Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • you need to ring northants bulk and ask for a copy of the judgement and the claimform by email pdf. it is quite usual for them to not have a copy of the claimform. so you need to record the call and ask them to read out the particulars of claim and the address it was sent too.     old wives tales , if you have a debt owing that shows on your credit file or you know exists from say the last 7yrs you should NEVER move without WRITTING to the debt owner with your new address. never run from debt which falls within the above .     all mortgage style SLC loans that were not deferred with erudio following the gov't sale in 2013 and that did not have a court claim raised within 6yrs are SB'd.   drydens simply did this because they wrote to your old address, got no response, and knew they'd get a default roboclaim CCJ where no human checks anything.   shot yourself in the foot.      
    • yep.   if all these are still owned/with the original creditors and you are not paying any powerless DCA's  then little point in any CCA requests at this stage unless any (non OD A/C's) are say pre 2000 opening.   our pro rata letters are the way to go you'll find those in the debt collection section of our library.   get any income payments on going or otherwise moved into a parachute A/c.   it is most probable that whatever you do most A/c's will be defaulted once this is done if not already. bearing in mine your wish to re mortgage or move in a future, it is most probable that the quicker you do default , the earlier a DN will be registered thus the earlier these will not show following their 6th birthday. this might involve you thinking about stopping all payments now ensuring this does happen, then resuming payment under a pro rata scheme self administered , once this happens.   just be aware that no DMP providers will ever question enforceability, should that be relevant.     
    • LL would have Absolutely no chance of getting the smart meter changed back.....
    • slow down ...read what i'm asking , stating and trying to clarify.. it all might seem useless or totally irrelevant but it's important information moving forward with the whole situation and useful in the SPC claim moving forward     there was not 2 loans - the litigated OD is not a loan but it appears from your comment here..     sorry but then you did get scammed on many fronts... they allowed you to settle the loan exploiting your confusion over thinking it was the litigated account. they didn't tell you either and they would also have been aware of your statement filed response form:   The respondent had a junior account with the Bank of Scotland since a young age.  The Bank of Scotland offered the Respondent a loan of around £2500. This Respondent serviced the loan until losing her source of income and ran into some financial difficulty resulting in defaulting in servicing the loan.   they settled for a discounted sum... why? we usually find this is because they hold no enforceable paperwork at all. or was full of charges , charges could have been the discount or it could have been due to 'a business decision' ...   but sure as eggs is eggs there is no way 1st credit would not have raised a court claim for both the OD and the loan unless there was a very good reason. they didn't that smells...badly.   OD 's are notoriously difficult to litigate upon if defended properly...but with a loan in the same claim, with enforceable paperwork, they would have almost been guaranteed to win.   it's also a shame you didn't come where before you did anything but we are where we are.   now the above might seem harsh..even petty but our posts are not only for you and your issue they are also for future readers that find us via search engines or read like threads here alerting debtors to frequent pitfalls and innocent wet myself actions many do that all these dca's will and have exploited time and time again over the last +40yrs .   i'll try and get around to properly redacting all your pdf's tonight and get them back up. but before i finish and get on with the above........the status of the claim as it stands now.   From what i can gather the claim now hinges upon proving her ex at the time settled by a discounted payment to HBOS well before the sale to Intrum and the SPC Claim.   In all honestly and with regard to your comments in your previous posts upon his character, i seriously doubt this ever happened. the disclosures from Intrum contain all the OD statements , should that have happened, it would be detailed in those.   there is little point in the claimant hiding that info as they would be in far more legal trouble should they have doctored them than insuring a mere +£1k claim win. Even 1st credit wouldn't pull such stunts.   Sorry but there is little point in requesting HBOS to attend any future hearing, nor hoping the SAR shows anything different to the statements the claimant has disclosed . That will cost you more money , and more money in terms of the claimant attending another hearing.   there is one exploitation i see. that being the mention of a default notice. the claim states:  The respondent fell into arrears under the Finance Agreement. A Default Notice was Issued by the Original Creditor .   now default notices are not issued for OD A/C's (which ties in to the possible loan confusion and scam settlement i mentioned) . This tallies with a common mistake that many DCA's, including why i keep mentioning 1st credit, which is the previous name for Intrum, made on numerous claims and was one of the reasons for the name change. To Hide that They lost many Statutory Demand and court claims over the non existence of a DN or proof of it's issuance by the OC (a DCA can't issue a DN) .. No copy of a default notice is fatal to to successful  litigation.   even though in this OD case one was not ever needed. (Poor particulars of claim showing copy and paste, and never expecting a claim to be defended but responded to by a wet themselves response , which you did by settling a loan which you believed was the claimed debt when it never was)    other than that you indicate you made an OOC F&F offer in 09-20  have you advanced this option since ?   dx
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1437 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

Please help, I'm not sure how to handle this claim and don't want to get it wrong!

