Lowell/Cohen claim form - old CAT 'debt'

[mikecymru]

Hi All,

 

I have received a claim form for an old shop direct account,

did think this was was taken care of,

so I am questioning legitimacy of legal ownership and right of assignment along with the claimed amount.

 

Details are:

 

Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio I Limited (the I could be a 1?)

Date of issue – 13th October 2016

 

Date of defence issue - 4pm Monday 14th November 2016

 

What is the claim for –

 

1.The claim is for the sum of £4XX.XX

due by the defendant under a non-regulated shop direct account with an account reference of XXXXXXXX

The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required under the terms of the account agreement.

The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on XX/XX/2011, notice of which has been given to the defendant.

 

2.The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £3X.XX

The claimant claims the sum of £5XX.XX

 

What is the value of the claim? £515

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

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? - After 2007

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. - Lowell

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I dont recall receiving one, Im fairly certain I didnt.

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Maybe, but I dont recall

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? Not that I recall

Why did you cease payments? Lost my job.

What was the date of your last payment? I dont know this and have no Bank accounts going back that far.

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? I dont recall, I thought this had been cleared.

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor

and make any attempt to enter into a debt managementicon plan? No.

I intend to defend the claim and will register acknowledgement of service this evening ,

I will prepare CCA and CPR and send tomorrow.

 

Any other advice?

Thanks

[dx100uk]

check the credit ref agencies to find last payment/use

or go ring shop direct and ask.

 

 

note corrected date for filing defence.

 

 

dx

[mikecymru]

Hi Dx

 

I've checked Experian and equifax, both show a closed account for Lowell , different lower amount and Ac number, - 30-11-2011 last entry date.

 

What does that mean? A clue that there is some underhand business here

 

Mike

[Bazooka Boo]

When Lowlifes buy these they will give them their own AC number, nothing untoward, less for lowlifes having their grubby mitts on it!

 

Did it tell you when you last paid SD? 30th Nov 2011?? if so another 13 months to run before time barred.

 

How much of that paltry amount they're chasing is made up of reclaimable fees/charges?

[mikecymru]

When Lowlifes buy these they will give them their own AC number, nothing untoward, less for lowlifes having their grubby mitts on it!

 

Did it tell you when you last paid SD? 30th Nov 2011?? if so another 13 months to run before time barred.

 

 

 

How much of that paltry amount they're chasing is made up of reclaimable fees/charges?

 

Hi, I've checked the date again, it shows the default date on my report , not the last payment date. Payment date will be earlier than this date for sure.

 

If I contact shop direct , do you think they will provide this information freely or will I need to officially request?

 

Thanks

[Bazooka Boo]

No harm in trying.

 

Just don't get drawn into any lengthy conversation with them. They might simply say it's no longer anything to do with them and try and wash their hands of it.

 

If thats the case, then you would need to send them a SAR.

[dx100uk]

yep go ring them

 

 

dx

[mikecymru]

I contacted SD - they wont give me any information other than the account is managed by Lowell. since Dec 2011.

They wont confirm last payment date.

I also received a letter from Cramer on Monday, who informed me that "as I had not responded to the claim form" they would have no option to go for a CCJ, unless I contacted them... nice bit scare mongering that. (actually i have responded through MCOL)

Should I SAR SD?

 

Or little point now?

[dx100uk]

Rarely does it take a cat company 12mts to default a debt

So I'd guess its not SB,d

Don't missyour def date

[mikecymru]

I'm working on it now dx, thanks mike

[mikecymru]

Hi I wonder of someone could take a look at my defence so far?

 

Thanks

 

Mike

 

Particulars of the Claim

1.The claim is for the sum of £4XX.XX

due by the defendant under a non-regulated shop direct account with an account reference of XXXXXXXX

The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required under the terms of the account agreement.

The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on XX/XX/2011, notice of which has been given to the defendant.

 

2.The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £3X.XX

The claimant claims the sum of £5XX.XX

 

 

 

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 an amount due under an agreement (s). The Claimant/Solicitor has refused to disclose any agreement or statements on which its claim relies upon.

 

3. I am unaware of any legal assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars and deny the notice was served pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14. To date I have yet to receive a compliant response. This was posted on the xxxxxxxx .To date I have had no response.

 

On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a Section 78 request. To date I have yet to receive a response complying with the request. To date they have failed to comply and remain in default.

 

Therefore with the courts permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a)Show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement(s); and

 

(b) Show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount(s) claimed for;

 

© Show how the agreement(s) were breached/ terminated to allow the claimant relief.

 

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

 

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

 

5. 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 crediticon Act 1974.

 

6. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief

[mikecymru]

In addition to my defence, I received a letter from SOLS, it reads:

 

We have notified our client of your request.

Please note that our client has given us a minimum time period of 45days, from the date of your letter to send the documents your require.

in the meantime we have put your account on hold.

Upon delivery of your documents you will have a further 14 days to prepare a defence.

 

Should I ignore this and submit my defence on time though MCOL? It feels like I should and this is a snake tactic to get judgement by default.

 

appreciate any advice.

 

Thanks

[dx100uk]

you file regardless to their tricks to tell you otherwise

std reply from them if you go read other cohen claim threads

 

gotta admit I dont like that defence

just doesn't read right.

 

try:

 

Here is a recent Cat defence that Andyorch drafted for another poster

which was successful in the claim remaining stayed.

.

You will have to edit slightly to suit and add your requests for CCA /CPR ect.....

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

.

Defence

.

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.

.

1 .Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with [enter original creditor] but do not recognise the account number referred to by the claimant.

.

2 .Paragraph 2 is denied I have never received any Default Notice from the original creditor nor the claimant

.

