Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is the other sign  parking sign 1a.pdf
    • 4 means that they need to name and then tell the people who will be affected that there has been an application made, what the application relates to (specificially "whether it relates to the exercise of the court’s jurisdiction in relation to P’s property and affairs, or P’s personal welfare, or to both) and what this application contains (i.e what order they want made as a result of it) 5 just means that teh court think it is important that the relevant people are notified 7 means that the court need more information to make the application, hence they have then made the order of paragraph 1 which requires the applicant to do more - this means the court can't make a decision with the current information, and need more, hence paragraph one of the order is for the applicant to do more. paragraph 3 of the order gives you the ability to have it set aside, although if it was made in january you are very late. Were you notiifed of the application or not?    
    • These are the photos of the signs. At the entrance there is a 7h free sign. On some bays there is a permit sign.  Also their official website is misleading as it implies all parking is free.  I can't be certain of the exact parking bay I was in that day, and there was no PCN ticket on my car and no other evidence was provided.  parking sign 2.pdf
    • Hi, In my last post I mentioned I had received an email from SS who were asking me to hand over the keys to my mother’s flat so they could pass them to the Law firm who have been appointed court of protection to access, secure and insure my mother’s property.  Feeling this, all quickly getting out of my hands I emailed ss requesting proof of this. I HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM SS.  Yesterday, I received an email (with attached court of protection order) from the Law Firm confirming this was correct (please see below a copy of this).  After reading the court of protection order I do have some concerns about it:   (a)   I only found out yesterday, the Law firm had been appointed by the court back in January.  Up until now, I have not received any notification regarding this.  (b)   Section 2   - States I am estranged from my mother.  This is NOT CORRECT    The only reason I stepped back from my mother was to protect myself from the guy (groomer) who had befriended her & was very aggressive towards me & because of my mother’s dementia she had become aggressive also.  I constantly tried to warned SS about this guy's manipulative behaviour towards my mother and his increasing aggressiveness towards me (as mentioned in previous posts).  Each time I was ignored.  Instead, SS encouraged his involvement with my mother – including him in her care plans and mental health assessments.   I was literally pushed out because I feared him and my mother’s increasing aggression towards me. Up until I stepped back, I had always looked after my mother and since her admission to the care home, I visit regularly.   .(c)    Sections -  4, 5 and 7  I am struggling to understand these as I don’t have a legal background.  I was wondering if there is anyone who might be able to explain what they mean.  It’s been a horrendous situation where I had to walk away from my mother at her most vulnerable because of; ss (not helping), scammer and groomer. I have no legal background, nor experience in highly manipulative people or an understanding of how the SS system operates, finding myself isolated, scared and powerless to the point I haven’t collected my personal belongings and items for my mother’s room in the care home.  Sadly, the court has only had heard one version of this story SS’s, and based their decision on that. My mother’s situation and the experience I have gone through could happen to anyone who has a vulnerable parent.    If anyone any thoughts on this much appreciated.  Thank you. ______________________________________________________  (Below is the Court of Protection Order)  COURT OF PROTECTION                                                                                                                                                                                   No xxx  MENTAL CAPACITY ACT 2005 In the matter of Name xxx ORDER Made by  Depty District Judge At xxx Made on xxx Issued on 18 January 2024  WHEREAS  1.     xxx Solicitors, Address xxx  ("Applicant”) has applied for an order under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.  2.     The Court notes (my mother) is said to be estranged from all her three children and only one, (me) has been notified.  3.     (Me) was previously appointed as Atorney for Property and Affairs for (my mother).  The Exhibity NAJ at (date) refers to (me) and all replacement Attorneys are now officially standing down.  4.     Pursuant to Rule 9.10 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 and Practice Direction 9B the Applicant 2must seek to identify at least three persons who are likely to have an interest in being notified that an application has been issues.”  The children of (my mother), and any other appointed attorneys are likely to have an interest in the application, because of the nature of relationship to (my mother).  5.     The Court considers that the notification requirements are an important safeguard for the person in respect of whom an order is sought.  6.     The Court notes that it is said that the local authority no longer has access to (my mother’s) Property.  7.     Further information is required for the Court to determine the application.  IT IS ORDERED THAT  Within 28 days of the issue date this order, the Applicant shall file a form COP24 witness statement confirming that the other children of (my mother) and any replacement attorneys have been notified of the application and shall confirm their name, address, and date upon which those persons were notified.  If the Applicant wishes the Court to dispense with any further notification, they should file a COP9 and COP24 explaining, what steps (if any) have been taken to attempt notification and why notification should be dispensed with.   Pending the determination of the application to appoint a deputy for (my mother), the Applicant is authorised to take such steps as are proportionate and necessary to access, secure and insure the house and property of (my mother).   This order was made without a hearing and without notice.  Any person affected by this order may apply within 21 days of the date on which the order was served to have the order set aside or varied pursuant to Rule 13.4 of the Court of Protection Rules 2017 (“the Rules”).  Such application must be made on Form COP9 and in accordance with Part 10 Rules.              
    • Unless I've got an incorrect copy of the relevant regulation: The PCN is only deemed to have arrived two days after dispatch "unless the contrary is proved" in which case date of delivery does matter (not just date of posting) and I would like clarification of the required standard of proof. It seems perhaps this hasn't been tested. Since post is now barcoded for the Post Office's own tracking purposes perhaps there is some way I can get that evidence from the Post Office...
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

