Erudio/Drydens claimform - old SLC Loans . ***Claim Dismissed***

[RC710]

Great, thank you for your advice and support.

Coincidentally, just as I thought this might have gone away, Drydens have sent me a letter stating that they have now addressed the issues in my defence. 

The letter goes on to tell me they are "clearly" in a position to progress the claim against me and invite me to settle the matter by way of a Tomlin Order.  They say that if I do not respond, they will have no alternative but to progress legal action without further notice. I note they have also sent a financial statement to complete, with monthly incomings/outgoings. 

All I have received since submitting my defence is a statement for all accounts, indicating they have used the £1 postal order towards the alleged debt.

My understanding is that they are bluffing and trying bullying/scare tactics. They haven't responded to my defence and I cannot see that they would, in these circumstances, apply to the court for the stay to be lifted.  I am however cautious not to make an assumption without checking in with you.    

I'd be grateful for your thoughts

r710

[dx100uk]

yep simply std practice for them to threaten intimidate and try and make you wet yourself.

 

just about std for every stayed erudio court claim here.

 

dx

 

[RC710]

Thank you. Thought as much from what I had read but glad for the reassurance. 

[RC710]

Unfortunately I am back.. 

I have received a Notice of Transfer of Proceedings stating that the claim has been transferred to the local county court to hear the claimants application for summary judgement.  I am told that the court will send notice of the time, date and place of hearing. 

Enclosed in this bundle is an N244, completed by a Legal Representative for Drydens, asking the court:

1. For the stay on proceedings to be lifted pursuant to CPR 3.9 (1)

2. For the defence to be struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4 (2) (b); and /or

3. For summary judgement on the whole claim pursuant to CRP 24.2

4. Costs Order be made against the defendant.

The defendant's defence does not raise any grounds with reasonable prospect of successfully defending the claim and  there is no good reason why the matter should be disposed of at trial. 

They want the application dealt with at a hearing, expected to last 20 mins. 

The Defendant's intention is drawn to Part 24.5 of the CPR as any evidence he wishes to rely upon needs to be filed and served no later than 7 days before the date of the hearing. 

Drydens have provided a Witness statement. 

Copies of the loan agreements, signed by myself are also included. 

 Is there anywhere to go from here?   

It seems they have the documents they need and that I now have little come back?

I'd appreciate some advice as to what my next steps should be. 

Thank you

R710

[dx100uk]

std practice for them in some SLC cases.

think they are all powerful and you'll wet yourself.

scan everything inc the exhibits upto to one mass PDF 

read upload carefully please.

 

dx

 

[RC710]

Thank you. 

Of note: 

Dryden claim they have sent copies of the credit agreement to me. They have not. Within this bundle is the first time I have seen them. 

I'm also curious that they have not included the letter they sent to me where they allocated my £1 postal order across each of the debts as repayment. 

I'd welcome advice about what my next steps might be. 

Thank you

R710

 

Erudio N244+exhibits+N271.pdf

[AndyOrch]

Same action here :-

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/447393-erudiodryden-claimform-old-slc-loan/page/3/#comments

You need to sub and follow the above topic.

[r710]

Apologies, family trauma diverted my attention. 

I will follow that thread, with Plonker1's circumstances. It looks like it is at a very similar stage to mine, with no progress in the last couple of weeks. 

I have done a brief bit of reading around the application for a summary judgement but have lots more to read. 

As I understand it, I can prepare my statement addressing the points they have listed whilst I wait for a court date. I will post here once drafted. 

Then I wait to see if they pay the court fee. 

How long might it take to get a court date, and how long do they tend to give you to file your witness statement? 

Is it too early for me to start worrying about a court hearing?  Would you give odds on whether it will get as far as court?! 

Thanks

r710

[RC710]

Hello, 

I received correspondence that the application for the stay to be lifted will take place on 24/8/23. 

Please could someone look over my witness statement draft?

Am I on the right track? The language used is not consistent and I can work on that but am keen to hear some feedback. 

I would be grateful for any pointers. 

Thank you.

Erudio Student Loans Limited V XXXX

Claim No: XXXXX

 

WITNESS STATEMENT OF XXXXXX

I, XXXXXX, the defendant in this claim make the following statement believing it to be true will state as follows:-

1. It is admitted that I have had financial dealings with The Student Loans Company in the past.  .

2. It is denied that default notices were ever received.

3. It is denied that I was informed of assignment of this debt either by the original creditor nor the assignee. For an assignment to be legally binding it must be pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925 (sec136). Assuming it’s a Legal Assignment Only the benefit of an agreement may be assigned.

