-
-
Tweets
-
-
Posts
-
ok looks like that's what you need to do. but keep it bare bones for now as post 5 -
stuff and all if there no signed agreement in the return dx
-
1st again why do you keep changing things before you send them you've added counterclaim in to our std CPR 31:14 you sent? why? this opens you up to additional costs and I hope you didnt tick counterclaim when you did AOS on mcol too? also I notice you've played with our std OD defence above too... pers I would refrain from continuing to change things as they are written in the frain they are for specific reasons. your defence is due by 4pm Monday [day 33] here are 2 versions you will ofcourse need to adapt them to lowells para no's and remove the NOA stuff as your docs show Lowell have complied with those. but don't forget to mention other documents provided to date notably statements contain no proof they came from Lloyds but rather Lowells own internal data system dx 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. (c) 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. (c) 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 Andy
-
Hi Just read your thread and looked at the Docs posted in your PDF. 1. from AST to rent a Car Parking space you need to have signed a Car Parking Agreement for a Space and for visitors you should have asked permission for another space in advance with a fee to pay. (i also assume renting a parking space would be at a cost) 2. You have no signed Car Parking Agreement nor visitor space agreement. Did you not fully read that AST before you signed it and pick up what is stated about parking and ask them about this Car Parking Agreement and if you need one to park in the car park? You could formally complain to them about what was verbally said to you but unless you have evidence of this it may be hard to prove. You should also contact them and ask how you go about renting a Car Parking space/costs and about the Car Parking Agreement also what the process is for a visitor car parking space/costs. You need to be aware that they could class you and your visitor as illegally parking in there car park without consent nor a signed car parking agreement which they could use as a Breach of your Tenancy Agreement so you need to be careful in how you are approaching this and where you are parking. Just for info on checking Manchester Life website they have numerous buildings/apartments/car parks but you may be in a building where some of the apartments are leasehold and as part of there leasehold they may have purchased a car parking space in that building. (so how do you know you are not parking in a space that someone in the building has legally purchased?) -
-
-
Our picks
-
Mobile users can now switch providers with one simple text
Andyorch posted a topic in Telecoms - mobile or fixed,
Mobile users can now switch providers with one simple text. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/417284-mobile-users-can-now-switch-providers-with-one-simple-text/-
- 4 replies
Picked By
Andyorch, -
-
@curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK refused to honour purchase
Irt8787 posted a topic in Currys/Dixons,
Currys refused to honour purchase. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/417157-currys-refused-to-honour-purchase/-
- 98 replies
-
-
My personal experiences of Future Comms
rooferman27 posted a topic in Telecoms - mobile or fixed,
My personal experiences of Future Comms
Don't touch them owe me £500 since January 2019 make excuse after excuse. Seem they always have software problems sending money out. Keep saying they will call back or email nothing been chasing it now for 6 mths the phone staff always have the same banter we will chase it up and get back to you then nothing!-
- 0 replies
-
-
Future Comms is a Big Con. How to get out of it
Ken123456789 posted a topic in Telecoms - mobile or fixed,
Future Comms is a Big Con. How to get out of it. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/417058-future-comms-is-a-big-con-how-to-get-out-of-it/-
-
- 4 replies
Picked By
Ken123456789, -
-
Hoist/cohen claimform - Ex Barclaycard debt.
By
244065013, in Financial Legal Issues
-
Recently Browsing 0 Caggers
No registered users viewing this page.
-
Have we helped you ...?