MBNA court Activ Kapital


shamrocker
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3459 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 361
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Are you submitting a WS in objection to their application for SJ....have you had an hearing date yet?

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

 

I had a letter confirming the hearing date this morning - it's less than two weeks away. The WS submission deadline is about a week away - yes, I will submit a defence if you good people believe there is some merit in it.

 

As outlined above, currently they have only produced one blurry and illegible copy of signed CCA, then more recently a clearer unsigned copy of a CCA with my name and address printed on it. No T&Cs have been disclosed. Their main focus seems to be credit card statements and the fact that credit has been received.

 

My other query is whether the steep rise in minimum repayments could be used in any way to highlight their total lack of disregard for the terms of any agreement that supposedly existed - the same agreement they are trying to enforce now. Without going into detail here, there seems to be no obvious explanation for this other than they weren't adhering to the agreement terms themselves at that point in time. Can they be be picked up on not adhering to said agreement during the course of the arrangement, but then place great importance on the agreement when it suits them? Maybe this is just a trivial point.

 

I'd really appreciate your advice on the above - particularly with regards to defending on illegible agreement and no T&Cs. The agreement is pre-2007, if that's of any use.

 

Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

 

I had a letter confirming the hearing date this morning - it's less than two weeks away. The WS submission deadline is about a week away - yes, I will submit a defence if you good people believe there is some merit in it.

 

As outlined above, currently they have only produced one blurry and illegible copy of signed CCA, then more recently a clearer unsigned copy of a CCA with my name and address printed on it. No T&Cs have been disclosed. Their main focus seems to be credit card statements and the fact that credit has been received.

 

My other query is whether the steep rise in minimum repayments could be used in any way to highlight their total lack of disregard for the terms of any agreement that supposedly existed - the same agreement they are trying to enforce now. Without going into detail here, there seems to be no obvious explanation for this other than they weren't adhering to the agreement terms themselves at that point in time. Can they be be picked up on not adhering to said agreement during the course of the arrangement, but then place great importance on the agreement when it suits them? Maybe this is just a trivial point.

 

I'd really appreciate your advice on the above - particularly with regards to defending on illegible agreement and no T&Cs. The agreement is pre-2007, if that's of any use.

 

Thank you!

As regards the above, see the contents of my post #119.

Kind regards

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

As regards the above, see the contents of my post #119.

Kind regards

The Mould

 

Thanks The Mould. I appreciate you taking the time to help me.

 

I will read through that with interest. I'm sure I will have more questions thereafter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

 

I've been getting my head down on this today and I now need some information with regards to a notice of assignment, as it seems a bit strange.

 

What would this Notice of Assignment document look like and from whom would it be sent/created? Am I correct in that it should be sent to the debtor via registered mail?

