Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I have had a secondary thought.  I borrowed £s from a completely separate entity 6y ago. It was personal and unsecured. I was going to repay upon sale of the property. But then repo and I couldn't.  Eventually they applied and got a charging order on the property.  Their lawyers wrote that if I didn't repay they may apply for an order for sale.  I'm not in control of the sale.  The lender won't agree to an order for sale.  The judge won't expedite it/ extract from trial.  Someone here on cag may or may not suggest I can apply for an order v the receiver?  But could I alternatively ask this separate entity with a c.o to carry out their threat and actually make an application to court for an order for sale v the receiver instead?
    • You left the PCN number showing, but no worries, I've redacted it. Euro Car parks are very well known to us.  I've just skimmed through the titles of the latest 100 cases we have with them (I gave up after 100) and, despite all their bluster and threats, in not one have they taken the Cagger to court. You stayed there for 2 hours &:45 minutes.  I'm guessing the limit is 2 hours and 30 minutes, right?  
    • If the claimant fails to draft directions the court can order a Case Management Hearing to set them but normally in Fast Track claims the claimant sets the directions...Unlike small claims track which are always set the court.
    • Not Evris offer, the court offers mediation service.   All claims proceed to hearing if mediation fails /not happen.   Why do you not wish to attend in person to stand your claim ?     Absolutely you must comply with the courts directions or your claim risks being struck out. Preparation for a hearing should happen irrespective of mediation.   https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/460613-suing-a-parcel-delivery-company-when-you-dont-have-a-direct-contract-with-them-–-third-party-rights-copy-of-judgment-available/#comment-5255007   Andy  
    • LPA.  (I'm fighting insolvency due to all the stuff that he and lender have done).  He appointed estate agents - (changed several times). Disclosure shows he was originally appointed for a specific reason (3m after repo) : using his powers as acting for leaseholder to serve notice on freeholders (to grab fh).  There was interest from 3 potential buyers. He chose one whose offer depended on a positive result of the notice.  Disc also shows he'd taken counsel advice - which was 'he'd fail'.  He'd simultaneously asked to resign as his job (of serving notice) was done and he'd found a buyer.  Lender asked him to stay on to assign notice to the buyer.  Notice failed, buyer didn't buy.  So receiver stayed.  There was 1 buyer who wanted to proceed w/o fh but receiver/ lender wasted 1y trying to get rid of them!  Disc shows why. But I didn't know why at the time. In later months Lender voiced getting rid of receiver. Various reasons - including cost.  But there's a contradiction/ irony: as I've seen an email (of 4y ago) which shows the receiver telling lender not to incur significant costs and to minimize receiver costs.    Yet lender then asked him to serve another notice - again counsel advice indicated 'he'd fail'.  And he did fail.  But wasted 3y trying and incurred huge legal costs - lender trying to pass on to me. Lender interfered - said wanted to do works.  Receiver should have said no.  But disc. shows he agreed to step aside to let them do the works - on proviso lender would discuss potential costs first (they didn't), works wouldn't take long (took 15m), and lender would hold interest (they didn't) (this last point is crucial for me now - as I need to know if I can argue that all interest beyond this point shouldnt be allowed?)   I need to check receiver witness statement in litigation with freeholders to see exactly what he said about 'his position'. But I remember it being along the lines of - 'if the works increased the value of the property he didn't have a problem'.  Lender/ receiver real problems started at this point. The cost of works and 4y passage of time has meant there is no real increase in value. Lender (or receiver) didn't get any permissions (statutory or fh) (and didn't tell me) and just bulldozed the property to an empty shell.  The freeholders served notice on me as leaseholder for breach of covenants (strict no alterations).  The Lender stepped in (acting for me) to issue notice for relief of forfeiture - not the receiver.  That wasted 2y of litigation (3y if inc the works) and incurred huge costs (both sides).  Lender's aim was to do the works that every potential buyer balked at due to the lease restrictions.  Lender and receiver knew couldn't do works w/o fh permission. Lender did them anyway; receiver allowed.  Receiver remained appointed.  I'm arguing lender interfered in receiver duties.  Receiver should have just sold property 4-5y ago w/o allowing any works.  Almost 3y since works finished the property remains unsold (>5y from repo). The property looks brand new - but it was great before.  The lender spent a ton of money - hoping that would facilitate a quick sale.  But the money they spent and the years they have wasted has meant they had to increase sale price.  It's now completely overpriced.  And - of course - the same issues that put buyers off (before works) still exist.   The receiver has tried for 2y to assert the works increased value. But he is relying on agents estimates - which have proved highly speculative. (Usual trick of an agent to give a high value to get the business - and then tell seller to reduce when no-one buys.). And of course lender continues to accrue interest (despite 4y ago receiver saying pause interest). Lender tried to persuade receiver to use specific agent. Disc shows this agent was best friends with the lender's main investor in the property.  Before works this agent had valued it low.  After works this agent suggested a value 70% higher!  The lender persuaded receiver to sack one agent and instead use this agent.  No offers. (Price way too high).   Research has uncovered that this main investor has since died.  I guess his investment is part of probate? And his family want it back?    Disc shows the sacked agent had actually received a high offer 1y ago.  Receiver rejected it.  (thus I don't know if the buyer would have ever proceeded). He was relying on the high speculative valuation the agents had given him to pitch for the business. The agents were in a catch-22.  The receiver sacked them. Disc shows there has been 0 interest ever since (inc via new agent requested by lender). I don't think lender or receiver want all this to come out in public domain via a trial.  It will ruin their reputations. If I can't get an order for sale with lender - can I apply separately against receiver?
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Claim form Lowell/Overdales re multiple New Day credit cards


