Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I've inserted their poc re:your.. 1 ..they did send 2 paploc's  3. neither the agreement nor default is mentioned in their 2.        
    • Hi Guys, i read a fair few threads and saw a lot of similar templates being used. i liked this one below and although i could elaborate on certain things (they ignored my CCA and sent 2 PAPs etc etc) , am i right in that at this stage keep it short? If thats the case i cant see what i need to add/change about this one   1)   the defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreements vanquis under account reference xxxxxxx 2)   The defendant failed to maintain the required payment, arrears began to accrue 3)   The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 29 September 2017 and notice given to the defendant 4)   Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of 2247.91 remains due outstanding And the claimant claims a)The said sum of £2247.91 b)The interest pursuant to S 69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £xxxx, but limited to one year,  being £xxxx c)Costs   Defence:   The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim vague and are 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. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) Failed to serve a letter of claim pre claim pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017.It is respectfully requested that the court take this into consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.   2. The Claimant claims £2247.91 is owed under a regulated consumer credit account under reference xxxxxxx. I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request who are yet to fully comply.   3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or any default notice served in breach of any defaulted payments. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied.The Defendant contends that no notice of assignment pursuant to s.136 of the Law of Property Act & s.82 A of the CCA1974 has ever been served by the Claimant as alleged or at all.   5. 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 and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice or termination notice; and © show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;   6. After receiving this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request for copies of any documents referred to within the Claimants' particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they have failed to comply to my CPR 31.14 request and also my section 78 request and remain in default with regards to this request.   7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.   8. 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 credit Act 1974.   9. 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.  
    • i understand. Just be aware I am prepared to take some risks 😉
    • Thanks Tnook,   Bear with us while we discuss this behind the scenes - we want you to win just as much as you do but we want to find the right balance between maximising your claim without risking too much in court fees, and in possible court costs awarded to the defendant bank.
    • Tell your son and think on this. He can pay the £160  and have no further worries from them. If he read POFA  Scedule 4 he would find out that if he went to Court and lost which is unlikely on two counts at least [1] they don't do Court and 2] they know they would lose in Court] the most he would be liable to pay them is £100 or whatever the amount on the sign says. He is not liable for the admin charges as that only applies to the driver-perhaps.If he kept his nerve, he would find out that he does not owe them a penny and that applies to the driver as well. But we do need to see the signage at the entrance to the car park and around the car park as well as any T&Cs on the payment meter if there is one. He alone has to work out whether it is worth taking a few photographs to help avoid paying a single penny to these crooks as well as receiving letters threatening him with Court , bailiffs  etc trying to scare him into paying money he does not owe. They know they cannot take him to Court. They know he does not owe them a penny. But they are hoping he does not know so he pays them. If he does decide to pay, tell him to wait as eventually as a last throw of the dice they play Mister Nice Guy and offer a reduction. Great. Whatever he pays them it will be far more than he owes as their original PCN is worthless. Read other threads where our members have been ticketed for not having a permit. [We know so little about the situation that we do not know if he has a permit and forgot to display it. ]
  • Our picks

today

Claim on the Crown incorrectly served

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 786 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

The fact that this Notice of Issue is used thousands of times is a further reason why it should provide correct information in all circumstances. It happens that claims against the Crown are a minority and that the Notice of Issue should be amended to reflect also the rules concerning the service of claim against the Crown. I will be simple to add a paragraph to the Notice of Issue which in additional of saying that the claim form should be served on the defendant within four months of the date of issue will say also that for claims against the Crown the claim form should be served on the defendant’s representative

 

The Notice of issue that I have received is the N205A Notice of issue (specified amount) (& request for judgment) that I invite you to upload from the Internet to have a look at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be helpful if you could upload the N205A, today, please.

 

HB

Edited by honeybee13

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please find attached the N205A Notice of issue (specified amount) (& request for judgment)

n205a-eng.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see legal people are hovering, today, but I can't see any information on what you uploaded.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The relevant passage of the N205A Notice of issue (specified amount) (& request for judgment) that I have attached in my previous post is in the Notes for Guidance where it is stated

 

" The claim form must be served on the defendant

within 4 months of the date of issue ( 6 months if

you are serving outside England or Wales).You may

be able to apply to extend the time for serving the

claim form but the application must generally be

made before the 4 month or 6 month period expires."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The claim forms were sent back to me by the court so that I served them myself because I asked this in my claim form. However if I would not have asked this the court would have served the claim forms itself.

