Lowell claimform - old Paypal Debt

[AndyOrch]

Court date hearing and hearing fee date does not signify the dates from the N157 when each party must file/exchange their statement and evidence by ?

[robert_harper_2000]

Shall I upload the other n document?

[dx100uk]

Yes n157 and all the exhibit s too.

 

Dx

[robert_harper_2000]

You want all the WS evidence? Quite a lot is that ok?

 

2023-07-07 N157 NOA.pdf

[AndyOrch]

On 11/03/2023 at 07:35, robert_harper_2000 said:

Case going to court next month. They sent a lot of papers but nothing on the actual drbt

 

You should have posted the N157 with your post above on the 11th March then we would have plenty of time to prepare and also know the date that you should file and serve by, although DX seems to know your 4 days late somehow even though you are yet to upload the N157 Notice of Allocation.

[robert_harper_2000]

I can’t seem to find this allocation can I access through the MoneyClaim gov site?

 

A claim was issued against you on 31/05/2022

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 11/06/2022 at 09:37:18

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 13/06/2022 at 01:06:11

Your defence was submitted on 27/06/2022 at 12:12:40

Your defence was received on 27/06/2022 at 14:05:09

DQ filed by claimant on 02/08/2022

DQ sent to you on 02/08/2022

You filed a DQ on 19/08/2022

Your claim was transferred to BRIGHTON on 27/09/2022

 

My DN 

DN1-merged.pdf

1. Invalid Default Notice: On [date of receiving the Default Notice], I received a Default Notice from the Claimant, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 7 days. However, according to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach. As the Default Notice only provided me with 7 days to comply, I argue that it is invalid.

 

 

Consumer Credit Act 1974

WWW.LEGISLATION.GOV.UK

---

An Act to establish for the protection of consumers a new system, administered by the Director General of Fair Trading, of licensing and other control of traders concerned with the provision of credit, or the supply of...

 

Dn bit Crap 

Again what's this about dn 7 days?? It's not!

 

The DN notice says I have 7 days. But the CCA S88 is it needs to be 14 days - I don't understand what I've said wrong? Paypal gave me 7 days when it should be 14?

 

 

 

sorry again. The date is 15.01.2020 and the date to be remedied by is 29.01.2020 so that is 14 days but doesn't allow +2 days for postage?

[dx100uk]

That's what I put yes 

 

How can you be given 14 days when it must have taken +2 days for the letter to reach you.........DN invalid

[rarelydarely]

I really don't want them to win by default. You need to get your witness statement in. I never expected this to get to the hearing stage. Having skimmed the files you uploaded it seems they are using your lack of knowledge against you, don't let them. I think (please more knowledgeable correct me if wrong) you really must emphasise the Pre-Brexit issue & invalid default notice. But, you need to get your WS done & dusted a.s.a.p. 

[robert_harper_2000]

I can do it now working on it asap

 

Ok sk dn invalid due to postage time 

 

prebrexit rules need to find 

 

that’s the main points?

 

So this so far is going in the right direction

 

Invalid Default Notice:

1. On [date of receiving the Default Notice], I received a Default Notice from the Claimant, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 14 days. However, according to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach, and this period should also account for the additional time needed for postage, which would be at least 2 days. In this case, the Default Notice provided me with 14 days to comply but did not include the extra 2 days for postage. Considering the postage time, the effective period provided for me to remedy the breach should have been 16 days, making the Default Notice invalid.

Improperly Executed Credit Agreement:

2. The Claimant has provided a copy of the alleged credit agreement, which I believe is not properly executed pursuant to Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The copy of the agreement provided lacks any signature, IP address, or tick box verification, as required by Section 4 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 for electronic agreements. Due to these missing elements, I argue that the agreement is improperly executed.

Jurisdictional Issue:

3. Furthermore, the alleged credit agreement provided appears to be a pre-Brexit PayPal EU agreement. As a result of Brexit, the jurisdiction of such agreements has changed, and I argue that this agreement falls outside the jurisdiction of this court.

 

can't find the legislation regarding old PayPal pre brexit 

[rarelydarely]

I didn't quote any Brexit legislation. You will confuse yourself if you try. You have 2 issues that should have this struck out the DN & pre-brexit.  One or both of those issues saw my case discontinued.

[robert_harper_2000]

Shall I send this off? Email the claimant and post to the courts? 
 

Invalid Default Notice:

1. On 18.01.2020, I received a Default Notice from Paypal Europe SOrl  & Cie SCA, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 14 days. However, according to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach, and this period should also account for the additional time needed for postage, which would be at least 2 days. In this case, the Default Notice provided me with 14 days to comply but did not include the extra 2 days for postage. Considering the postage time, the effective period provided for me to remedy the breach should have been 16 days, making the Default Notice invalid.

Improperly Executed Credit Agreement:

2. The Claimant has provided a copy of the alleged credit agreement, which I believe is not properly executed pursuant to Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The copy of the agreement provided lacks any signature, IP address, or tick box verification, as required by Section 4 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 for electronic agreements. Due to these missing elements, I argue that the agreement is improperly executed.

Jurisdictional Issue:

1. Furthermore, the alleged credit agreement provided appears to be a pre-Brexit PayPal EU agreement. As a result of Brexit, the jurisdiction of such agreements has changed, and I argue that this agreement falls outside the jurisdiction of this court.

