Jump to content


balina2

Lowell/shoe's Claimform - EGG Pers Loan

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 580 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Thank you for your advice and I will also put in the SAR

 

In the meantime, I confirmed back to S-miths that, as they stated, I have responded to their requests for further information (those that are relevant and pertain directly to the matter). I have also provided sufficient evidence of this debt being statute barred, as per my defence (dated Jan 2017) and its accompanying Exhibits. I said their organisation asked me for further information via email and I responded in kind. I said that their statement that this is insufficient as per Part 18 is denied as a result and I would expect that the matter falls actually not under Part 18 but Part 27.

Their response

 

As set out in my email below, your response to my client’s Part 18 request for further information is spread out over a number of emails. It is incoherent and insufficient for the purposes of Part 18.

 

 

For your convenience, I provided you with a copy of my client’s request with space for you to detail your reply. I attach a further copy and ask that the document is completed and returned to me, by no later than 4pm on 24 January 2018. In default, I will have no alternative but to seek an Order from the Court, compelling you to provide a sufficient response.

 

You suggest that the matter falls under Part 27 and not Part 18. The matter has been allocated to the small claims track, the procedure for which is set out in Part 27. Part 18 covers requests for further information.

 

 

Should I ignore them at this point?

 

And is there anything else I should be preparing for the hearing (SAR evidence if received in time)? My defence from Jan 2017 has already been received by the Court and S-smiths.

 

Thank you again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Already covered in my last post...#198...CPR 18 is not applicable to Small Claims Track...Fast Track only.

 

Already advised what you need to prepare and submit and serve in preparation for the hearing...your WS and Disclosures as per the Notice of Allocation.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

eh! they know/confirm its been allocated small claims yet they still want part 18! and you even pointed them to part 27 which confirms 18 doesn't apply in smalls. or am i missing something (was it court ordered?). are you up against a new paralegal/trainee :)

did you see andy's post re 18.


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I wanted to update on the result of the hearing today at small claims.

The Judge ruled in Shoosmiths/Arrows favour and awarded full claim plus costs.

 

The focus of the hearing was actually not on my defence but was a quite personal line of questioning about why I had defaulted, why I had spent certain monies on the bank statements I had provided.

 

The bank statements showed that I had not made the payments that Arrows had claimed I had but this seemed to be of no interest to the Judge who instead asked me about why I had spent money in Morrisons and John Lewis but had failed to keep up payments on my loan.

 

Her summary was that my defence was not unreasonable but that she was making a judgement on the balance of probability which has a threshold of 51%.

No parts of my defence were discussed.

All in all it was very much a huge verbal and financial slap round the chops for having defaulted on a loan, disregarding the fact it is statute barred.

 

I am minded to appeal the decision but I have no idea whether this is possible/advisable.

 

I am also unaware of the best approach to negotiating an installment plan with them so any advice here appreciated.

 

The Judge rather unhelpfully advised that if she were to do this today it would be recommended as £400 a month, even though she had no knowledge of my current financial status/earnings/outgoings etc

You can see I find the Judge somewhat prejudiced......

Edited by dx100uk
spacing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

opps you hit judge lottery.


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...