lowell Claimform - old halifax OD debt filed as lloyds OD

[pablo23]

First attempt,

pulling / adjusting from multiple sources.

 

Because of the vague POC, it is mostly generic.

 

From what I’ve read,

I am only defending the POC in the claim form

– although it’s been narrowed down to a Halifax overdraft

– the POC clearly states

“Lloyds banking group”, making my response in P.1, I feel, still accurate.

But there might be a better way to word this.….

 

If you can have a quick look for me – I would appreciate any feedback – be as harsh as you want!

 

POC:

 

Debt assigned on xx/06/15 by

Lloyds Banking Group PLC

and the Claiment claims.

1. 2xxx.xx

2. Statutory interest pursuant to section 69

of the County Courts Act (11984) at a rate

8.000% per anum from xx/06/15 to xx/12/17

2xx.50, and thereafter at a daily rate

of 0.62 to date of judgement or sooner

payment

Ref: xxxxxxxxxx

 

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

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. The Defendant is unaware of any financial dealings directly with Lloyds Banking Group PLC

 

2. The Defendant made a written request to the claimants on XX December 2017 requesting inspection of documents relating to the claim, under the Civil Procedure Rules section 31.14, including the agreement, default notice and notice of assignment.

 

3. The claimant has not complied with this request.

The defendant feels that it is impossible to defend against a claim when there is no information with which to construct a proper defence, nor indeed, admission.

 

4. The particulars of claim state that the "debt was assigned on XX/06/15 by Lloyds banking group PLC".

The Defendant has not received any notification of this assignment.

 

5. The Claimant has failed to detail how the sum claimed has accrued and is considered due.

 

6. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation.

 

7. Therefore It is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed.

 

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

[dx100uk]

I more like...

 

Heres a more detailed version of an overdraft defence...obviously you would have to edit to suit your particulars....

.

1. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant entering into an Agreement referred to in the Particulars of Claim ('the Agreement') with the [insert original creditor] .

.

2. The defendant denies that the account exceeded the agreed overdraft limit due to overdrawing of funds but is as a result of unfair and extortionate bank charges/penalties being applied to the account.

.

3. I refute the claimants claim is owed or payable. The amount claimed is comprised of amongst others default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, missed or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbey National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.

.

4. 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. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.

.

5. The claimant is denied from added section 69 interest within the total claimed that as yet to be decided at the courts discretion.

.

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

.

The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.

.

(a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.

(b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.

© Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.

(d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.

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

(f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.

.

7. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.

.

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.

.

..............

 

 

or

 

Particulars of Claim

 

1.The claim is for the sum of 2470.56 in respect of monies owing pursuant to an overdraft facility under account number XXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX.

 

2.The debt was legally assigned by Santander UK Plc to the claimant and notice has been served.

 

3.The Defendant has failed to repay overdrawn sums owing under the terms and conditions of the bank account.

 

 

The Claimant claims:

 

The sum of 2470.56 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county courticon Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00 percent from the 7/04/2015 to the date hereof 14 days is the sum of 7.58Daily interest at the rate of .54

 

Costs

 

Defence

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of the 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. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with the original creditor Santander Bank. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.

 

2. Paragraph 2 is denied.I am not aware or ever receiving any Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925. 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. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.

 

3. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Original Creditor has never served notice pursuant to 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974

 

Any alleged amount claimed could only consist in the main of default penalties/charges levied on the account for alleged late, rejected or over limit payments. The court will be aware that these charge types and the recoverability thereof have been judicially declared to be susceptible to assessments of fairness under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 The Office of Fair Trading v Abbeyicon National PLC and others (2009). I will contend at trial that such charges are unfair in their entirety.

 

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

 

The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.

 

(a) Provide a copy agreement/overdraft facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception that this claim is based on.

(b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.

© Provide a breakdown of all excessive charging/fees and show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.

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

(e) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.

 

5. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated April 2015 namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.

 

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

 

nicked from Andy

[pablo23]

Thanks DX - I think I've made the second suggestion work. Defense 2.0 - If you could have a quick glance, let me know if I've done anything stupid.

 

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

 

POC:

 

Debt assigned on xx/06/15 by

Lloyds Banking Group PLC

and the Claiment claims.

 

1. 2xxx.xx

 

2. Statutory interest pursuant to section 69

of the County Courts Act (11984) at a rate

8.000% per anum from xx/06/15 to xx/12/17

2xx.50, and thereafter at a daily rate

of 0.62 to date of judgement or sooner

payment

Ref: xxxxxxxxxx

 

Defense

 

The Defendant contends that the particulars of the 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. It is admitted with regards to the Defendant once having had banking facilities with a subsidiary creditor of the Lloyds Banking Group. It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed.

 

2. 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. The Claimant has yet to provide a copy of the Notice of Assignment its claim relies upon.

 

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

 

The claimant is also put to strict proof to:-.

 

(a) Provide a copy agreement/facility arrangement along with the Terms and conditions at inception, that this claim is based on.

(b) Provide a copy of the Notice served under 76(1) and 98(1) of the CCA1974 Demand /Recall Notice and Notice of Assignment.

© Provide a breakdown of their excessive charging/fees levied to the account with justification.

(d) Show how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed.

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

(f) Show how they have complied with sections III & IV of Practice Direction - Pre-action Conduct.

 

4. On receipt of this claim I requested documentation by way of a CPR 31.14 request dated [xxxxxxx] namely the Agreement and Termination Demand Notice referred to in the claimants Particulars of Claim. The Claimant has failed to comply with this request.

 

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.

 

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

 

Point 1 - reworded slightly to admit banking facilities with a "subsidiary creditor of the Lloyds banking group"

Point 1 - It is denied that I am indebted for any alleged balance claimed. - I assume with this statement I'm denying anything unproven

Point 3 - The cliament has yet to provide a copy of the NOA - they've provided one, but not from the original creditor - I assume this is what Jon was saying, and this point is still relevant.

 

 

 

Thank you!

[pablo23]

Hi Guys

- Sorry to pester,

 

I will be submitting the above defence shortly.

 

I just wanted to ask a quick question regarding their response to the 31.14 rquest;

 

They mention they have requested statments and a copy of the default notice

- until they receieve a response, my account is on hold.

 

Do I still submit this defence regardless of the account being on hold?

[jon8214]

Regardless of what they say, you follow the courts timetable!!

 

File your defence on the date that you have been told by the courts

 

Looking at previous posts it should be filed by 4pm on the 19th

[dx100uk]

needs work.??

 

1. you admit its Lloyds?? as that was not the case when you took the account why admit

[pablo23]

I didn't think that was relevant because either way Halifax does fall under the Lloyd banking group, as well as the letters they've sent confirming it's a Halifax current account, which will only materialise in court should it reach that point.

If it's best to defend strictly to the POC wording - I can go with my initial:

 

1. The Defendant is unaware of any financial dealings directly with Lloyds Banking Group PLC

[dx100uk]

IMHO go with that

don't make their Guesswork easier.

 

also

did you get Pre action protocol paperwork 1st?

 

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?481827-The-Pre-Action-Protocol-for-Debt-Claims-is-made-by-the-Master-of-the-Rolls-as-Head-of-Civil-Justice.-1st-Oct-2017

[pablo23]

Thanks Jon/DX. I'll go with that. I've not seen the pre action docs but I'll have a good read now!

[dx100uk]

then you need to add an extra line to your defence as they should have abided by the new PAP rules