 

1 hour ago, rarelydarely said:

I didn't quote any Brexit legislation. You will confuse yourself if you try. You have 2 issues that should have this struck out the DN & pre-brexit.  One or both of those issues saw my case discontinued.

 

The jurisdiction issue. But the agreement doesn't have an ip address 

[rarelydarely]

Yes, include every relevant issue in your case but the facts remain the DN & pre-brexit are what will win this, the rest just adds to your case.

 

[dx100uk]

10 hours ago, robert_harper_2000 said:

The jurisdiction issue. But the agreement doesn't have an ip address

 

so they cant prove in what country it was signed up to in then..

 

12 hours ago, robert_harper_2000 said:

On [date of receiving the Default Notice], I received a Default Notice from the Claimant, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 14 days. However, according to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach, and this period should also account for the additional time needed for postage, which would be at least 2 days. In this case, the Default Notice provided me with 14 days to comply but did not include the extra 2 days for postage. Considering the postage time, the effective period provided for me to remedy the breach should have been 16 days, making the Default Notice invalid.

 

no thats not correct its NOT 16days its 14days by the act

BUT as the DN is dated the 15th with an expiry to remedy by 29th

so if was posted on the same day it was written,

it could not have arrived to you until atleast +2days into your allowed 14 days to remedy the default.

so DN is invalid. you were not given the acts full 14days .

 

 

you dont email a fleecer never!

 

and yes we need their FULL WS + exhibits but we DONT need account statements.

 

so your WS was due on april fools day...

[robert_harper_2000]

I’ll carry on reading up on this. Hope it goes well on the day

Can I upload the witness statement? Would you still have any time to help?

[AndyOrch]

Please do although in reality as it should have been already filed and served by date (unknown) it may be too late and your defence has already been struck out.

[robert_harper_2000]

Oh… I did submit it already … will I find out on the day?

[AndyOrch]

No you will be informed before the hearing if they have invoked sanctions (struck out defence) informing you the claimant has judgment as you did not comply with the court directions on time.

 

 

.

[dx100uk]

can you post up exactly what WS you filed please

[robert_harper_2000]

this is their WS

 

crap, hope I don't lose the chance to defend the case.... such an idiot...###

 

 

My WS ... I basically sent what I had above - feel a bit embarrassed to post it now... 

 

Claimants WS.pdf

[dx100uk]

exact default boiler plate ws amy files every time.

 

dx

 

[robert_harper_2000]

Any tips ? Do you have any cases to quote for the PayPal jurisdiction 

 

the case has been postponed. The court emailed yesterday to say they might delayed the case as they have double booked and they called this morning to say they will post out a new date for the case to be heard. Do I have extra time to correct witness statements?

[dx100uk]

not sure if you could file a supplementary witness statement?

getting things right this time  ?

 

cant see why not?

dx

[robert_harper_2000]

Shall I send it anyway and see if it is accepted it won’t do any harm. 
 

shall I upload my witness statement and would you take a look? I know I’ve been a bit doodoo so far. 
 

should I just quote legislation or do I need to include the actual legislation in the witness statement like quote the actual bit.

 

[dx100uk]

not before its thoroughly checked by the experts.

 

 

 

 

[robert_harper_2000]

this better?

 

In the county Court at Brighton                                                           Claim No. xxxxxx

 

Mr xxxxxx -AND- Lowell Portfolio I LTD

 

Witness Statement of:

xx xxxx

xxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

xxxxxxx

11/04/2023

 

Witness Statement for PayPal Credit Agreement Dispute

 

I, XXXXX, hereby declare that the following statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

 

Background Information:

1. I am the Defendant in this case, and I am disputing the validity of the Default Notice and the alleged Paypal credit agreement provided by the Claimant, Lowells. I believe the Default Notice is invalid and the credit agreement is not properly executed, as detailed below.

 

2. On 18.01.2020, I received a Default Notice from the Claimant, which informed me that I was in breach of the credit agreement and that I had to remedy the breach within 14 days. According to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, Section 88, a Default Notice must provide the debtor with a minimum of 14 days to remedy the breach. The Default Notice was dated the 15th, with an expiry to remedy by the 29th. Assuming it was posted on the same day it was written, it could not have arrived to me until at least 2 days later. As a result, I was not given the full 14 days required by the Act to remedy the default, since at least 2 days were used for postage. Therefore, I argue that the Default Notice is invalid.

 

Improperly Executed Credit Agreement:

3. The Claimant has provided a copy of the alleged credit agreement, which I believe is not properly executed pursuant to Section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The copy of the agreement provided lacks any signature, IP address, or tick box verification, as required by Section 4 of The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 for electronic agreements. Due to these missing elements, I argue that the agreement is improperly executed.

 

Jurisdictional Issue:

4. Furthermore, the alleged credit agreement provided appears to be a pre-Brexit PayPal EU agreement. As a result of Brexit, the jurisdiction of such agreements has changed, and I argue that this agreement falls outside the jurisdiction of this court.

 

Statement of Truth:

5. I, XXXX, confirm that the contents of this witness statement are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.

 

Signed: XX

XXXXXXX

13.04.2023