The assignment must be absolute.
The rights to be assigned must be wholly ascertainable and must not relate to part only of a debt.
The assignment must be in writing and signed under hand by the assignor.
Notice of the assignment must be received by the other party or parties for the assignment to take effect.

Again it is denied any Notice of Assignment was ever received.

4. It is admitted that in October 2022 I did request information pursuant to CPR 31.14

Namely to show how I entered into an agreement
Show how the claimant quantified the amount claimed
Show and evidence service of Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1)
And to show how the claimant has legal right either under statute or equity to issue a claim in their name

Given that at this stage the claim is trackless and not allocated, CPR 31.14 does apply and the claimant is required to comply to validate and assist in verifying its claim. Although it is a civil request, the court expects parties to communicate to try to narrow any differences.

The Claimant did not respond to my request for information pursuant to CPR 31.14. Ineligible alleged copies first appeared in the Notice of Transfer of Proceedings bundle sent to me by the County Court Business Centre in June 2023.  

I note that the Claimaint has included a letter dated 22^nd March 2023, allegedly sent to me enclosing a copy of the credit agreements, a copy of the default notice and a copy of the notice of assignment. This letter was not received by me.

Given that the claimant readily issued a claim based on documentation referred to within their particulars one would assume that they would be more than happy to comply to prove that any claim is valid and therefore eradicating any need to defend or proceed to trial. I understand that this avoidance can be sanctioned when the question of costs arise as deemed as being unreasonable.

5.  As per CPR 16.5(4) it is expected that the claimant prove the allegation that any money is owed. It is therefore submitted that the claimants be ordered by the court to quantify ,verify, substantiate and disclose all evidence  relied upon and should the claimant fail to that their claim be struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4 as having no basis.

6. The Claimant fails to acknowledge in their witness statement, letters sent to me dated 31^st January 2023 indicating that they have used the £1 postal order I sent with a request for copies of the documents they rely on, towards the alleged debt.

They have done so without consent and notably against my direction on the reverse of the postal order where I had written that it was NOT to be used towards any alleged debt.  Erudio have later, in letters dated 4^th July 2022, omitted to indicate this alleged credit expressly other than the alleged sums owed.  I therefore question the legitimacy and records kept by Erudio

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

 

Signed:

 

Name

Address

 

 

[dx100uk]

On 16/11/2022 at 22:20, RC710 said:

Do you mean deferment forms or do you mean the forms that come with the Letter of Notice? - the Reply form? Either way, no, I didn't. 

i would include somewhere that erudio did not from 2020 send out their deferment forms, thus you are now in this position, if they had, you would have deferred and that would have been the end of the claimant issue.  the FOS have several cases whereby the castigated erudio for not sending forms out (regardless to your phonecall. which to date erudio have not referred too..lets hope they dont)

to be clear to date you've received nowt from the claimant?

when's WS exchange due by?

[RC710]

Thanks dx100uk

I'll add about no deferment forms sent. I definitely was not given another opportunity/no forms received. As soon as I failed to pay the arrears within 4 months, they went straight to cancel the agreements. 

The claimants application notice states I have to submit this - filed and served - no later than 7 days before the date of the hearing. (I have yet to research how this is done, via MCOL or via post, but will check this). 

I'm not feeling confident that I am in a good position. My best hope is that they see my defence, fail to pay the court fee and it does not go ahead but I have a very limited idea of the chances of this. I haven't seen court successes for Erudio but perhaps they have enough on me. 

But I am extremely anxious about it going ahead. My work brings me into contact with the court it is listed at, I am sometimes before magistrates as part of my role and I am worried about my professional reputation.

I will have colleagues in the court building, who will see the court listings or may see me and I am hugely embarrassed by this.   I wondered about asking to to move it to a different court, where I attend less often. 

I have tried to set my emotions aside as I've gone through this process but it is very difficult to do in these circumstances. 