 

Name of the Claimant ? Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd

 

Date of issue – 30th Aug 2016

 

Date to submit defence = - by 4pm Friday 30/9/2016

 

What is the claim for –

 

1.The claim is for the sum of £13718 in the respect of monies owing pursuant to The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA) under account no xxxxxx-xxxxxxxx. The debt was legally assigned from Santander UK PLC to the claimant and notice has been served.

2.The defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement.

A default notice has been served upon the defenadant pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA.

 

3.The Claimant Claims:

1. The sum of £13718

2. Interest pursuant to s69 of the County Court Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 13/8/16 to the date hereof 12 days is the sum of £36.08

3. Daily interest at the rate of £3.01

4. Costs

 

What is the value of the claim? £13718

 

Is the claim for a current account (Overdraft) or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? cahoot Flexible Loan

 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? 20/05/2002

 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. HPH2

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? No

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ?

Yes

 

Why did you cease payments?

Had a Debt Managemant Plan set up with Payplan from February 2010 of which Santander had agreed to being paid £66.27 per month

However, they refused repeatedly to freeze the interest unlike the other creditors in the DMP.

This was adding around £200 per month in interest in January 2011

I stopped paying the DMP as it seemed pointless as it would never reduce the debt.

The original debt was £10804 at the start of the DMP but 11 months later was £13718 due to them being completely unreasonable.

 

What was the date of your last payment? December 2010

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved?

Only with regards the interest whilst in a debt management plan

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan?

Yes, as described above. Payplan had requested all creditors freeze interest and all agreed except Santander.

 

Many Thanks.

 

Brief background:

In early 2010 after trying to keep a failing business going I was left with various credit card and a flexible loan debts and the combined monthly repayments became unbearable.

 

I entered into a debt management plan through Payplan paying £324 per month to 6 creditors.

By January 2011 the business could no longer trade as I lost my premises and then a few months later lost the house.

 

I considered bankruptcy for the first few years but could never manage to raise the fee (about £750 at the time), then as time passed and I lived in various places the letters became sporadic and it was easier to ignore the few that came.

 

I've had plenty threatening court action from all the usual DCA's and nothing happened until now. I was looking forward to another 4 months hoping it would be statute barred but Hoist have other ideas!

 

I've tried to get an idea by reading all the forums but was wondering if I can do a CCA request for a flexible loan?

 

 

Also, when checking the FCA register the DCA's licenses don't seem to be active - is this relevant and can it be used?

 

FCA license for Howard Cohen (Cohen Cramer Ltd) Current Status: Lapsed , Permissions Inactive 31/10/2015

 

FCA license for Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd Current Status: Cancelled , Permissions Inactive 30/09/2015

 

I have registered with MCOL and done the acknowledgement on the 8th Sept 2016 and stated I wish to defend the whole claim, problem is I don't know the best way to do it.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

 

 

Forgot to add, the solicitor on the claim form is Howard Cohen & Co, Leeds :evil:

Link to post
Share on other sites

get a CCA request running to the claimant

get a CPR 31:14 running to the sols

 

 

FCA licence is immaterial they'll be covered by the hoist 'group'.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, s.77 for a loan.

 

It's strange that they added no further interest after your last payment. Anyway...I'm sure it'll all come out in the wash.

 

Start reading up on similar threads and get started on drafting your defence once you've done the CCA/CPR requests. Post the draft up here for review.

 

Sham

Link to post
Share on other sites

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, I sent the CCA and CPR requests on monday by special delivery and have proof of delivery for the CPR to the solicitor. However, the CCA remains undelivered although it is tracking as 'processing through the network'. This has got me worried that if they refuse to accept signed for mail where would that leave me? I sent it to the claimants address on the Court claim so I assume they can't use a different address for post can they?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Std when they don't sign for it

Don't worry

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I wondered why the 12 days interest also, I have no clue. Yes, by the time I stopped paying the DMP the bal was £13718.

