PRA Judge & Priestley Claim Form MBNA

[AndyOrch]

Do not submit the above as your defence......4th warning......

[mahul04]

Do not submit the above as your defence......4th warning......

How come. ? Please advise as my last day is tomorrow to send. . I have read the link but none are to related to my case ... spent hours reading... Please advise how I should defend ..

[AndyOrch]

Because its not CPR complient.....reads more like a shopping list...possibly useful for a witness statement ...but not as your initial defence.

 

In the thread DX posted above...this is how you should be laying out a holding defence at this stage of proceedings.

 

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 noted. It is accepted that the Defendant has had financial dealings with MBNA in the past, although I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged debt by which the claimant refers to within this claim.I have requested clarity by way of a section 78 request as of this date the claimant has only been able to disclose a reconstituted version which is not acceptable given that the alleged debt is pre April 2007

 

3) Paragraphs 2, 3 & 4 are denied as I am not aware of any Default Notice or Notice of Assignment as stated.I have never received statements or Notice of Sums in Arrears given that the claimants plead they are the legal owner of any alleged debt.

 

It is my understanding and pursuant to the CCA2006 amendments that the claimant is prevented from any enforcement during this lack of service.

 

4) Notwithstanding the above on receipt of the above claim a request for information pursuant to the consumer crediticon Act (section 78) and CPR 31.14.The requests were made on 16th October 2014 and acknowledged by the claimant in a letter dated 22nd October 2014. To date I have received no response or acknowledgement from the claimant’s solicitor.

 

The claimant is therefore in default of the statuary 12 days.

 

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

 

6) 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

 

It is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any alleged monies to Aktiv Kapital. The Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

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

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

© evidence any nature of breach and show service of a Default Notice and Notice of sums in Arrears.

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

 

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.

 

 

 

Look at yours and then read this again.

 

Andy

[mahul04]

here is my amended draft /... many thanks for the link it was a great help and much clearer .. what do you guys think is it good enough to send or should I add anything........

 

I have received the claim from Northampton county court on 28th may 2015

 

The claimant claims the sum of £22k for debt and interest.

On 26/06/2002 the defendant entered into an agreement with MBNA for a credit card under reference xx

 

On 30/01/10 the defendant defaulted on the agreement with an outstanding balance of £18k.

 

On 01/03/10 the debt was assigned to Verde Investments (Ireland) Ltd. Who assigned the debt

 

to Aktiv Kapital Portfolio AS, Oslo, and Zug Branch?

 

1. On 03/03/12 the debt was assigned to PRA GROUP ON 31/12/14
    
   Notices of assignment were sent in accordance with S136 Law of Property Act 1925.
    
   AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
   1. The sum of £17,385.44
   2. Statutory interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00% per
   annum from 03/03/12 to 27/5/15
    
   4496.40 and thereafter at a daily rate of 3.81 until judgement or sooner payment [pound signs missing]
    
   The defendant contends that the Particulars of Claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out his case below and relies on CPR 16.5 (3) in relation to any allegation to which a specific response has not been made.
    
   It is denied that the account was defaulted, and was in dispute at that time. I have sought clarity by way of a CPR 31.14 request; the claimant has yet to comply.
    
   I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from MBNA, PRA GROUP or the Claimant. I have therefore sought clarity by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has yet to comply.
   It is therefore at this time denied with regards to the defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is therefore out 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; and
   c) Show evidence of any breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notices of sums in arrears; and
   d) Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.
   e)As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
   f) Accordingly the Claimant has failed to comply with s78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s78 (6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.
    
   g) The Claimant has failed to reply and has not disclosed any documents relatin g to their claim to the Defendant.
    
   On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the claimant has a right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law and Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.
    
   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.
    
   STATEMENT OF TRUTH
    
   The defendant believes that the facts stated in his defence are true
   

I have received the claim from Northampton county court on 28th may 2015

 

The claimant claims the sum of £22k for debt and interest.

On 26/06/2002 the defendant entered into an agreement with MBNA for a credit card under reference x

On 30/01/10 the defendant defaulted on the agreement with an outstanding balance of £18k.

 

On 01/03/10 the debt was assigned to Verde Investments (Ireland) Ltd. Who assigned the debt

 

to Aktiv Kapital Portfolio AS, Oslo, and Zug Branch?

 

1. On 03/03/12 the debt was assigned to PRA GROUP ON 31/12/14
    
   Notices of assignment were sent in accordance with S136 Law of Property Act 1925.
    