cx085
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 379 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

Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton N1

 

Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio Ltd

 

Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 10 Jun 2022

 

Particulars of Claim

 

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? 

1. The Claim comprises the following Agreements the Defendent entered into:

a. New Day Ltd with reference xxxx and current balance of xxx

b. New Day Ltd with reference xxxx and current balance of xxx

c. New Day Ltd with reference xxxx and current balance of xxx

d. New Day Ltd with reference xxxx and current balance of xxx

The Agreements were terminated as payments were not maintained and subsequently assigned to the Claimant.

And the Claimant claims:

a) The total of the said sums being £3886.87

b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, but limited to one year, being £310.95

c) Costs

 

What is the total value of the claim? £4482
 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? Yes
 

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No
 

Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a

Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Cards
 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After
 

Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online
 

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes
 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Accounts assigned to Lowell
 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Yes
 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Cannot remember or find them
 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Cannot remember or find them

Why did you cease payments? Lost job and close member of family was seriously ill and I buried head in sand re financial problems.
 

What was the date of your last payment? Approx 2 years ago
 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? NO
 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Initially applied for payment holidays during COVID then made no further payments.

 

............................

 

 

I received a Letter of Claim approximately 6 weeks ago and ignored it until I received a claim form for 4 New Day credit cards that were assigned to Lowell.

 

I have acknowledged service and will start preparing my defence.

 

Are Lowell able to issue claims for multiple accounts on one form?

I will send CCA requests on Monday.

Do I need to send them a separate request for each account with separate postal orders?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes they càn.

Cca for each.

 

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

  • 2 months later...

Further update to this.

I acknowledged the claim.

CPR request sent to solicitor and CCA requests for each agreement to Lowell. Still not received anything back from either other than letter to say information would be requested from the original creditor and offering me a discount to settle.

Read up loads of similar threads here and sent the standard holding defence.

Received and sent back the DQ and ticked agreeing to mediation.

Received mediation appt by email for 6 Sept.

The email from mediation service says:

Please read the following statements - mediation is only available if you can answer yes to all 3:

1. I am willing to negotiate on the amount of the claim and I will consider a compromise.

2. I have enough information about the claim to enter into negotiations and do not require any further evidence from the other party before starting mediation.

3. I’m available for the entire time slot on the date of my appointment.

If you cannot answer yes to all 3 statements, mediation is NOT suitable for your case and you should contact us: [email protected]

 

Yes I have read other similar threads, but didn't think it was right to blindly say yes to mediation. I replied confirming I accepted the appointment, but was still waiting for the information I had requested from the claimant and solicitor and would need these beforehand to make an informed decision.

Yesterday I got another email from the mediation service which says:

Thank you for your email. Can you please reply no later than 4 days before the appointment date offered confirming whether you want to keep or cancel the mediation appointment..

I still have no paperwork. Should I confim the appointment and let them know at the start of the call I don't have the information I need or cancel it now?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Either will do 

 

Well done on getting it all done by yourself 

 

Post up the defence you filed for ref sometime 

 

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

  • 1 month later...

Further update.

I notified Small Claims mediation team 4 days before mediation appt that Overdales had not sent any documentation to me and I could not make an informed decision.

 

Received Notice of Transfer of Proceedings to local County Court dated 8 September 2022 as the mediation team could not arrange mediation in time.