[dx100uk]

not via mcol...that ended once allocated out.. .....post to court and sols.

and its not the claimants notice its from the court.

its a speculative consumer credit debt, its not criminal and it will be a feather in your cap.

they are just scammers and your money will simply fund a staffs family holiday abroad. nothing goes of the imaginary debt. 

if they dont refer to your verbal calls (which i've never seen them do before) you are onto a winner regarding sent no deferment forms, esp with the repeated castigation the FOS have given erudio about them doing this.

just remember it most probably will not be anyone from erudio/drydens, it will just be a locum that knows nothing about how the loans work and will only have gotten the case <7 days before the hearing.

typical in these cases they will claim they did not get your bundle you sent it late (you await theirs or the very last second to send yours) as they've discovered something wrong and they need more time to counter your claims. the judge wont swallow that hopefully.

then another hearing where drydens might come out and have all gound blazing with the complete picture.

dont forget you can always deny the phone calls, and IF IF IF they bring them up, they MUST disclose the call record in the bundle. if they dont...you should win.

dx

 

 

 

[RC710]

Thank you. 

This helps me to hold my nerve.

I'll work on tidying up my witness statement, and post for checking, ready to be sent at the last moment. 

Thank goodness this site exists. 

[RC710]

dx100uk

Please may I ask you you to check my witness statement response to the claim against me by Erudio?

The court date is Thurs 24th Aug.   It has to be received 7 days before,  so Thurs 17th Aug - so long as it's not working days (cannot see that stipulated anywhere).  I aim to post this on Tues 15th - First class recorded to both. 

Please advise if there is anything that needs tweaking. 

Many thanks

 

In the county court at  XXXXXXXXX
 

 

Erudio Student Loans Limited V XXXX

Claim No: XXXXX

 

WITNESS STATEMENT OF XXXXXX

I, XXXXXX, the defendant in this claim make the following statement believing it to be true will state as follows:-

1. It is admitted that I have had financial dealings with The Student Loans Company in the past.  .

2. It is denied that default notices were ever received.

3. It is denied that I was informed of assignment of this debt either by the original creditor nor the assignee. For an assignment to be legally binding it must be pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925 (sec136). Assuming it’s a Legal Assignment Only the benefit of an agreement may be assigned.

The assignment must be absolute.
The rights to be assigned must be wholly ascertainable and must not relate to part only of a debt.
The assignment must be in writing and signed under hand by the assignor.
Notice of the assignment must be received by the other party or parties for the assignment to take effect.

Again it is denied any Notice of Assignment was ever received.

4. It is admitted that in October 2022 I did request information pursuant to CPR 31.14

Namely to show how I entered into an agreement
Show how the claimant quantified the amount claimed
Show and evidence service of Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1)
And to show how the claimant has legal right either under statute or equity to issue a claim in their name

Given that at this stage the claim is trackless and not allocated, CPR 31.14 does apply and the claimant is required to comply to validate and assist in verifying its claim. Although it is a civil request, the court expects parties to communicate to try to narrow any differences.

The Claimant did not respond to my request for information pursuant to CPR 31.14. Ineligible alleged copies first appeared in the Notice of Transfer of Proceedings bundle sent to me by the County Court Business Centre in June 2023.  

5.  As per CPR 16.5(4) it is expected that the claimant prove the allegation that any money is owed. It is therefore submitted that the claimants be ordered by the court to quantify ,verify, substantiate and disclose all evidence  relied upon and should the claimant fail to that their claim be struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4 as having no basis.

I note that the Claimant has included a letter dated 22^nd March 2023, allegedly sent to me enclosing a copy of the credit agreements, a copy of the default notice and a copy of the notice of assignment. This letter and documents were not received by me.

Given that the claimant readily issued a claim based on documentation referred to within their particulars one would assume that they would be more than happy to comply to prove that any claim is valid and therefore eradicating any need to defend or proceed to trial. I understand that this avoidance can be sanctioned when the question of costs arise as deemed as being unreasonable.

6. The Claimant fails to acknowledge in their witness statement, letters sent to me dated 31^st January 2023 indicating that they have used a £1 postal order I sent with a request for copies of the documents they rely on, towards the alleged debt.  They have done so without my consent and notably against my direction on the reverse of the postal order where I had written that it was NOT to be used towards any alleged debt.  Erudio have later, in letters dated 4^th July 2022, omitted to indicate this alleged credit expressly other than the alleged sums owed.  I therefore question the legitimacy and records kept by Erudio.

7. Erudio continue to send statements related to the alleged debt, however it is noteworthy that they have not, at any point since the alleged default in 2020, provided any further deferment forms. They have been criticised by the Financial Ombudsman Service for this practice.