   AND THE CLAIMANT CLAIMS
   1. The sum of £17,385.44
   2. Statutory interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00% per
   annum from 03/03/12 to 27/5/15
    
   4496.40 and thereafter at a daily rate of 3.81 until judgement or sooner payment [pound signs missing]
    
   The defendant contends that the Particulars of Claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out his case below and relies on CPR 16.5 (3) in relation to any allegation to which a specific response has not been made.
    
   It is denied that the account was defaulted, and was in dispute at that time. I have sought clarity by way of a CPR 31.14 request; the claimant has yet to comply.
    
   I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from MBNA, PRA GROUP or the Claimant. I have therefore sought clarity by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has yet to comply.
   It is therefore at this time denied with regards to the defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is therefore out 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; and
   c) Show evidence of any breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notices of sums in arrears; and
   d) Show how the claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.
   e)As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4) it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.
   f) Accordingly the Claimant has failed to comply with s78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s78 (6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.
   

g) The Claimant has failed to reply and has not disclosed any documents relatin g to their claim to the Defendant.

 

On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the claimant has a right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law and Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

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

 

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

 

The defendant believes that the facts stated in his defence are true

[AndyOrch]

Particulars of Claim

 

1.The claimant claims the sum of 21 881.84 for debt+interest.On 26/06/2002 the defendant entered into an agreement with Mbna for a credit card ref ########

 

2.On 30/01/ 2010 the defended defaulted on the agreement with an outstanding amount balance of 17385.44..

 

3.On 01/03/10 the debt of 17385.44 was assigned to varde investment (iIreland ) Ltd name change t.. who itself assigned the debt to aktiv kapital portfolio as zug branch on 03/03/1212 who then assigned the debt to pra group uk Ltd on 31/12/14

 

4.notices of assignment were sent to the defendant accordance with s136law of property act 1925

 

And the claimant claims

1 the sum of 17385.44

2 statutory interest pursuant to section 69 of the court act 1984 at a rate of 8.00% per annum from 3/3/1212 to 27/515 44960.40and there after at a daily rate of 3.81 until judgement or sooner payment

 

Defence

 

The defendant contends that the Particulars of Claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out his case below and relies on CPR 16.5 (3) in relation to any allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

It is denied that the account was defaulted, and was in dispute at that time. I have sought clarity by way of a CPR 31.14 request; the claimant has yet to comply.

 

I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from MBNA, PRA GROUP or the Claimant. I have therefore sought clarity by way of a CPR 31.14 request. The claimant has yet to comply.

It is therefore at this time denied with regards to the defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is therefore out 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; and

c) Show evidence of any breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notices of sums in arrears; and

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

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

f) Accordingly the Claimant has failed to comply with s78 (1) consumer crediticon Act 1974 and by virtue of s78 (6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.

 

g) The Claimant has failed to reply and has not disclosed any documents relating to their claim to the Defendant.

 

h) On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the claimant has a right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law and Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

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.

[AndyOrch]

Getting there.....look how I have numbered their particulars of claim......4 points that they wish to make.....that they state as the cause of action.

 

A defence can only be valid if you respond to those 4 points....you either admit or deny......anything else you state the court will take as an admission.

 

So you answer theirs points one by one...by either admitting or denying.

[mahul04]

how about now

 

( particulars and claim number removed )

 

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 noted. It is accepted that the Defendant has had financial dealings with MBNA in the past, although I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged debt by which the claimant refers to within this claim.I have requested clarity by way of a section 78 request as of this date the claimant has only been able to disclose a reconstituted version which is not acceptable given that the alleged debt is pre April 2007

 

3) Paragraphs 2, 3 & 4 are denied as I am not aware of any Default Notice or Notice of Assignment as stated.I have never received statements or Notice of Sums in Arrears given that the claimants plead they are the legal owner of any alleged debt.

 

It is my understanding and pursuant to the CCA2006 amendments that the claimant is prevented from any enforcement during this lack of service.

 

4) Notwithstanding the above on receipt of the above claim a request for information pursuant to the consumer credit Act (section 78) and CPR 31.14.The requests were made on 16th October 2015 and acknowledged by the claimant in a letter dated 22nd October 2015. To date I have received no response or acknowledgement from the claimant’s solicitor.

 

The claimant is therefore in default of the statuary 12 days.

 

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

 

6) 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

 

It is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any alleged monies to pra group l. The Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

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

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

© evidence any nature of breach and show service of a Default Notice and Notice of sums in Arrears.

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

 

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.