 

On 28 September, I received a bundle of about 500 pages from Overdales.

I have attached the Overdales letter and  the DN for Debenhams card. The DNs for the other cards are identical with a different account number.

 

They have included monthly statements for the Debenhams, Amazon and TopShop cards, but not the TUI card.

 

The letter says they have now been provided with copies of the agreements and have attached them. But I have fully checked the bundle and there are no credit agreements for the Amazon, TUI and TopShop cards.

 

The Debenhams agreement includes 24 pages of Terms and Conditions, none of my details are on there but a statement on front page that my personalised details are on the back of my welcome letter. Checked that letter and nothing on there.

 

Their letter again mentions their offer of mediation and mentions I should tick the box on my own DQ from the Court (no acknowledgement that the case has already been transferred).

 

Should I do anything regarding the lack of agreements in the bundle or just wait till I hear from the local County Court?

 

Separately from this, and without informing Lowell or Overdales,

I made a formal complaint regarding irresponsible lending to NewDay.

 

I had a total of 6 accounts with them. I have received a response and they have upheld my complaint and agreed that 5 of the accounts (including all 4 in this case) should not have been approved. They say they will refund all interest and charges on these accounts. But the letter doesn't mention the accounts were sold to Lowell.

 

What should be my response to this letter?

Should I inform Overdales or just let the case carry on?

 

 

Overdales redacted-min.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

difficult one as the IRL complaint sort of acknowledges the debts, but theres a few claimform threads here whereby IRL was involved and the debt reduced, cant remember the end result.

 

but yes zero signs of any signed agreements, however they were taken out?

 

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

Thanks DX. I knew IRL complaint was a risk but NewDay let me take open first account with 11 defaults on credit file and 2 CCJs, increased my credit limit from £1200 to £4600 and then let me open 5 other cards. I am sorting out all my debts myself and not going to blindly pay any DCA.

 

I think for now I am going to keep the 2 issues separate and let the claim run. My defence is based on the lack of correct paperwork and they have still not sent the agreements. They would have been internet applications. Will see what they come up with from their filing cabinet if it progresses as far as a court hearing.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I have received a hearing date at my local County Court in April. I will get working on my witness statement.

One of the directions on the notification letter states:

"The defendants to file and serve on the claimant copy of original agreement, copy letter of assignment, statement of account showing how amount of claim is calculated by 4.00pm on 23 February 2023"

 

I am confused with this. Should it not be that the claimant (Lowell) should serve the agreement paperwork on the defendant? Sorry if I'm not understanding this correctly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Scan the order up please 

 

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

yes 11  wrongway around:pound:

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

thanks dx. I'll contact the court on Monday.

I've been reading other threads but can't find a similar situation so far. Is it usual for the court to order the claimant to serve documents almost 2 months before the hearing?

 

Overdales sent 500 pages of statements  and copies of Lowell letters for all 4 accounts back in October. They sent 24 pages of terms and conditions for the Debenhams card, but none of my details were on there. No agreements for the other 3 accounts were sent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

all that previous paperwork was just smoke and mirrors to hope you wet yourself.

 

i think you need to point out 2 errors in 11

 

11) The defendants to file and serve on the claimant copy of original agreement, copy letter of assignment,
statement of account showing how amount of claim is calculated by 4.00 pm on 23 February 2023

 

i think defendants obv should be claimant, BUT i also think the 's' should mean ALL 4 AGREEMENTS , all4 NOA etc.

they've failed to realise this is a merged claim 4 FOUR SEPARATE NEWDAY CARDS. 

they need to produce docs for all of them.

 

did you get 4 default notices yet?

 

 

 

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

On 02/10/2022 at 11:49, cx085 said:

Separately from this, and without informing Lowell or Overdales,

I made a formal complaint regarding irresponsible lending to NewDay.

 

I had a total of 6 accounts with them. I have received a response and they have upheld my complaint and agreed that 5 of the accounts (including all 4 in this case) should not have been approved. They say they will refund all interest and charges on these accounts. But the letter doesn't mention the accounts were sold to Lowell.

 

What should be my response to this letter?

Should I inform Overdales or just let the case carry on?

 

 

Overdales redacted-min.pdf 1.39 MB · 4 downloads

 

as for the above i would copy this to overdales.

has anything happened else re this?

 

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

hi dx

so just to confirm, I should notify court that order 11 is wrong and that this is a merged claim and the case refers to 4 agreements and documents should be served for each?

