Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • nothing you can do can product against the very rare judge lottery syndrome.
    • not sure why you added the blue line I've highlighted? that's no in the we gave you.   as for your question... PRAC's roboclaim computer knows when the account was taken out, after all it raised the claim and checked everything carefully first before issuing the request via northants bulk courts equally inept roboclaim computer... 
    • I've been researching in preparation of compiling my particularised defence/WS.    I'm none too happy that some judges still seem to be siding with DCAs and seemingly brushing aside anything that we have assumed to be "necessary" for DCAs to have a winning case.    Reading a recent "summary" from another poster (another thread with case similar to mine - very old, illegible application form, no default notice, reliance on their own software to prove it was ever sent) and the judgment made in favour of the DCA and even suggesting that there was no "agreement with the DCA, they simply owned the debt, not the agreement"  Makes me very nervous.    Especially if cases like this will be judged on "probability" - the probability that if I signed the original application form, then I must have taken out the credit card and racked up the alleged debt as shown in statements enclosed in their WS (and dated some ten years later).   Is it ok to post some "evidence" I've found from elsewhere?    This is in line with my fears that regardless of how hard one tries to rebut the "lack of evidence" produced by DCAs for chasing these very old "alleged" debts, it does appear to come down to the luck of what judge you get on the day and how much they can be swayed by the DCA solicitor.    A quick Google search produced the following - from one case - this related to a credit agreement - which resulted in someone being made bankrupt - that person appealed the bankruptcy order on the grounds of defective credit agreement and default notice and this was the appeal judge's decision:   The necessary formalities for the entry into the regulated consumer credit agreement (which related to the debt in issue) were not complied with; The default notice served in respect of that credit agreement was defective.   The First Ground The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.   Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make.   Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.   The Second Ground The Appellant also argued that the default notice upon which the Respondent relied did not comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice) Regulations 1989 because it stated the full balance of the account rather than the total of the missed payments. The Respondent argued that, as a result of the missed payments, it was contractually entitled to the entire balance subject to the service of the appropriate notice, a requirement which was fulfilled by the default notice itself and, consequently, the sum required to remedy the breach was the entire amount.   Mr Justice Mann agreed with the Respondent and the District Judge, holding that: “If by the time the default notice is served circumstances have arisen which entitle the lender to recover not merely sums which might be regarded as arrears, by which I assume is meant accumulated minimum payments, but also the whole of the sum, then they are entitled to claim that sum, and the sum to require to remedy the breach for non-payment of that sum is the payment of the whole sum due. The bank is not confined, at that stage, to claiming merely the amount of arrears if it has an accrued contractual right to have the whole of the sum.”   Do judgments like these not mean that a lot of what you guys do on here (and for which I and many others are VERY grateful) somewhat redundant. What is happening to judges just accepting "well, the terms must have been there if you signed it" -    Feeling quite nervous now.
    • we know it wasn't done to avoid enforcement we understand completely. but that doesn't take from away the fact that it happened   you can't appeal the pcn's on the basis that 'it was not his vehicle to levy upon'. the law clearly states otherwise.          
    • here is a question for you, is yu house divided up into a retail/business area  and domestic area for business rates purposes? If not why on earth are you paying business water rates? ceertainly not for tax purposes as you can claim any legit expense without having to reclassify your home as a business premises. i would be stopping this nonsense and goping back to whatever water supplier is the domestic one for your area. there is stuff all they can do to get the £40 from you whan you do that.
  • Our picks

mikecymru

Lowell/Cohen claim form - old CAT 'debt'

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1110 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

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

check the credit ref agencies to find last payment/use

or go ring shop direct and ask.

 

 

note corrected date for filing defence.

 

 

dx


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yep go ring them

 

 

dx


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm working on it now dx, thanks mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

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


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 by Andyorch
Particulars numbered and defence edited except for point 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
as required by the s87 con credit act

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


IMO

:-):rant:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

 

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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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


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

 

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

great idea

 

 

examples held amended

 

 

dx


PLEASE DONT HIT QUOTE IF THE LAST POST IS THE ONE YOU ARE REPLYING TOO.

MAKES A THREAD TWICE AS LONG TO SCROLL THROUGH!

please do not post jpg images directly to a topic..USE PDF ....READ UPLOAD.

 

WE CAN'T GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU SEND ME A LINK TO YOUR THREAD - I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER HELP THERE

Single Premium PPI Q&A Read Here

Reclaim mis-sold PPI Read Here

Reclaim Bank Account, Loan & Credit Card Charges Read Here

The CAG Interest Tutorial Read Here

spreadsheets 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...