are in default of your section 78 request...yes they are not complying with legislation in not providing annual statements.I think it may be prudent to insert a line that you have been making payments of which have totaled to a value of £1600.00...which the claimant is unwilling to provide any evidence of accounting to determine if any alleged balance is a true reflection of any indebtedness. Until such time that the claimant can comply with your section 78 request and are prepared to provide the required annual statement of payments then you are unwilling to commence payments and they are unable to to request any relief or enforcement.

 

You must amend your point 3 as you are aware of the assignment ...your payments have accepted such.They may not have provided a legal Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925....but you can still put them to proof on such service.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[bubblenskweak]

Thanks Andy, please check out this latest draft, and see what you think.

Regards...Dave

 

Particulars of Claim:

 

 

1.By an arrangement with Goldfish Bank Ltd (GFB) and the Defendant, on or around 14/09/2002 (“The Agreement”)

GFB agreed to issue the Defendant with a credit card upon the terms and conditions set out therein.

 

2. In breach of the Agreement the defendant failed to make the minimum payments due and the Agreement was terminated.

 

3. The Agreement was assigned to the Claimant.

 

4. The Claimant therefore claims 3450.00

 

 

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. The claim is denied with regards to an amount due under an agreement. The Claimant/Solicitor have been unable to disclose any agreement or statements on which its claim relies upon.

 

3. I understood that any payments made, were to Goldfish Bank Ltd, and Cabot financial was the collection agent for that Company. I am unaware of any legal assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars and deny the notice was served pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

4.I have made payments of which have totaled to a value of £1600.00..during which time the claimant has never acknowledged or rendered an annual statement of balance. The claimant is unwilling to provide any evidence of accounting to determine if any alleged balance is a true reflection of any indebtedness. Until such time that the claimant can comply with my section 78 request and are prepared to provide the required annual statement of payments then I am unwilling to commence payments and they are unable to request any relief or enforcement.

 

5.I have requested information pertaining to this claim from Cabot Financial (UK) Limited by way of a Section 78 request. To date I have yet to receive a response complying with the request. This was posted on the 27 March 2015 and signed as received on 30 March 2015.

 

6.On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Mortimer Clarke Solicitors by way of a CPR 31.14. To date I have yet to receive a compliant response. This was posted on the 08 May 2015 and signed as received on the 11 May 2015.

 

Therefore with the courts 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.

 

(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, it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

8. 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.

 

9.. 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 including interest pursuant to S69 of the County Court Act.

[AndyOrch]

Just a few tweaks Dave......if you are in agreement?

 

Andy