PRA Claimform - Halifax credit card debt ***Claim Dismissed***

[dx100uk]

you can never prepare nor counter judge lottery.

 

 

[AndyOrch]

 "did you have the money and did you spend it?"!  What would be a reasonable response to this?!

 

With the upmost respect I'm not on trial to determine if I had the money or spent it.....Im defending the claimants particulars of claim and putting the claimant to strict proof to disclose that they are legally allowed to bring this claim instead of the original creditor pursuant to the Credit consumer Act 1974 and the utilising the Civil Procedure Rules.

 

See whats his response to that is ?

 

Andy

[amerillo]

On 09/07/2019 at 16:31, dx100uk said:

you can never prepare nor counter judge lottery.

 

 

 

Ok, so I guess it'll be freestyle on the day?! I guess it's just a case of being respectful, referring to the judge as "your honour" etc? I did a little Google search on the judge, doesn't look like the judge's speciality is consumer legislation. Hopefully he will have read the basic legislation that I have reference?

17 hours ago, Andyorch said:

 "did you have the money and did you spend it?"!  What would be a reasonable response to this?!

 

With the upmost respect I'm not on trial to determine if I had the money or spent it.....Im defending the claimants particulars of claim and putting the claimant to strict proof to disclose that they are legally allowed to bring this claim instead of the original creditor pursuant to the Credit consumer Act 1974 and the utilising the Civil Procedure Rules.

 

See whats his response to that is ?

 

Andy

 

Thanks Andy, will commit this to memory!!!

[amerillo]

So just an update, I have received a response statement from PRA in relation to my witness statement, which they have filed with the court. I wasn't expecting to receive this, however I have drafted another statement in response to this. Can I post both up for scrutiny?

 

[dx100uk]

yes 

pdf only please 

read upload

[amerillo]

Ok here are the two documents in PDF format, first their response to my original statement, and then my response to their response! I have redacted various dates but not sure whether this was necessary to be honest!!

 

Thanks!!!

PRA response statement.pdf My response statement.pdf

[dx100uk]

1. forget about it.. you signed the courts one yes..
2.oh dear a lip was a few days late..tough luck pra.
3. no chance

 

the rest is just rubbish to try and kid the judge they dont need to produce a copy of the actual DN.
a database screenshot is not proof one was ever served or sent.

the oc could have decided not to send it..

 

just musings

 

 

[AndyOrch]

7.  

Section 87 states ...Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a “default notice ”)

Service of an actual Default Notice........not a cobbled together screenshot that could have been created last week on their own software..a screen shot of details is not a default notice nor evidence that one was ever sent.

 

87 Need for default notice.

(1)Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a “default notice ”) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,—

(a)to terminate the agreement, or

(b)to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

(c)to recover possession of any goods or land, or

(d)to treat any right conferred on the debtor or hirer by the agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

(e)to enforce any security.

(2)Subsection (1) does not prevent the creditor from treating the right to draw upon any credit as restricted or deferred, and taking such steps as may be necessary to make the restriction or deferment effective.

(3)The doing of an act by which a floating charge becomes fixed is not enforcement of a security.

(4)Regulations may provide that subsection (1) is not to apply to agreements described by the regulations.

(5)Subsection (1)(d) does not apply in a case referred to in section 98A(4) (termination or suspension of debtor's right to draw on credit under open-end agreement).

[AndyOrch]

...Each party should only submit one statement..there is no such thing as a Reply to Defendants/Claimant's  Witness Statement.

 

The Legal term is a Supplemental Witness Statement...which is only used for new evidence...and normally agreed between parties that one will be submitted....not for tit  responses...otherwise this could go all month and you end up with 30 statements each.

 

In many cases the Court orders parties simultaneously to exchange witness statements. The rationale is clear: sequential exchange may well give one party an unfair advantage in terms of the ability to tailor the content of their own statements in response to the statements served by the other side. The corollary of simultaneous exchange, however, is that one party will often seek to adduce a supplementary witness statement. It might do so as a direct response to the other side’s evidence, or, more controversially, in an attempt to re-cast its case when it becomes clear what the other’s side arguments will be. What, then, is the effect of CPR 32.5(3) and (4) in this scenario? The rules provide as follows:

 

(3) A witness giving oral evidence at trial may with the permission of the court –

(a) amplify his witness statement; and

 (b) give evidence in relation to new matters which have arisen since the witness statement was served on the other parties.

 

(4) The court will give permission under paragraph (3) only if it considers that there is good reason not to confine the evidence of the witness to the contents of his witness statement.

