Cabot/restons Claim form - old MBNA card 'debt' ***Claim Discontinued***

[MBaxter]

OK that makes total sense. Thank you.

 

Would this work instead...

 

Particulars of Claim

 

1.Claimants claim is for debts arising from CCA 1974 agreements.

2.The claimant is the Assignee of the following debts, notice of the assignment having been given to the defendant in writing.

 

MBNA Account No.1234 £4,156.

Despite demands for payment, the above sums remain due.

 

The claimant therefore claims the sum of £4,156 interest under s.69 County Courts Act 1984 and costs

 

Proposed Defence

 

Paragraph 1: is noted I have in the past had financial dealings with Original Creditor but deny any monies being due as alleged by the claimant Cabot.

 

Paragraph 2: is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or provision of a Notice of Assignment between Original Creditor and Cabot Financial and the claimant is put to strict proof thereof.

 

Paragraph 3: is denied the claimant has not provided a default notice as alleged, has failed to respond to a CPR request to verify any breach nor has it served any Notice of Sums in Arrears since their alleged assignment of £XXX and remains in default of my section 78 request dated XXXX.

 

Paragraph 4: is denied as yet the claimant has yet to provide any proof at all.

 

Therefore this claim is neither admitted nor denied with regards to the Defendant entering into an agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim. The Claimant is put to strict proof as to the existence, execution and terms of any alleged agreement 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

(d) show that they have served a Notice of Sums in Arrears

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

 

On receipt of this claim, I sent a CCA 1974, Section 78 request to the Claimant dated XXXX. This was sent via recorded delivery and signed for on the XXXX. The Claimant has yet to comply to this request.

 

Furthermore, on the XXXX, I requested copies of the documents referred to in the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim by way of a Civil Procedure Request 31, PD 14. This was also sent via recorded delivery and signed for on the XXXX. The Claimant has yet to respond.

 

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

 

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. The Defendant has no recollection of receiving a notice of assignment.

 

Until such time the Claimant can comply with my request for a copy of the agreement and other documents relied upon in the Claimant’s Particulars of Claim, the Claimant is prevented from enforcing or requesting any relief as pursuant to 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.

[MBaxter]

Also, do you recommend sending via mail guaranteed next day delivery or file online?

[Guest]

can be filed online via MCOL

 

a typo; should be '...civil procedure request 31.14', not '31 PD 14'.

[dx100uk]

always via the MCOL website.

but not yet.

 

 

let andy check it

 

 

you need to add to the top as a stand alone sentence..

 

 

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.

 

 

and remove the embarrassed defence bits you've sneaked in...very old hat now and never used

 

 

Therefore this claim is neither admitted nor denied

[dx100uk]

https://cse.google.co.uk/cse?cx=partner-pub-0964707606882478:652l7hswbgv&ie=UTF-8&q=reston+claimform+MBNA+card+&sa=Search+CAG#gsc.tab=0&gsc.q=reston%20claimform%20MBNA%20card&gsc.page=1

[MBaxter]

Thank you for that.

 

 

I have amended/added in the top part you have suggested.

 

 

When you refer to the embarrassed defense parts..

"Therefore this claim is neither admitted or denied" s

hould I just delete that whole paragraph or change it to ... ...

 

 

... "Therefore this claim is denied with regards to the Defendant entering into an agreement

referred to in the Particulars of Claim.

The Claimant is put to strict proof as to the existence, execution and terms of any alleged agreement".

 

The rest I'll await Andy to double check as suggested.

[dx100uk]

have a read of some of the threads in that link

they all have defences

[AndyOrch]

HI MB

 

I have brought forward your particulars of claim...and numbered them accordingly...check it now as you will see there is no paragraph 3 or 4 or any reference to a default notice.

 

Andy

[MBaxter]

Great - thank you for that Andy - it makes more sense now. I will go over again with a fine tooth comb tomorrow make sure all the figures etc. are correct and so it's ready to submit next week. I've been up since 5 am and am totally whacked and falling asleep in front of the computer.

 

Cheers all I really do appreciate your help and hope to be able to reciprocate to others.

 

Also, I shall make a donation when i get paid as the site is invaluable and will potentially save me a tonne of money in solicitor and litigation fees etc.