3 .Paragraph 3 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served over X years ago.

.

On the DD/MM/YYYY ( sent by recorded delivery) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

.

3.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore 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

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

.

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

.

5.On the alternative, if 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 crediticon Act 1974.

.

6.By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

.

Regards

.

Andy

***************

[mikecymru]

Thanks DX.

 

Good advice re:filing on time.

 

I take on board your comments regarding the defence, I will re-draft and post for checking.

 

Thanks for your help

 

Mike

[mikecymru]

Hi All,

 

Heres my final defence, it reads more or less like above, I plan to file this evening, any last advice?

 

Thanks in advance.

Mike

Particulars of the Claim

1.The claim is for the sum of £4XX.XX

due by the defendant under a non-regulated shop direct account with an account reference of XXXXXXXX

The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required under the terms of the account agreement.

The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on XX/XX/2011, notice of which has been given to the defendant.

 

2.The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £3X.XX

The claimant claims the sum of £5XX.XX

 

Defence

.

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.

.

1 .Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with Shop Direct but do not recognise the account number referred to by the claimant.

.

2 .Paragraph 2 is denied I have never received any Default Notice from the original creditor nor the claimant

.

3 .Paragraph 3 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served over 5 years ago.

.

On the 4/11/2016 ( sent by recorded delivery) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

I was informed in writing by the Claimants solicitors on the 12/11/2016 that the Claimant is unable to provide such documents at this time.

.

3.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, therefore 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

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

.

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

.

5.On the alternative, if 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 crediticon Act 1974.

.

6.By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

[Guest]

it doesnt match up

eg you say para 2 is denied re a dn. does para 2 mention a dn.

also, shldn't such a credit agreement be regulated? therefore, say have not rec'd a dn.

[mikecymru]

thanks Ford,

 

actually the para's are not numbered.

 

it reads like this, verbatim. hard to see where the para's start and end, I classed para 1 as the start until "agreement" and the 2nd para starting at "the debt"

 

Is it really that exacting? if so they have made it difficult to read, and i have learnt a valuable lesson here...

 

How should I renumber?

 

Mike

 

Particulars of the Claim

The claim is for the sum of £4XX.XX

due by the defendant under a non-regulated

shop direct

account with an account reference of

XXXXXXXX

The defendant failed to maintain contractual

payments required under the terms of the

account agreement.

The debt was legally assigned to the

claimant on XX/XX/2011, notice of

which has been given to the defendant.

The claim includes statutory interest under

S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate

of 8% per annum from the date of assignment

to the date of issue of these proceedings in

the sum of £3X.XX

The claimant claims the sum of £5XX.XX

[Guest]

i know they're not numbered. but you have numbered.

they dont mention a dn, but you did.

imo, maybe just say you have not rec'd a dn as required by the s87 con credit act. without reference to a para number.

i dont see why it wldnt be regulated. shop cat accounts are consumer credit. plus they have acknowledged your cca request, which is con credit act regulated! maybe am wrong.

check with the guys first though.

[mikecymru]

Ive revised the defence to incorporate your comments Ford. It is strange about the non-regulated agreement, but that is exactly how the claim is written.

 

Anyone else shed some light? Hope Its not too late to get a meaniful defence together, thought I had it nailed...

 

Particulars of the Claim

 

1.The claim is for the sum of £4XX.XX due by the defendant under a non-regulated shop direct account with an account reference of XXXXXXXX

 

2.The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required under the terms of the account agreement.

 

3.The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on XX/XX/2011, notice of which has been given to the defendant.

 

The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in

the sum of £3X.XX

 

The claimant claims the sum of £5XX.XX

 

 

Defence

 

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.

 

1 .Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with Shop Direct but do not recognise the account number referred to by the claimant.

 

2 .Paragraph 2

 

3 .Paragraph 3 is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served over 5 years ago.

 

On the 4/11/2016 ( sent by recorded delivery) I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. The claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request.

I was informed in writing by the Claimants solicitors on the 12/11/2016 that the Claimant is unable to provide such documents at this time.

 

4.It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31. 14, 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;

 

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

 

6.On the alternative, if 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.

 

7.By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Edited November 13, 2016 by Andyorch
Particulars numbered and defence edited except for point 2

[Guest]

as required by the s87 con credit act

put consumer credit act (i use 'con' in irony )

[mikecymru]

got you thanks

 

I'll wait for a bit until filing, just in case anyone has any comments about the regulated - non regulated agreement.

 

thanks for your assistance Ford, its good to have help in these times.

 

Mike

[AndyOrch]

Defence in post #19 now edited and particulars numbered...just your point 2 to finalise

 

Andy

[dx100uk]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?470754-Lowell-cohen-claimform-JDW-CAT-debt-defence-needed-tomorrow&p=4958654#post4958654

 

 

is the not covered by 4?

re post 13 here:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?470754-Lowell-cohen-claimform-JDW-CAT-debt-defence-needed-tomorrow&p=4958654#post4958654

[AndyOrch]

2. The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required under the terms of the account agreement.

 

2. Paragraph 2 is denied.The claimant or the original creditor has never served a notice of default or a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87.1 of the CCA1974.

 

In a way yes but not ideal or directly responding to the pleading

 

Perhaps something along the lines of.....

 

Paragraph 2 is noted but not admitted. The claimant would not be aware of any alleged breach or in a position to plead such fact as an assignee as the defendant did not enter into any agreement with the claimant and is therefore put to strict proof to verify the alleged statement of its particulars.

 

We need to evolve the holding defence as they are finding ways around it

[dx100uk]

great idea

 

 

examples held amended

 

 

dx