Lowell/lowell Solicitors claim form - old Vodafone mobile debt

[honeybee13]

Hello there, dx isn't around atm, so I'll try to answer you. I'm sure he'll correct me if I get this wrong.

 

Agreeing to mediation makes you look to be behaving reasonably and trying to save the court time if you're able to reach an agreement through mediation before the court case.

 

However, if the mediation service ring you and ask if you've had all the relevant paperwork from Lowells and you say no, then my understanding is that mediation fails.

 

I hope I've got that right.

 

HB

[UnclePete]

Ahh gotcha. Thanks for explaining. It's good to know why things are done a very way, in case it ever happens again.

[dx100uk]

10/10 HB though when not if.

 

 

dx

[honeybee13]

Thank you.

 

HB

[AndyOrch]

Make sure you put down your local court Pete also and then submit the DQ serve a copy on the Claimants Solicitor and retain a copy for your file.

 

Andy

[UnclePete]

Hello all.

 

Just wanted to give a brief update on things...

 

So, as predicted above, mediation was a non-starter as I have not received anything from the claimant whatsoever in support of their claim.

 

I have now received a court date for early June.

 

All the best,

 

UP

[AndyOrch]

So if you know the date of trial ...then you must have received the Notice of Allocation...you must comply with the directions by the dates stated...submit your disclosures and draft/file /serve a Witness Statement.

 

Andy

[UnclePete]

Hi Andy

 

You're absolutely correct.

I've spent the last day reading up on it, but I'm really confused as to what exactly I need to submit.

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

 

Apologies for being dumb!

 

UP

[dx100uk]

witness statement

use the search CAG box of the top red toolbar

[UnclePete]

Hello all

 

So I've been working through my witness statement, as I've never received any documentation from Lowell to support their claim - in fact, apart from the summons, I've never heard anything from them at all.

 

This morning an A4 envelope arrived from Lowell with their witness statement, some bills from Vodafone from Feb to June 2011, a letter from them (which I have never seen before!) from 2013 with the assignment of debt on it and some other letters chasing the debt from 2013 onwards, which again, I have never received.

 

The pertinent bit is below:

[UnclePete]

Sorry about that.

Here is the complete evidence package sent, minus the itemised bill pages for obvious reasons.

The summary parts are there though.

 

I don't know whether this makes a difference, but as they note in their statement, my last payment on the account was February 2011 and I've only just received this information from them.

 

Many thanks in advance.

 

Uncle Pete

WS .pdf

Edited March 30, 2017 by dx100uk
10Mb WS reduced to 1Mb - dx

[AndyOrch]

Post up a copy of your ws when your ready.

 

Andy

[UnclePete]

Will get onto it over the next couple of days. Just a quick question - would statute barred apply to this if my last payment was Feb 2011?

 

Many thanks

 

Uncle Pete

[dx100uk]

Date of issue: 21 November 2016

[UnclePete]

Ahh well.

 

Thanks DX

[Pepe2004]

Pete have you completed and posted the WS ?

[UnclePete]

Hello.

 

Sorry for the delay. Still working on the thing. Should have something tangible in the next day or two.

 

It really is a steep Learning curve!

 

Many thanks

 

Uncle Pete

[Pepe2004]

Thanks for the reply ,i am at the stage waiting for court date ,so started to work on WS as well

[UnclePete]

Good evening all.

 

After a lot of head scratching and reading up, here is my first attempt at a Witness Statement...

 

IN THE COUNTY COURT AT HOLLYWOOD CLAIM NO:

BETWEEN:

LOWELL PORTFOLIO I LTD

(CLAIMANT)

-and-

UNCLE PETE

(DEFENDANT)

_____________________________________________

 

WITNESS STATEMENT OF UNCLE PETE

_____________________________________________

 

INTRODUCTION

 

1. I, Uncle Pete of Hollywood, California, the Defendant in this case, make this statement in support of my defence against the Claimant, Lowell Portfolio I Ltd. The matters set out below are within my own knowledge, except where I indicate to the contrary.

 

THE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT

 

2. The Claimant states that they have provided the Defendant with “numerous letters relating to this debt prior to proceedings being issued”, of which they have provided alleged evidence of these letters, under their exhibit “SK3”, which they deem as meeting the requirements of Pre-Action Protocol. The Defendant categorically states that no letters have ever been received from the Claimant, with the first contact from them being this claim. Therefore, the Claimant is to put strict proof to their claim by providing proof of delivery for these letters. If the Claimant cannot provide this, then the Defendant invites the Court to strike the claim out based upon a failure to adhere to Paragraph 6 of the Practice Direction – Pre-Action Practice and Protocols.

 

3. The Defendant vociferously disputes Paragraph 13 of the Claimant’s Witness Statement, in which the Claimant considers that they have provided sufficient evidence to constitute an Agreement. The Defendant claims that his request of 24th November 2016 under the CPR 31.14, of which the Claimant has confirmed receipt, for the disclosure and production of a verified and legible copy of the Agreement has not been adhered to, by way of the fact that said Agreement is entirely missing from the Claimant’s evidence.

 

4. In light of the above, it is clear that the claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach as requested by CPR 31.14 and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into a Contract; and

(b) show how the Claimant 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 CPR 16.5(4), the Defendant alleges the Claimant has not proved their allegation that the money is owed.

 

6. Notwithstanding the above, as the Claimant alleges to be 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.

 

7. The alleged amount claimed includes an early termination charge amounting to the entire balance of the remaining contract. OFCOM guidance states that any Early Termination Charge, which is made up of the entire balance of the remaining contract, is unlikely to be fair as it fails to take into account the fact that the provider no longer has to provide and pay for their service.

 

8. 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 believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

 

Signed: Uncle Pete

 

Dated on the day 21st April 2017

[Pepe2004]

thanks uncle pete

[UnclePete]

No worries. Hopefully the legend that is Andy will be along shortly to get it good!

[AndyOrch]

What date must you submit by Pete?

[UnclePete]

Morning Andy.

 

It has to be in by Friday. It's all run away with me a bit.

[AndyOrch]

Hi Pete

 

Just a suggestion....lose the word agreement and change to service contract

 

Also is there no reference to Notice of Default ? See claimants WS points 5&6

 

Also in their 6 the cause of action has absolutely nothing to do with assignment or the law of property act

 

Andy

[UnclePete]

Thanks Andy. I will amend and add.

 

I was under the impression that they were not required to issue a Default Notice for mobile contracts, or is that just what they tell us?

 

Your help is very much appreciated!