 

Basically, the notice of assignment is referred to in the claimant's disclosure documents list, but all I can find is a letter from AK with words to the effect of 'we have purchased your debt'.

 

Then in their witness statement they refer to the defendant (me) being notified that the debt was assigned on (e.g.) 01/01/2013 and that a letter was sent to me on that date notifying me of the assignment -also, the 'notice of assignment letter' is given an exhibit number within the witness statement. The letter listed under that exhibit code is that same 'we have purchased your debt' letter I mention above and the date coincides with the date they claim the assignment of debt took place - i.e. 01/01/13. The record for 'debt assigned' in my credit file also coincides with the date. Therefore, I can only assume this letter is what they are relying upon as the Notice of Assignment.

 

Is this a proper Notice of Assignment? I have my doubts, but am not totally sure.

 

Thank-you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guys

 

I've been getting my head down on this today and I now need some information with regards to a notice of assignment, as it seems a bit strange.

 

What would this Notice of Assignment document look like and from whom would it be sent/created? Am I correct in that it should be sent to the debtor via registered mail?

 

Basically, the notice of assignment is referred to in the claimant's disclosure documents list, but all I can find is a letter from AK with words to the effect of 'we have purchased your debt'.

 

Then in their witness statement they refer to the defendant (me) being notified that the debt was assigned on (e.g.) 01/01/2013 and that a letter was sent to me on that date notifying me of the assignment -also, the 'notice of assignment letter' is given an exhibit number within the witness statement. The letter listed under that exhibit code is that same 'we have purchased your debt' letter I mention above and the date coincides with the date they claim the assignment of debt took place - i.e. 01/01/13. The record for 'debt assigned' in my credit file also coincides with the date. Therefore, I can only assume this letter is what they are relying upon as the Notice of Assignment.

 

Is this a proper Notice of Assignment? I have my doubts, but am not totally sure.

 

Thank-you!

Law of Property Act 1925 sections 136 & 196

 

136 Legal assignments of things in action.E+W

(1)Any absolute assignment by writing under the hand of the assignor (not purporting to be by way of charge only) of any debt or other legal thing in action, of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to claim such debt or thing in action, is effectual in law (subject to equities having priority over the right of the assignee) to pass and transfer from the date of such notice—

(a)the legal right to such debt or thing in action;

(b)all legal and other remedies for the same; and

©the power to give a good discharge for the same without the concurrence of the assignor:

Provided that, if the debtor, trustee or other person liable in respect of such debt or thing in action has notice—

(a)that the assignment is disputed by the assignor or any person claiming under him; or

(b)of any other opposing or conflicting claims to such debt or thing in action;he may, if he thinks fit, either call upon the persons making claim thereto to interplead concerning the same, or pay the debt or other thing in action into court under the provisions of the M15Trustee Act, 1925.

(2)This section does not affect the provisions of the M16Policies of Assurance Act, 1867.

[F156(3)The county court has jurisdiction (including power to receive payment of money or securities into court) under the proviso to subsection (1) of this section where the amount or value of the debt or thing in action does not exceed [F157£30,000].]

 

196 Regulations respecting notices. E+W

 

Annotations are used to give authority for changes and other effects on the legislation you are viewing and to convey editorial information. They appear at the foot of the relevant provision or under the associated heading. Annotations are categorised by annotation type, such as F-notes for textual amendments and I-notes for commencement information (a full list can be found in the Editorial Practice Guide). Each annotation is identified by a sequential reference number. For F-notes, M-notes and X-notes, the number also appears in bold superscript at the relevant location in the text. All annotations contain links to the affecting legislation.

(1)Any notice required or authorised to be served or given by this Act shall be in writing.

(2)Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served on a lessee or mortgagor shall be sufficient, although only addressed to the lessee or mortgagor by that designation, without his name, or generally to the persons interested, without any name, and notwithstanding that any person to be affected by the notice is absent, under disability, unborn, or unascertained.

