Jump to content


Lowell clamform - old shop direct CAT debt


NikkiBloom
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1566 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

urm.. that's a telecom defence??

why not adapt the one I pointed you too??:noidea:

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll Try Again 😅

 

Particulars Of Claim.

1)            The Defendant entered into an agreement with Very - Littlewoods/Additions Direct which was regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 under reference ******** on 02/12/2014 ('the Agreement').

2)            In breach of the Agreement, the Defendant failed to maintain the required payments and the Agreement was terminated.

3)            The Agreement was later assigned to the Claimant on 09/09/2016 and written notice given to the Defendant.

4)            Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of £990 remains due and outstanding. And the Claimant claims

a)            The said sum of £990

b)            Interest pursuant to s69 Count Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.216, but  limited to one year, being £80

c)            Costs

 

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. Paragraph 1 is denied. Whilst it is admitted I have held various catalogue agreements in the past, I have no recollection of ever entering into an agreement with Shop Direct and do not recognise the specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 78 request pursuant to The Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

2. Paragraph 2 is denied I do not recall any breach and I have not been served with a Default Notice pursuant to sec87(1) the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

3. Paragraph 3 is denied. I do not recall having received a Notice of Assignment, as stated by the Claimant. They have sent an alleged copy dated 5th Oct 2016 from my cpr31.14 request. this is the first time I have seen this letter.

 

4. On receipt of this claim form , I the Defendant sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request.

 

5. A further request made via CPR 31.14 to the claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim. The claimant has not complied.

 

6. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and;

b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for and;

c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974

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

 

7. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed

 

8. 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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

well done that man..

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received a letter from the courts. Guessing it is pretty standard.

 

The body reads:

 

I acknowledge receipt of your defence.

A copy is being served on the claimant (or the claimant's solicitor).

 

The claimant may contact you direct to attempt to resolve any dispute. If the dispute cannot be resolved informally, the claimant will inform the court that he wishes to proceed. The court will then inform you of what will happen.


Where he wishes to proceed, the claimant must contact the court within 28 days after receiving a copy of youndefence.Afteflhat period has elapsed, the claim will be stayed.

 

The only action the claimant can then take will be to apply to a judge for an order lifting the stay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yea sure quite std

 

they have 28 days to do 'something' else the claim will get stayed.

 

plenty of threads here to read up on the court process as/if its progresses through the various stages

 

most claimform threads will hold info.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

So, I completed the forms sent, including the one about mediation after following the advice on other threads.

 

One thing that I've been sent in the info from Lowell is a 'draft Tomlin order'. 

Is this a sign of their confidence or desperation?

 

Still no DN. Just a silly computer screenshot.

Link to post
Share on other sites

std practice for every Lowell claimform thread if you go read them.

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...