 

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part32#32.4

 

Andy

[amerillo]

15 hours ago, dx100uk said:

1. forget about it.. you signed the courts one yes..
2.oh dear a lip was a few days late..tough luck pra.
3. no chance

 

the rest is just rubbish to try and kid the judge they dont need to produce a copy of the actual DN.
a database screenshot is not proof one was ever served or sent.

the oc could have decided not to send it..

 

just musings

 

 

 

Definitely signed the court one, I remember that was the last thing I did before sealing it and dropping it in the box about 45mins before they closed! Someone assured me that it would be logged as filed that day so all ok on that front.

 

With regards to the PRA docs, to be honest I thought I had signed that too but I was rushing to catch the last post.

I wasn't even a few days late, just one!! So it definitely looks like they are trying their luck.

 

I feel confident that these requests will be dismissed.

If they had sent me the information on the two separate occasions that I requested them months ago, then it wouldn't have happened. Definitely not an accidental oversight by them, they obviously did it on purpose.

 

They knew that if I had access to the one document that could ruin their case as early as when I first asked for it that I would be able to pee all over it and set it on fire (figuratively of course!!). They clearly wanted to make it such that I had as little time as possible to rubbish it.

[dx100uk]

well if moaning about a couple of silly Litigant in Person allowed 'mistakes' in their list of things 'wrong' in all they can do. [an they feel they are more important than the supposed DN issue as they state them first, is all they can come up with...they don't stand a chance IMHO, and they know it.

[amerillo]

My thoughts exactly! Fingers crossed!!!

[amerillo]

based on the CPR, do you think I should not be sending a response

 

I definitely want to reiterate my arguments to make them very clear to the judge, and also explain why I was late with the filing as it is definitely valid in my opinion. But at the same time I don't want to be annoying and pee the judge off before the date!!

 

Surely PRA would know that there is no requirement for a response to my statement, because, as mentioned in the CPR, there is no new evidence, they are just trying to argue against me by repeating what they have already said, like they are arguing with a sibling!!!

in theory, both "responses" would probably be disregarded anyway?

 

Makes me wonder whether they only sent this in as they have no intention of attending or sending someone to represent them as their case is poor........else they are just chucking good money after bad.

 

Or perhaps they will continue to gnaw away at this in a hope that they will by chance win and recover their losses on it?

I could be wrong, but the way I see it, the ONLY way they win this is if the judge doesn't rule according to the legislation.

 

[AndyOrch]

I doubt the court will even accept it or the judge read in in all honesty 

[amerillo]

Hmmmmm. What to do!!!!

 

I just gave the listings dept at the county court a call and they haven't as yet received anything from PRA (likely stuck in their mail chain). They said that apparently it is an optional thing (??).

 

I was thinking that maybe I would just sit on my response and bring it with me to the hearing but they advised me to file it so that they judge can look at the case beforehand.

 

One thing I have just thought about is that my witness statement bears no relationship to the initial defence that I filed when the claim was initially made; in fact, I have barely mentioned it in my original statement.

Does this matter?

 

Also, based on the ordering of simultaneous exchanges (as in Andy's post #161), it is clear that my witness statement is based on PRA's statement, and I have mentioned in my "response to the response statement" that I needed to re-write my statement based on what the Claimant had written in their's.

 

Would the judge view this as me having an unfair advantage?

I know it shouldn't be an issue as PRA should have sent me the "screenshot" months ago, but I can't help but wonder!!!

[AndyOrch]

Which post contains their initial witness statement ?

[amerillo]

I didn't upload their initial statement, but here it is.....

PRA initial witness statement.pdf

[AndyOrch]

The £1 paid to Robbers I assume was  CCA request and not payment towards the debt ?

[amerillo]

No that refers to the token payments that I offered to pay.

[AndyOrch]

In 2016 but you defaulted in 2009...any payments made before 2016 after you defaulted in 2009....7 year gap ?

[amerillo]

Yes, I did make payments. PRA sent me a "statement" showing payments as far back as 2014, although this too could have easily been a made up document to be honest!!! Were you thinking statute barred?

[AndyOrch]

Yes was just trying to eliminate the possibility...but if you dont recall making them and they can only provide their self created statement of payments..not one from Halifax on their headed paper.....I would be challenging said payments.

[amerillo]

Is it not too late to add this in now?

[AndyOrch]

It should already be in your Witness Statement....you cant keep adding and serving further statements.

[amerillo]

Yeah I think I will have to leave it at that. Surely the lame excuse for a default notice will be enough to lean things in my favour. Still toying with whether to send in my response or not though!