(3)Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall be sufficiently served if it is left at the last-known place of abode or business in the United Kingdom of the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, or, in case of a notice required or authorised to be served on a lessee or mortgagor, is affixed or left for him on the land or any house or building comprised in the lease or mortgage, or, in case of a mining lease, is left for the lessee at the office or counting-house of the mine.

(4)Any notice required or authorised by this Act to be served shall also be sufficiently served, if it is sent by post in a registered letter addressed to the lessee, lessor, mortgagee, mortgagor, or other person to be served, by name, at the aforesaid place of abode or business, office, or counting-house, and if that letter is not returned [F196by the postal operator (within the meaning of the Postal Services Act 2000) concerned] undelivered; and that service shall be deemed to be made at the time at which the registered letter would in the ordinary course be delivered.

(5)The provisions of this section shall extend to notices required to be served by any instrument affecting property executed or coming into operation after the commencement of this Act unless a contrary intention appears.

(6)This section does not apply to notices served in proceedings in the court.

 

Kind regards

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andy

 

I had a letter confirming the hearing date this morning - it's less than two weeks away. The WS submission deadline is about a week away - yes, I will submit a defence if you good people believe there is some merit in it.

 

As outlined above, currently they have only produced one blurry and illegible copy of signed CCA, then more recently a clearer unsigned copy of a CCA with my name and address printed on it. No T&Cs have been disclosed. Their main focus seems to be credit card statements and the fact that credit has been received.

 

My other query is whether the steep rise in minimum repayments could be used in any way to highlight their total lack of disregard for the terms of any agreement that supposedly existed - the same agreement they are trying to enforce now. Without going into detail here, there seems to be no obvious explanation for this other than they weren't adhering to the agreement terms themselves at that point in time. Can they be be picked up on not adhering to said agreement during the course of the arrangement, but then place great importance on the agreement when it suits them? Maybe this is just a trivial point.

 

I'd really appreciate your advice on the above - particularly with regards to defending on illegible agreement and no T&Cs. The agreement is pre-2007, if that's of any use.

 

Thank you!

 

 

The clearer unsigned copy of the agreement is not compliant with s.61 CCA 1974 and cannot be relied on to enforce by reason of s.127(3) of the Act which such agreement is subject to.

 

 

If the agreement that the Claimant relies on is illegible and absent of terms & conditions, then I believe that you can rely on s.127(3) of the Act and the authority of Harrison v Link Financial Ltd that I posted a link for you previously.

 

 

Kind regards

 

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey guys

 

Just an update. This week I received documents related to an application for summary judgement. The defendant has no case, etc, etc. Any advice on that?

 

Prior to that, I wrote and asked for a legible copy of the CCA they used in disclosure. I have not had a response to that.

 

What are my options here?

 

Many thanks!

Can you scan in the Claimants’ summary judgement application in its entirety so that we can see exactly what you are required to respond to and defeat. Redact all personal details therefrom before posting up here.

Kind regards

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2000/27.html

Click the above link and peruse this House of Lords decision where Lord Hoffman, giving the leading judgement made this qualified statement as regards irredeemable breach of s.61 (1)(a) of CCA 1974 which rendered the agreement in this case unenforceable by virtue of s.127(3) of the 1974 Act:

Lord Hoffman

“Section 65(1) provides that an improperly executed agreement shall be enforceable only "on an order of the court." Section 127 gives the court power to make orders for the enforcement of agreements that are, for various reasons, improperly executed. But subsection (3) provides that a court shall not make an enforcement order for an agreement that does not comply with section 61(1)(a) unless the debtor signed a document containing "all the prescribed terms." The hiring agreement in this case did not and is therefore irredeemably unenforceable”.

The above only applies to regulated agreements that do not comply with s.61(1)(a) before the CCA 1974 was amended and is the highest authority in England and Wales, now replaced by the Supreme Court. The amendments repealed s.127(3) amongst other things.

Kind regards

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks TM! Your advice above is exactly what I was reading up on (re. legibility, T&Cs, etc), albeit I have no idea how to kick my WS/defence off as yet. I have a couple of things to sort right now and then I'll get everything scanned and posted up tonight.

 

I'm sure your guidance would be invaluable.