 

But it's not just 12 days interest - that's the bit up to that time what about 3 daily interest at £3.01 a day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Hi again, I've received a letter today from Robinson Way regarding the CCA request that I sent to Hoist.

 

 

They returned the postal order also.

I haven't had a response yet from the solicitor re the CPR request.

 

 

This is the letter below;

 

Robinson way

Debt Collectors

Quays reach

Carolina Way

Salford

M50 2ZY

 

We acknowledge receipt of your request under sections 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act.

Your account is now with our clients solicitor Howard Cohen & Co and they have issued a county court claim against you.

 

As you have filed your defence in this matter, all documents will be requested by our solicitor Howard Cohen & Co as part of this process, therefore please find enclosed your £1.00 fee.

 

If you have any questions please contact our office on 0345 266 8876.

 

It's confusing because I sent the request to Hoist at the Jersey address on the court documents

and also, I haven't yet filed my defence - only my intention to defend it.

 

Am I right in thinking they've failed to comply with the request?

 

Many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

its a tactic they have used on numerous claimform threads here if you go read them

doesn't absolve them from having to comply

 

 

its something that you'll note in your defence.

 

 

thats due on the 30th

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you dx.

I'd really appreciate if you could take a look at this draft defence.

I've had a good read through some of the others on here and hope I haven't missed anything.

 

 

1.The claim is for the sum of £13718 in the respect of monies owing pursuant to The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA) under account no xxxxxx-xxxxxxxx. The debt was legally assigned from Santander UK PLC to the claimant and notice has been served.

2.The defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement.

A default notice has been served upon the defenadant pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA.

 

3.The Claimant Claims:

1. The sum of £13718

2. Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courtlink3.gif Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 13/8/16 to the date hereof 12 days is the sum of £36.08

3. Daily interest at the rate of £3.01

4. Costs

 

 

Defence

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 denied; With regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of agreement/contract/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and is in default of a Section 77 request.

The Claimant is put to strict proof that a notice of assignment was issued to, and received by the Defendant.

The Defendant maintains that a notice of assignment was never received.

 

 

Regarding paragraph 2, 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.

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied; The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued to and received by the Defendant.

 

4. On the 12th September 2016 I made a legal request by way of a section 77 request to the Claimant. The Claimant has not yet produced the requested documents therefore I am currently unable to fully defend this claim.

 

5. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed and evidence any breach and notice of breach by way of a default notice or notice of sums in arrears.

Therefore 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

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

7. 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.

 

Regards, M

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've added the poc above

your defence should align to their para no's

at present it doesn't

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers, is this one better?

 

 

1.The claim is for the sum of £13718 in the respect of monies owing pursuant to The consumer creditlink3.gif Act 1974 (CCA) under account no xxxxxx-xxxxxxxx.

2.The debt was legally assigned from Santanderlink3.gif UK PLC to the claimant and notice has been served.

3.The defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement.

A default notice has been served upon the defenadant pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA.

 

The Claimant Claims:

1. The sum of £13718

2. Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courtlink3.gif Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 13/8/16 to the date hereof 12 days is the sum of £36.08

3. Daily interest at the rate of £3.01

4. Costs

 

 

Defence

 

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 denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of agreement/contract/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and is in default of a Section 77 request.

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied the Claimant is put to strict proof that a notice of assignment was issued to, and received by the Defendant. The Defendant maintains that a notice of assignment was never received. Regarding paragraph 2, 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.

 

4. Paragraphs 3 is denied as The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued to and received by the Defendant.

 

5. On the 12th September 2016 I made a legal request by way of a section 77 request to the Claimant. The Claimant has not yet produced the requested documents therefore I am currently unable to fully defend this claim.

 

6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed and evidence any breach and notice of breach by way of a default notice or notice of sums in arrears.

Therefore 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

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

 

7. 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.

 

I saw this in another thread;

5. On receipt of this claim, I the Defendant sent a request under the customer credit Act 1974,by way of a section 77 for a copy of the agreement and payment of the statutory fee of £1.00. The claimant has refused to comply with my request by returning the statutory fee in an attempt to frustrate and avoid its legal responsibilities. However it is considered the claimant is and remains in default of its own volition.

Is this something I should adapt and use in mine?

 

Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

same mistake again.........