 

 

Statement of truth removed ...not required

[AndyOrch]

Thats fine you are now CPR compliant and good to go.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[mahul04]

Many thanks for all your help well be donating very soon ..

just out of interest what will happen next. . It's my first court experience

[AndyOrch]

The claimant has 28 days to decide if they wish to proceed (on receipt of the defence) if they wish to procced the court will advise and it will move to allocation stage...if they fail to respond the claim will be stayed.

[shamrocker]

Many thanks for all your help well be donating very soon ..

just out of interest what will happen next. . It's my first court experience

 

Hi Mahul04 - I've been away from this site for a while,

 

 

I was in a similar position to you with taking on J&P with an old MBNA debt not too long ago.

 

 

I lost, but learned a lot in the process - expensive lesson with over £5k in costs on top of the full amount awarded to the claimant!

 

 

I'll look in from time to time to see how you're getting on and may be able to offer you some pointers.

 

 

With there being no apparent agreement it being pre-2007,

I have a feeling they'll adopt a similar approach with you to that used with me.

 

 

In the meantime, you may want to look at my old thread, particularly the end part where I summed up the experience.

 

Good luck!

 

Sham

[Guest]

thanks shamrock. 5k costs! not nice.

mahul04, do have a read of shamrocks thread. for ref (is it this one?), thread link http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?404641-MBNA-court-Activ-Kapital

[AndyOrch]

Hi Mahul04 - I've been away from this site for a while, but I was in a similar position to you with taking on J&P with an old MBNA debt not too long ago. I lost, but learned a lot in the process - expensive lesson with over £5k in costs on top of the full amount awarded to the claimant! Anyway, I'll look in from time to time to see how you're getting on and may be able to offer you some pointers. With there being no apparent agreement it being pre-2007, I have a feeling they'll adopt a similar approach with you to that used with me. In the meantime, you may want to look at my old thread, particularly the end part where I summed up the experience.

 

Good luck!

 

Sham

 

But your case was Fast Track Sham to be fair and you were always at risk of costs...this is Small Claim Track

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Guest]

But your case was Fast Track Sham to be fair and you were always at risk of costs...this is Small Claim Track

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

re post #17, mahul's claim is for 22k. likely to be fast track (if it proceeds).

[AndyOrch]

Apologies Ford and Sham so it is......dont know why I assumed this was SCT...scratch my last post:oops:

[Guest]

shams seems to have resulted in summary judgment. if such application arises, can negotiate/tomlin prior if needs be (avoid poss costs if not looking good)?

[shamrocker]

Hi guys... they'll make a 'Without Prejudice' offer at some stage no doubt,

but my personal mistake,

apart from being very naive going into the trial,

was to eject it in the thinking that they were afraid to go to trial themselves.

Pre-armed with what I know now,

I could have presented a much stronger defence at the trial.

 

 

Ultimately, I also did not lay the groundwork properly prior to the trial either - within my defence and witness statements,

and no skeleton argument for the 'mini-trial'.

 

 

i was a bit of a mess tbh - easy pickings, but wiser for the experience.

 

Anyway, we're a long way off that stage yet!

 

Sham

[mahul04]

Hi guys .. Unfortunately judge and priestly are going ahead with the case and court has sent me a form N181 directions questionnaire to fill out. . Really lost now should I get a solicitor ? Or is there some advice you guys can give me.

[AndyOrch]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?447033-PRA-Group-claimform-old-MBNA-card-debt/page2&highlight=n181

 

The above thread covers completion and directions for the N181.

 

Andy

[mahul04]

Just read the above post about filling in form N181 the first question asks if given the rules require you to try to settle the claim before the hearing do u want to attempt to settle at this stage ?

2. If yes do u want one moths stay ... y n

3 . If you answered no please state below the reason why you consider it in appropriate to try to settle at this stage

 

There is a big blank page to give reason. .

What should I pu?? ?? The above link says to put yes to the first question. I think the form must have changed slightly since then.

Also what you think the next step will be. . It's getting very serious??

[AndyOrch]

State yes ...as you are expected to by the courts

[mahul04]

Hi guys .. judge and priestly have failed to comply with my cpr3114 snd my cca request .

.. as of today I have not received one letter of response what should I do now. ? .

 

Sorry the time has passed on both the cca and the cpr3114 .. what should I do next ??

[AndyOrch]

Nothing......The court will order disclosure once the Notice of Allocation is processed.

[Guest]

stick to court procedure/timeline in the meantime.

its not small claims, so they cant use that as an excuse re 31.14. and a cca request needs to be satisfied at some point. you've already mentioned those in yr defence. but i suppose its whether they can satisfy the cca request, and show/prove their claim, come the time for hearing.

see what andy etc say.

 

ps, andy beat my post

[mahul04]

so is it worth sending an sar request to the solictors