 

Thanks again!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you submitting a WS in objection to their application for SJ....have you had an hearing date yet?

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Andy,

 

Are you aware of any defences that have proceeded on the grounds of illegible CCA and also non-supply of T&Cs. If so, were they successful or unsuccessful?

 

I need to start getting this together in the next day or two and am struggling with exactly where to start, albeit I'll trawl the forum again tonight for examples. The requests for advice I've read up on so far have only been in with regards to CCA requests that hadn't actually got as far as any claim being lodged and there were no details what impact pointing to the illegible CCA ended up. I'm keen to know how to angle this for the purposes of my WS and objection to SJ.

 

Many thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy,

 

Are you aware of any defences that have proceeded on the grounds of illegible CCA and also non-supply of T&Cs. If so, were they successful or unsuccessful?

 

I need to start getting this together in the next day or two and am struggling with exactly where to start, albeit I'll trawl the forum again tonight for examples. The requests for advice I've read up on so far have only been in with regards to CCA requests that hadn't actually got as far as any claim being lodged and there were no details what impact pointing to the illegible CCA ended up. I'm keen to know how to angle this for the purposes of my WS and objection to SJ.

 

Many thanks!

 

 

Err, Sham, I have posted a link to the House of Lords authority and the Harrison v Link Financial Ltd High Court authority as regards the contents of your above post.

 

 

I have just downloaded the Claimants' WS for his SJ and when I have had the opportunity to peruse the same I shall of course post back here for you.

 

 

Kind regards

 

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Err, Sham, I have posted a link to the House of Lords authority and the Harrison v Link Financial Ltd High Court authority as regards the contents of your above post.

 

 

I have just downloaded the Claimants' WS for his SJ and when I have had the opportunity to peruse the same I shall of course post back here for you.

 

 

Kind regards

 

 

The Mould

 

Thanks The Mould. I would be most grateful for that.

 

I've had a read of the link you posted. It seems to focus primarily on the absence of T&Cs at the time of account opening. I didn't see anything that suited my illegible CCA defence, but I'll have another read through it this evening as it was quite interesting how the case was put.

 

My head is beginning to spin a bit now with it all, but I think that if I can get through this stage I'll come out with a much greater understanding of my position that will help me later on. Trying to glance in on the forum whilst working is making me a bit twitchy :-) ...but I'll sit down for a few hours tonight and try to read some more on the relevant areas.

 

Thanks as always! I really appreciate your guidance a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the CCA

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]52055[/ATTACH]

 

They have also included a slightly 'unsigned' clearer version in the WS pack. My particulars are of a different format/style, so who knows when they were added.

 

I'll scan the DN shortly and get that posted too.

 

P.S. Can you check if any personal details can be seen on the PDF - i.e. author, etc?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the CCA

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]52055[/ATTACH]

 

They have also included a slightly 'unsigned' clearer version in the WS pack. My particulars are of a different format/style, so who knows when they were added.

 

I'll scan the DN shortly and get that posted too.

 

P.S. Can you check if any personal details can be seen on the PDF - i.e. author, etc?

 

 

Can you please post up a copy of the CCA that Claimant relies on in support of his SJ application.

 

 

Kind regards

 

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi The Mould,

 

Please see Default Notice documents attached. Don't hesitate to let me know if you need anything else.

 

Many thanks!

 

Sham

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]52057[/ATTACH]

 

 

The DN is valid because it complies with the provisions of the CCA 1974 before the Act was amended. i.e. before amendments creditors were only required to give debtors 7 days to remedy breach stated in the DN.

 

 

Kind regards

 

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the……………………….County Court Claim no.

 

Between:

 

The parties etc.etc

 

 

 

 

 

 

1st WITNESS STATEMENT of (your full name in caps)

 

EVIDENCE IN REPLY (DRAFT)

 

 

I, (your full name) of (your full postal address) am the Defendant in these proceedings and I make this statement as my evidence in reply in opposition to the Claimant’s summary judgment application dated (put the date). The facts and matters set out hereafter are made to the best of my knowledge and belief and I will say as follows:-

 

 

 

  1. It should be noted that the agreement (“the agreement”) relied on by the claimant in support of his summary judgment application is unsigned and dated 2005 and therefore subject to the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“the Act”) that are set out therein before the Act was amended.