 

the defence is ok

and yes to 5

 

but theres no 3 or 4 in their poc

 

and the assignment is not mentioned in their 2.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

PoC numbering tweaked to fit the defence DX

 

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Thanks Andyorch and dx100uk. Whats causing me the confusion is there's no actual numbering on the POC as such so I was trying to follow each point raised in the claim. This is exactly as its wrote on the poc and how its laid out

 

This claim is for the sum of £13718.50 in

respect of monies owing pursuant to The

Consumer Credit Act 1974 (CCA) under account

no xxxxxx xxxxxxxx

The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK

PLC to the claimant and notice has been

served. The defendant has failed to make

contractual payments under the terms of the

agreement. A default notice has been served

upon the defendant pursuant to section 87(1)

CCA.

The Claimant Claims

1. The Sum of £13718.50

2. Interest pursuant to s69 of the County

Court Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent

from the 13/08/16 to the date hereof 12

days is sum of £36.08

3. Daily interest at the rate of £3.01

4. Costs

 

So the second paragraph includes the assignment and notice being served but also the default notice. Is it ok to set it out with the default notice in number 3 as andyorch has above? Sorry for being a pain, just scared of getting it wrong!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's ok, just found the answer on another thread. "You break the particulars down into paragraphs to enable an easy response." So is the new draft below looking good?

 

Defence

 

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 denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant. The claimant has failed to provide any evidence of agreement/contract/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and is in default of a Section 77 request.

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied the Claimant is put to strict proof that a notice of assignment was issued to, and received by the Defendant. The Defendant maintains that a notice of assignment was never received. Regarding paragraph 2, 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.

 

4. Paragraph 3 is denied as The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued to and received by the Defendant.

 

5. On receipt of this claim, I the Defendant sent a request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, by way of a section 77 for a copy of the agreement and payment of the statutory fee of £1.00. The claimant has refused to comply with my request by returning the statutory fee in an attempt to frustrate and avoid its legal responsibilities. However it is considered the claimant is and remains in default of its own volition.

 

6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed and evidence any breach and notice of breach by way of a default notice or notice of sums in arrears.

Therefore 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

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

 

7. 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.

 

Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

post 16 is good to go I believe

but the above is perfect too

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Hi again,

Its now the 7th of November and I haven't had any communication from the claimant and they have not responded to my defence on MCOL.

 

I rang the court last week and they told me the claimant had 33 days to respond which is now passed.

 

Does it get struck out automatically or do I have to request it?

 

Just wondering what the next steps are please and is it usual for them not to respond?

Many thanks, M

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi again,

Its now the 7th of November and I haven't had any communication from the claimant and they have not responded to my defence on MCOL.

 

I rang the court last week and they told me the claimant had 33 days to respond which is now passed.

 

Does it get struck out automatically No

or do I have to request it? No

 

Just wondering what the next steps are please and is it usual for them not to respond? Yes

 

Many thanks, M

 

The claim is merely stayed (paused) until/unless the claimant decides to proceed.

 

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 OTHERS

 

 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

Thanks Andy. I have today received a Notice of Proposed Allocation to the Fast Track with Form 181 which has to be returned by 9th December.

I've been trying to get an idea of what to do by going through the forums and just want to check with you that I'm on the right track.

 

Should I follow this from another thread?

A - Yes

 

B1- No and name local county courticon

 

B2 - Yes ...Its your local county court and you are the Litigant in person in this claim

 

C - No....Not applicable you are the defendant

 

D1- No

 

D2 Fast Track ...the claim is not complicated and relatively straight forward.

 

D3 Disregard as you want it in Fast Track

 

D4 Type see attached Draft Directions (this needs to prepared separately )

 

E- No No No

 

F- Witness,s you are 1 plus any other you wish (if joint defendants 2)

 

G- Less than 1 day 4 hours

 

H - disregard (you want Fast Track)

 

I- Not applicable to defendant

 

J - Tick yes if its your intention to make any applications and the reason for said application

 

Sign and date and attach Draft Directions.

 

I gather that I shouldn't file with the court until close to the 9th but when should I send copies to Cohens?

 

As for the directions - is this suitable (also from another thread)

 

1 The Claimant shall file and serve a verified true copy of the following documents mentioned in the Particulars of Claim.

 

(a) the executed regulated consumer credit agreement made between the defendant and Cahoot under reference XXXXXXX together with any terms and conditions that applied to it, the original document must be brought to the hearing.

(b) the default notice

© the notice of assignment

 

Is there anything else I should be thinking of? Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...