[AndyOrch]

Yes best take a break ...its only a minor tweak required and your good to go.

[MBaxter]

Just a quickie - I called the courts just to clarify filing dates, they confirmed as the date due is a Sunday that I have until Monday. Would you recommend filing today or leave until Monday?

 

Also, I have not had a reply to my CCA request. I sent it w/ proof of postage - is this normal not to receive any acknowledgement? I did get an ackowledgement to my CPR31 request though. Just curious.

[renegadeimp]

You wont get a reply. Cabot wont have the paperwork, so cant enforce it. They rely on lack of knowledge to get a judgement and hope they wont be found out. Once found out, they issue a NoD for 'business reasons' and run off.

[MBaxter]

Oh thank you for that.

 

 

Not that I'm glad this has happened, but I have found it all very interesting

how this side of the banking/dca industry operates a

nd how very close to fraudulent it is.

 

 

The industry clearly makes its money on fear and bullying tactics,

much like a controlled mafia operation in many ways.

[Old Cogger]

Oh thank you for that. Not that I'm glad this has happened, but I have found it all very interesting how this side of the banking/dca industry operates and how very close to fraudulent it is. The industry clearly makes its money on fear and bullying tactics, much like a controlled mafia operation in many ways.

 

 

you are learning!

[AndyOrch]

Mat as well submit today...1 day wont make a difference...then you can relax over the weekend.

 

Andy

[MBaxter]

Great, that is kind of what i had thought. I will wait until the mail comes today not that I expect anything.

[dx100uk]

filing date is already covered in post 26

[MBaxter]

So, from getting home yesterday evening I have tried to submit my defense. I get as far as pasting the details and then hit submit and get the following ... "We are sorry, but your request has been rejected owing to one or more technical reasons. Please check your input and try again. If you continue to get this message then please contact the Money Claim helpdesk".

 

The number to call has been discontinued with no alternative number provided to call. This is a joke, right?

[MBaxter]

This now has happened at least 10 times. I have taken several screen shots for proof. Is there a way of submitting via email?

[MBaxter]

Filed via email now. I would have preferred to do online knowing that it is all done and complete but if I can't do that til Monday then this is the next best thing. The guy at the court did email me details for submitting online and in his email he states they have planned to have the system down Sunday and in the event it over runs, there is a back up.

 

Other than calling to confirm they have received the email Monday, I guess I can breathe a bit for now and see what they do next.

 

Thanks once again for all your help so far guys.

[MBaxter]

Hi Andy - I called the courts y'day and they confirmed the defense was received Friday (despite website not responding correctly). So what happens now? Is it a case of I await a reply from the solicitors with the information I have requested from the CCA request and CPR31 letters sent to them or do I need to contact the courts if I do not hear from them in order to have the case stayed?

 

I just don't want to sit and wait and then lose the chance to make it a bit harder for them.

 

Thanks,

 

Mike

[AndyOrch]

The claimant has 33 days to respond and if not the claim is stayed...no need to ring the courts...so until you receive a directions questionnaire (n180)....forget all about it

[MBaxter]

Thanks mate. For obvious reasons, I hope I do not hear from them as this dates back to 2001 but who knows.

 

Can I just ask what is the relevance in pre 2007 credit card agreements?

I was talking to someone I used to work with today

he said that a lot of claims brought to court for debts prior to 2007 are very shaky

because of the PPI claims

but he is a news reporter not a solicitor or banker. Just wondered.

[dx100uk]

Not PPI but changes to the CCA in 2006

 

Dx

[AndyOrch]

The key provisions of the CCA 2006, which received Royal Assent on 30 March 2006, was brought into force from April 2007

 

The significance of that change was Section 127, subsections (3)-(5) of CCA 1974 have been repealed so as to give courts a discretion as to whether agreements should be deemed unenforceable. The CCA 1974 automatically renders agreements unenforceable where, for example, certain prescribed information has not been included in the agreement. This discretion will certainly be helpful to lenders in light of the increased prescribed information to be provided under the CCA 2006.

 

This also affected the following parts of the original CCA1974 in that a court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1) (a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner)

 

Here are the relevant links

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/127/enacted

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/65/enacted

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/61/enacted

 

Regards

 

Andy