 

Therefore there is another issue which puzzles me which that in the claim form it is asked the address the defendant but not the address of its representative so the issue is how the staff of the court when they received my claim form would have known to which address to send the claim form to the defendant's representative if I would not have asked that the claim form are sent back to me so that I served them myself? Unless there is something that we have not understood in this story

Edited by today

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to proceed, i think you just have to get with it, rather than debate it here for days. The longer you leave, then the time delay issue gets worse.


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
The claim forms were sent back to me by the court so that I served them myself because I asked this in my claim form. However if I would not have asked this the court would have served the claim forms itself.

 

Therefore there is another issue which puzzles me which that in the claim form it is asked the address the defendant but not the address of its representative so the issue is how the staff of the court when they received my claim form would have known to which address to send the claim form to the defendant's representative if I would not have asked that the claim form are sent back to me so that I served them myself? Unless there is something that we have not understood in this story

 

 

The address for service is clearly requested in the bottom left box on the front page of the N1 Claim Form.

 

You're really reaching for excuses now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the bottom of the first page of the N1 form it is stated

 

“Defendant's

name and

address for

service including

postcode”

 

i.e. the defendant ‘s name and not the name of the representative of the defendant. Obviously if it is the name of the defendant which is asked it is also its address which is asked and not this of its representative

 

Moreover in the second page of the N1 form it is stated

 

“Claimant or claimaint’s legaI representative's

address to which documents or payments

should be sent if different from overleaf including

(if appropriate) details of DX, fax or e-mail”

 

We notice this time that it is made reference to the address of the representative

 

In this condition I think that if the court would have served the claim form instead of me it would have sent it to the address of the defendant and not to this of its representative and the defendant would have passed it to its representative as usually we do. This is a mystery if we consider that CPR 6.10 says that the claim form should be served on the defendant’s representative and not on the defendant itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're making it very difficult to help. If you already know all of the answers why are you here?

 

To clarify, the Court will only serve at the address you put in that bottom left box on the Claim Form regardless. It is for YOU to put the correct service address and comply with the CPR, not for the Court staff to check it and do it for you.

 

For example, you should have put in that box:

 

Ministry of Justice

C/O Government Legal Department

One Kemble Street

London

WC2B 4TS

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As said above, it is the responsibility of the Claimant to ensure the details on the claim form are correct.

 

Have you taken any steps to correctly serve these proceedings on the solicitors yet? In my view the longer you wait after the four month deadline, the more difficult you will make any application for service out of time if the MOJ takes issue (although the suggestion in your first post is that they invited you to serve proceedings on them, and so will not take issue if you do it correctly).

 

Until you send that claim form to the solicitors, strictly speaking it has not been served.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth I think the GLD are giving you an opportunity to correctly serve the proceedings so as they aren't seen to be taking advantage of a Litigant in Person's procedural error...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're making it very difficult to help. If you already know all of the answers why are you here?

 

Absolutely. The OP needs to make it clear if they want:

a) advice (as they are showing no sign of taking it!), or

b) validation of their viewpoint.

 

There seems little point in asking for a) and being given advice, if the OP is only going to accept b)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
For what it's worth I think the GLD are giving you an opportunity to correctly serve the proceedings so as they aren't seen to be taking advantage of a Litigant in Person's procedural error...

 

I told the OP on the first page to contact the Government Legal Department and ask that very thing.

 

In fact it was in my very first reply.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I told the OP on the first page to contact the Government Legal Department and ask that very thing.

 

In fact it was in my very first reply.

 

Yea I know I saw that a couple of days ago :) I stayed quiet hoping the OP would address it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am going to send an email to the defendant’s solicitor asking him if he will take issue if I serve late on him the claim form and if he will not take advantage of this to make an application to strike out my claim

 

However I will be surprised if he will not take issue because I do not see why he will act in a way which is contrary to its client's interest because it is in the interest of his client that he does his best to strike out my claim if he can.