I should notify Overdales that their bundle sent in September, after mediation didnt go ahead, was incomplete? I hadn't done this yet as wasn't sure whether to wait until witness statement to point this out.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cx085 said:

hi dx

 

just to confirm, I should notify court that order 11 is wrong and that this is a merged claim and the case refers to 4 agreements and documents should be served for each? yes

 

I should notify Overdales that their bundle sent in September, after mediation didnt go ahead, was incomplete? no, you dont tip them off whats up or missing!

 

 

 

sent overdales the FOS reply.

lets see what they do.

 

 

 

 

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

Thanks, I won't tip them off re whats missing.

 

The complaint hasn't had an FOS response yet.

It was NewDay who upheld my complaint regarding the 5 accounts, including these 4. Should I send Overdales the complaint response from NewDay? Wasn't sure how this would look regarding admittance of the debt.

 

I found another thread that involved Lowell and IRL but with 118118money and the claim was discontinued before a FOS decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry yes send newdays response

 

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

  • 2 months later...

Small update to this.

 

Sent Overdales the response from Newday re IRL. No response at all.

 

Contacted the Court by email end of January, pointing out the error on the paperwork for the hearing, auto response saying I would get a response within 10 working days.

 

Had no response, so wrote to the Court beginning of March, still no response.

 

Today, I called the Court. 4 attempts to get through.

When it was finally answered, I was abruptly told off for calling an emergency Counter Appointments number and to put my query in an email and they were working through a 30 day backlog.

 

When I was finally allowed to speak, I explained that I had emailed in January and it was now very urgent as the WS is due in 2 days, before the hearing on 19th April.

 

She wouldn't answer my questions over the phone, wouldn't tell me if the hearing fee had been paid and gave me a team leaders email to send my email again!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Further update

No response still from Court re error on their Order paperwork.

Hearing still listed for 19th April. WS due tomorrow, 14 days before hearing.

Today, received 600 page bundle from Overdales. I'm due at work soon so no time to upload right now.

Contains their WS, credit agreement, DN and letter of assignment and statements for each  of the 4 cards.

WS mentions the IRL complaint and they have reduced the balance on each claim by the amount NewDay did so for interest and charges.

 

From looking so far they have suddenly found the TUI, Topshop and Amazon card agreements which weren't in the original bundle they sent months ago.

 

As mentioned above, I contacted the Court, by email, in January, pointed out the errors in the Order as advised by dx in post #14. Followed this up with Court yesterday and was rudely told  I shouldn't call as its for emergencies only and to email them again and they had a 30 day backlog.

 

Am I likely to get any leeway from the Court re filing of the WS, bearing in mind their error and lack of response?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

Am I likely to get any leeway from the Court re filing of the WS Late, bearing in mind their error and lack of response?

 

No you wont get any leeway any party that fails to comply with the courts directions on time faces their claim/defence being struck out.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andyorch

 

So how do I now address the Order as in post 11 above? Should I include something about it in my WS?

"The defendants to file and serve on the claimant copy of original agreement, copy letter of assignment, statement of account showing how amount of claim is calculated by 4.00pm on 23 February 2023"

 

This was clearly the wrong way round, however, the court haven't responded when I contacted them to point out the error.

If it had been correct, then Lowell would have been ordered to send me the 4 original agreements, letter of assignment and statement for account by 23 February.

The first time I have seen the agreements is today in their Court bundle.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 28/01/2023 at 12:27, cx085 said:

I have received a hearing date at my local County Court in April. I will get working on my witness statement.

One of the directions on the notification letter states:

"The defendants to file and serve on the claimant copy of original agreement, copy letter of assignment, statement of account showing how amount of claim is calculated by 4.00pm on 23 February 2023"

 

I am confused with this. Should it not be that the claimant (Lowell) should serve the agreement paperwork on the defendant? Sorry if I'm not understanding this correctly.

 

Its obviously a typo and you really should have disregarded it and concentrated on preparing your statement/evidence which needs to be filed and served by this Thurs (6thApril) Your response will be that the claimant has failed to comply with the order dated xxxxxx and failed to serve the ordered documents along with all your own points to support your defence. 

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again Andy, I had drafted a WS so I was almost ready, using help from here some time ago. I'll tweak it and get it sent recorded tomorrow to Overdales and deliver to Court in person.

I've attached a copy of the Amazon CCA. The quality is not my scanning, it is literally how it's been sent to me. The other 3 agreements are almost identical, except the credit intermediary on the first page. Apart from no IP address and quality, anything else I should point out?

Lowell ND CCA Redacted.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...