 

a) Section 61 of the Act provides that

“61 Signing of agreement.E+W+S+N.I.

(1)A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless—

(a)a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to regulations under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed manner both by the debtor or hirer and by or on behalf of the creditor or owner, and

(b)the document embodies all the terms of the agreement, other than implied terms, and

©the document is, when presented or sent to the debtor or hirer for signature, in such a state that all its terms are readily legible”.

 

 

  1. The agreement relied on by the Claimant in support of his summary judgment application is clearly not a properly executed agreement pursuant to section 61 of the Act, as a consequence, the agreement is irredeemably unenforceable by reason of section 127(3) of the Act and in this regard, I respectfully draw this Court’s attention to the following House of Lords authority of Dimond v. Lovell [2000] UKHL 27 on this point of law where Lord Hoffmann, giving the leading judgment made this qualified statement:

 

Lord Hoffman

“Section 65(1) provides that an improperly executed agreement shall be enforceable only "on an order of the court." Section 127 gives the court power to make orders for the enforcement of agreements that are, for various reasons, improperly executed. But subsection (3) provides that a court shall not make an enforcement order for an agreement that does not comply with section 61(1)(a) unless the debtor signed a document containing "all the prescribed terms." The hiring agreement in this case did not and is therefore irredeemably unenforceable”.

 

 

  1. In the light of the foregoing, the Claimant’s summary judgment application is not only absent of reality, which is the criteria which the court must apply under CPR Pt 24, rather than one of probability, as stated by Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough in Three Rivers DC v Bank of England (No. 3) [2001] 2 All E. R. 513, but also the Claimants’ summary judgment application is bad in law and ought to be dismissed without any further ado.

 

 

  1. In ED&F Man Liquid Products Ltd v Patel [2003] EWCA Civ 472, it was said that under CPR Pt 24 r.24.2 the overall burden of proof rests on the applicant to establish that there are grounds to believe that the respondent has no real prospect of success and that there is no other reason for a trial. The Claimant has clearly not discharged this burden and clearly cannot discharge this burden on the evidence upon which he relies. The Claimant has not adduced any credible evidence in support of his application and in fact, the award he seeks from this Court thereon contravenes the Act and the authorities cited herein which I rely and which clearly hold in my favour and completely undermine and defeat the Claimants’ application.

  2. For reasons set out above, I believe that I have clearly demonstrated to this Court that I have very strong if not irrefutable prospects of succeeding at trial on the issues which hold in favour of my Defence against the Claimants’ extremely weak claim which I believe remains unsubstantiated and unmeritorious as of the date hereof. Accordingly, I respectfully request that this Court dismiss his application without any costs awarded to him thereon.

STATEMENT OF TRUTH

Signed………………………………………….this 7th day of July 2014

(print full name here) – Defendant/Respondent

The above should get you going Shamrock. But please bear in mind that this draft Evidence in Reply is subject to me viewing a copy of the agreement that the Claimant has filed and served in support of his summary judgment application.

You will need to print of 3 copies of the authorities cited above and to make 3 copies of your witness statement evidence in reply.

File one copy to the Court and serve one copy on the Claimant (his sols acting), send both by Special Delivery!

Kind regards

The Mould

Edited by The Mould
Paragraph spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

As regards the authorities that I have posted for you, it is the point(s) of law decided on by the Court which are relevant to your case and the agreement relied on by the Claimant, the circumstances of those cases are not relevant to your case.

 

 

Kind regards

 

 

The Mould

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you please post up a copy of the CCA that Claimant relies on in support of his SJ application.

 

 

Kind regards

 

 

The Mould

 

I have attached one in post #142 above - is this the one? Or do you also want to see the unsigned agreement that they have included with it?

 

EDIT - looking at the WS draft you very kindly supplied above, I see you have referenced an unsigned agreement, so I will upload that unsigned agreement now.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...