OH's IDEM claimform - MBNA credit card debt

[dx100uk]

pages 9 onwards are not a credit agreement as there is no signed box by him nor things like right to cancel box.

its a set of T&C's that they can get from here or from their own filing cabinet and insert his name on the 1st page, which a bet isn't even in the same type face as the T&C's

filing cabinet copy and paste jobbie, supported by an application form minus the required prescribed terms to make it an enforceable agreement

if you also look closely which we cant you'll see it references certain T&C numbered sections that are not included either

also where is the default notice from MBNA?

[blondiegirl]

So presumably we don't go back to Idem again as they haven't provided the right info but just submit the defence?

 

Also, with the DF - given that he didn't DF with MBNA for as long as the account was with them, and if Idem can't DF him, where does he stand with a DF?? 

[blondiegirl]

@yodabug Hope you don't mind the question: did you use a standard 'template' in drafting up your defence? I'm in this position now, I need to respond early next week. Lots of great threads on here, but copying and pasting everyone's defences is proving tricky as there are differences in everyone's case. Thanks in advance  

[dx100uk]

There are no defence 'templates' as you found each case is diff......

[blondiegirl]

Yes thanks dx 

 

Just finding it very tricky to sort the defence without copying and pasting a lot of irrelevant info from other people's defences (or maybe it is relevant, I dunno). I'm no expert on the terminology nor the law which this all relates to and just want to get it right.

[dx100uk]

No but you'll see the format and sentence s used are alike

Its not hard and you wont get it wrong

But you need to post up your thought else we dont know

 

[yodabug]

Hi blondiegirl 

 

every specific case is different and you have to tailor it to yours specific one.  Have a go using bits and pieces that you think suit yours - and as DX said post it up.  Good luck your in safe hands 

[dx100uk]

A non existent default NOTICE [STOP USING df]

is usually fatal to any court claim under section 87 of the consumer credit act. 

[AndyOrch]

I was wondering what  DF meant also   

 

Andy

[blondiegirl]

Sorry for any confusion. I learnt the abbreviation on here

 

 

[AndyOrch]

DN = Default Notice or DM = Default Marker...never heard of DF...but nevermind 

[blondiegirl]

First draft of response if someone could take a look please. Hope it's OK;

 

Particulars of Claim (for reference purposes only):

 

1.     A credit card agreement made between MNBA Europe Bank Limited and the cardholder (D)

2.     Claimant ( C ) purchased the balance on the account on 06/10/2016

3.     D accrued balance £ 2947

4.     D defaulted on payments

5.     C issued Formal Demand requesting payment dated 23.08.19

6.     Amount now due from D £ 2947

 

  

************************************* Draft 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. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) but failed to serve a letter of claim(s) for the alleged agreement 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

 

3. Paragraphs 1 and 3 are noted; I have in the past had financial dealings with MBNA on or about 2000. I am unaware of what alleged debt the Claimant refers to having failed to adequately particularise its claim, and have therefore sought clarity from the Claimant by way of a Section 78 request and a CPR 31.14 request.

 

In response the claimant has disclosed an application form for MBNA which is Illegible and incomplete therefore not enforceable pursuant to sec 61 .1 a/b/c.

 

Additionally, in response to my section 78 request for the MBNA agreement, an application form, which refers you to sign and return the agreement....barely legible - along with a reconstituted version which is void of an account number or date to which it supposedly refers to.

Both of which are pre April 2007 credit applications and therefore unenforceable pursuant to sections 61.1 and 65.1 and sections 127.1.

 

4. Paragraph 2 is noted but it is denied that I was ever served Notice of Assignment pursuant to sec 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925 at the time of the Assignment dated 06/10/2016.

                         I don’t think this was ever sent but cannot guarantee this from 2016

 

 

5. Paragraph 4 is denied. I am unaware of any service of a Default Notice (s) pursuant to section 87 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I have sought verification from the claimant regarding this matter and they have been unable to comply.

                         We have had a DF Notice from Idem but is this irrelevant? Or do we say that we’ve not had a DF Notice from MBNA?

 

 

6. Paragraph 5 is noted but I refer you to my point 2 and the claimants non-compliance of paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol).The claimant is not in a position to issue demands.

 

7. Paragraph 6 is denied for the reasons stated in my point 2.

 

 

 

8. 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 and evidence the nature of any breach and Default Notice;

(C) 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;

 

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

 

10. 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.

  

11. 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.

 

 

[AndyOrch]

2. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol

✎ EditSign

) but failed to serve a letter of claim(s) for the alleged agreement 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

 

I thought they had you stated yes in your initial response ?

[blondiegirl]

Thanks for that.

 

Yes to me filling the PAP form out? Yes, I did. But I haven't had anything from Idem relating to it (I don't think??).

 

They just went ahead and sent the claim form.

[dx100uk]

then you cant inc your no.2

 

dx

[blondiegirl]

Ah OK. I thought that they had failed to serve a letter of claim following my PAP return. 

[dx100uk]

eh?

your pap reply was to their letter of claim..

 

dx

[blondiegirl]

Yes, of course  Thanks.

I'll delete that line.

[AndyOrch]

Or you could adjust it to include that the claimant did not respond within the given 30 days and proceeded to issue the claim irrespective ?

[dx100uk]

yea like what was the point in sending loc pap?

or it being there if claimants ignore its purpose... in a way...

 

dx

 

[blondiegirl]

15 hours ago, Andyorch said:

Or you could adjust it to include that the claimant did not respond within the given 30 days and proceeded to issue the claim irrespective ?

Do I need to check dates?? 

 

So, am I right in thinking that:

 

from the date the Letter of Claim, Idem had 30 days but did nothing other than proceed with the claim?? 

[blondiegirl]

13 hours ago, dx100uk said:

yea like what was the point in sending loc pap?

or it being there if claimants ignore its purpose... in a way...

 

dx

 

I'm sensing sarcasm 

Not sure what you mean though, sorry. I am learning the process though but it's not second nature yet. 

[AndyOrch]

If you read the relevant thread on pre action protocol......

 

Disclosure

 

If in the debtor requests disclosure of a specific document or information in his reply, the creditor must provide that document/information within 30 days of receipt of the response or provide an explanation as to why it isn’t available.

 

So I take it they failed to comply with your request or any of the the above procedure.

[dx100uk]

Not at you..them..as above

[blondiegirl]

3 hours ago, Andyorch said:

If you read the relevant thread on pre action protocol......

 

Disclosure

 

If in the debtor requests disclosure of a specific document or information in his reply, the creditor must provide that document/information within 30 days of receipt of the response or provide an explanation as to why it isn’t available.

 

So I take it they failed to comply with your request or any of the the above procedure.

 

They wrote on 5th April 2019 and I returned the PAP form around the 20th April.

They wrote again on the 3rd June 2019 saying:

 

"Thank you for returning the reply form......but we need to speak to you.......please call".

 

But no response to the specific points I requested in the PAP nor explanation.