Erudio/dryden claimform - old SLC loan.

[dx100uk]

will it allow you to click on file a defence?

dx

 

[Plonker1]

It allows me to click on 'start defence'

[dx100uk]

Brill 

Do so 

There are numerous erudio claimform threads here 

 

Find our std defence and get it filled..but post it up here 1st for checking.

 

If not I'll post one latter 

 

No real rush but by midnight should do 

 

Please don't panic 

Let us check or give it too you 

 

Dx

[Plonker1]

Thanks DX!  

 

I have put together what I think is the standard defence in this situation, I hope its correct.

 

They haven't complied with my CCA request, Do I need to add something in my defence regarding this?

 

 

 

1.The Claimant claims £5999.52 for monies due from the Defendant

 

2. This debt was pursuant to a regulated agreement(s) between the Defendant and The Student Loans Company.

Each agreement had an individual account number as follows:

 

3. The defendant failed to make payments as per the terms resulting in the agreement(s) being terminated.

Notice of such is served by a Default or Termination Notice subject to the terms of the agreement(s).

 

4.The debt was assigned to the Claimant on 22/11/2013 with a notice provided to the Defendant.

A new master reference number ***************** was also applied upon assignment.

 

The Claimant has complied with the Pre Action Protocol for Debt Claims

 

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 & 2 are noted the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor - The Student Loans Company. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or debt nor do I recognise the agreement numbers the claimant refers to .The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default.

 

2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1).

 

3. It is 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’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and

 

c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and

 

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

 

 

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

 

 

5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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.

 

 

6. 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

[Plonker1]

Maybe the end of paragraph 1 doesn't apply to me as they have fulfilled my CPR request?

[dx100uk]

You need to add in about being deferred every year to xx date, when you got no reply and that you have never earned above the threshold etc. 

 

Should be in most erudio claimform threads here 

 

Sorry I'm out till very late tonight herding sheep and can't search 

 

Dx

[dx100uk]

5 minutes ago, Plonker1 said:

Maybe the end of paragraph 1 doesn't apply to me as they have fulfilled my CPR request?

Include they dont know you received it.

 

 

[Andyorch]

Just to clarify CPR 15.5 allows a defence to be submitted a further 28 days than normal IE 56 days.  (14th May 2022) The fact that they have allowed  further time is very generous on their part.

 

Andy

[dx100uk]

add back in the CPR line

go file that defence now.

protect yourself from a default judgement.

 

 

[Plonker1]

Morning DX,

 

Crashed out last night!

 

I shall submit the following defence today and have added point number 6 as you advised regarding the year until which I was in deferment and never earning more than the threshold.  

 

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 & 2 are noted the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor - The Student Loans Company. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or debt nor do I recognise the agreement numbers the claimant refers to. The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default.

 

2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1).

 

3. It is 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’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and

 

c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and

 

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

 

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

 

5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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.

 

6.  The defendant was in continued deferment until 2020 and has never earned over the threshold.

 

7. 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

[Plonker1]

Am I ok to file the following 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. Paragraph 1 & 2 are noted the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor - The Student Loans Company. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement or debt nor do I recognise the agreement numbers the claimant refers to. The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default.

 

2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1).

 

3. It is 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’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and

 

c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and

 

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

 

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

 

5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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.

 

6.  The defendant was in continued deferment until 2020 and has never earned over the threshold.

 

7. 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

[dx100uk]

32 minutes ago, Plonker1 said:

6.  The defendant was in continued deferment until 2020 and has never earned over the threshold.

remove^^

 

replace

33 minutes ago, Plonker1 said:

1. Paragraph 1 & 2 are noted, the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor and the claimant regarding Student Loans. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement nor any debt.  The defendant always continued deferment until around 2020 when this was refused . i have never earned over the threshold.  The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default.

 

 

[Plonker1]

Thanks DX,

 

I'll submit this now:

 

 

 

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 & 2 are noted, the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with the original creditor and the claimant regarding Student Loans. I am unable to recall the precise details of the alleged agreement nor any debt.  The defendant always continued deferment until around 2020 when this was refused. I have never earned over the threshold.  The Defendant has sought verification from the Claimant by way of a section 77 request which as to this date has failed to comply and remains in default.

 

2. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer credit Act 1974 by the claimant nor the original creditor, nor of any legal assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 section 136 (1).

 

3. It is 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’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and

 

c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and

 

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

 

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

 

5. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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.

 

6. 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

 

[Plonker1]

Submitted.

 

Let's await their response now.  

 

Really appreciate all your help DX, learnt a lot last night after some more searching!

[Plonker1]

So I've been away and came back to be greeted by a lovely letter from our friends at Drydensfairfax.

 

They have provided me with the following documents which wasn't previously supplied:

 

-  Copy of the signed agreement

-  Copy of the Default Notice

-  A notice of Assignment from the Student Loans company to our client

 

They claim that the above deals with my Defence in full!

 

Then the usual threats of lifting the stay and commence legal action.  They also mention 'It is also likely that any such application will include an Application for Summary Judgement, given the evidence which has now been provided to you in support of our client's Claim'.

 

What's the chances they will lift the stay and commence legal action?  

 

They certainly haven't dealt will all of my Defence, maybe part of it.

 

I'm inclined to ignore.........

 

[dx100uk]

The court will notify you IF they do 

 

Dx.