 

Moreover the court can on its own initiative also strike out my claim if the claim form was served on the defendant’s representative out of time

 

I am gathering the greatest number of pieces of evidence in my favour in case I need to make an application under CPR 7.6 for an extension of time. Therefore in the meantime I would like to reply to the Ganymede the following

 

The term C/O that you use means that the claim form will be sent to the Ministry of Justice i.e. the defendant which will be responsible to passed it to the Government Legal Department which is at another address. This means that the claim form will be served on the Ministry of Justice which will pass it to its representative as usually we do i.e. the Claim form will be served on the defendant and not on its representative contrary to CPR 6.10. Obviously this is confusing and complicated. Therefore we have to accept that the fact that that it is made reference in the bottom of the first page of the Claim Form N1 to the name of the defendant and to the address for service means that it is made reference to the address for service of the defendant and not of this of its representative

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are wrong, sorry.

 

To comply with CPR 6.10 you should have put the name and address of the MoJ care of the GLD exactly how I wrote it a few posts ago.

 

I really don't know why you are trying to argue these meaningless points and not simply calling the GLD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just send them the claim form, 'by way of service' (ideally do this by post and email), at the same time as asking them if they intend to take issue with late service. Then it is served.

 

The end result of your claim being struck out for being out of time for service, is that you have to issue proceedings again. It doesn't stop you from bringing a claim entirely (unless your claim is now statute barred under the Limitation Act). So, that means that the MOJ will just be awaiting another potential claim, that is inevitably going to be served correctly and therefore will have to be dealt with at some point in the future.

 

It is almost certainly more beneficial to the GLD and their Client if all is dealt with now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to me strange that a claimant has to use the term 'C/O' because most of the people even not know what it means

 

it will be careless for me to serve my claim out of time without the agreement of the LGD or permission of the court because my claim could be struck out at a hearing and I could be ordered to pay the cost of the hearing

 

Unfortunately I cannot issue another claim because it is now statute barred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It seems to me strange that a claimant has to use the term 'C/O' because most of the people even not know what it means

 

it will be careless for me to serve my claim out of time without the agreement of the LGD or permission of the court because my claim could be struck out at a hearing and I could be ordered to pay the cost of the hearing

 

Unfortunately I cannot issue another claim because it is now statute barred

 

So, it appears you know what you want (and feel you have) to do. What is your outstanding question (or are you merely hoping for validation?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly I would like to know if I can add anything to my application for an extension of time which could increase the chances that I will get this permission. Secondly if what I say in my posts is wrong I would like you explain me why so that I amend accordingly the witness statement that I am writing for this application. Thirdly to know how to properly explain my arguments in this witness statement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How did you get on with ringing the GLD, today? From what I read from the experts on this thread, the clock is ticking for you.

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I predicted the LGD refuses to do me such a favour. So now I have no choice but to make an application either under the overriding objective of doing justice which is to save time and money for an order from the court considering that the claim form was served on the defendant's representative because he has nevertheless received it and he makes reference to its contents in his last email. Or in the alternative for an order under CPR 6.10 to get permission to serve again my claim form this time on the defendant's representative after the four month deadline

 

Therefore I need you reply to my questions in my last post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a shame.

 

Could you remind us please why you missed the four month deadline and why you came up to the SB limit?

 

HB


Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I served my claim form within the four months deadline but I served it on the defendant instead of serving it on its representative because CPR 6.10 says that for claims against the Crown we have to serve the claim form on the defendant's representative. This is a stupid technicality it is judicial bureaucracy which wastes time and money because the defendant's representative has received my claim form as evidenced by his last email and could respond to it if he wishes. As a consequence if now I have to serve again my claim form this time on the defendant's representative I will be now outside the four months deadline.

 

I had to go through the several steps of the MOJ's complaint procedure and this has taken a long time. Moreover I had also other commitments. I made my first claim within the six years deadline but if I have to make another claim this time it will be slightly outside the six years limitation period

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...