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

 

Signed:

 

Name

Address

[dx100uk]

that needs work to make it flow better and be more focused IMHO.

dx

[RC710]

ok, thanks for the quick response.

Will try to adapt it and post a revised statement tomorrow.

[RC710]

dx100uk

Is this any better?

In the county court at  XXXXXXXXX
 

Erudio Student Loans Limited V XXXX

Claim No: XXXXX

 

WITNESS STATEMENT OF XXXXXX

I, XXXXXX, the defendant in this claim make the following statement:

1. It is admitted that I have had financial dealings with The Student Loans Company in the past.  

2. It is denied that I was informed of assignment of this debt either by the original creditor nor the assignee. For an assignment to be legally binding it must be pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925 (sec136). Assuming it’s a Legal Assignment Only the benefit of an agreement may be assigned.

The assignment must be absolute.
The rights to be assigned must be wholly ascertainable and must not relate to part only of a debt.
The assignment must be in writing and signed under hand by the assignor.
Notice of the assignment must be received by the other party or parties for the assignment to take effect.

3. It is denied that default notices were ever received.  In October 2022 I requested information pursuant to CPR 31.14 namely;

To show how I entered into an agreement

To show how the claimant quantified the amount claimed

To show and evidence service of Notice served under Sections 76(1) and 98(1)

To show how the claimant has legal right either under statute or equity to issue a claim in their name

4. The Claimant did not respond to my request for information pursuant to CPR 31.14. The claimant is required to comply to validate and assist in verifying its claim. Given that the claimant readily issued a claim based on documentation referred to within their particulars one would assume that they would be more than happy to comply to prove that any claim is valid and therefore eradicating any need to defend or proceed to trial. I understand that this avoidance can be sanctioned when the question of costs arise as deemed as being unreasonable.

5. In accordance with CPR 31.15(c) I sent the claimant a £1 postal order to for their reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with my CPR 31.14 request.  The Claimant has assigned this sum towards the alleged debt without my consent and expressly against my direction.   The claimant, in their witness statement, fails to acknowledge the letter sent to me, dated 31/1/23 which evidences this action.  

6. The witness statement refers to a letter dated 22/3/23, allegedly enclosing a copy of the credit agreements, a copy of the default notice and a copy of the notice of assignment. This letter and alleged credit agreements were not received by me. The claimant has subsequently provided illegible copies of the alleged credit agreements in their witness statement.   

7. The claimant has not at any point provided any further opportunity to defer since the alleged default in 2020. Erudio been criticised by the Financial Ombudsman Service for this practice.

8.  As per CPR 16.5(4) it is expected that the claimant prove the allegation that any money is owed. It is therefore submitted that the claimants be ordered by the court to quantify ,verify, substantiate and disclose all evidence relied upon and should the claimant fail to that their claim be struck out pursuant to CPR 3.4 as having no basis.

I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.

Signed:

Name

Address

 

 I'd be grateful for your thoughts. 

Thank you

 

[dx100uk]

im not happy with that. its very weak.

there are numerous erudio N244 threads here already

p'haps it might be an idea to see how they responded in a statement.

@Andyorch might well pop in if they get 5 mins free.

[AndyOrch]

You have the claimants statement as guidance and what points they will rely on and support their application for Summary Judgment and strike out of your defence.

Simply respond to each point by paragraph as to why the application should be dismissed.

PS your statement of truth is out dated

 

2.2 The form of the statement of truth verifying a witness statement should be as follows: “I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.”

[RC710]

Thank you for your comments. 

I'll look at more examples and try again being more specific to the points they raise in their statement.  It's like a different language to me!

[AndyOrch]

It does not require legalese simply respond in your own words as to why that point is incorrect and refute it. Statements are a particularised version of events in further depth to your intial defence.

[RC710]

Hi, 

Is this more along the right track? Mindful that I am running out of time. Will it be ok to post Wed, special delivery to arrive on Thurs (court is next Thurs)?

IN THE ******* County Court 
Claim No. ***********

BETWEEN:
Claimant
***********

AND
Defendant
************

_________________________ ________

WITNESS STATEMENT OF **********

I ******, being the Defendant in this case state as follows;

1. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct, disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed - 10p to 15p in the £1 and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. They then issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt to maximise profit.

2. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.

3. Paragraph 5 is noted. I have had financial dealings with The Student Loans Company in the past. On receipt of this claim, I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity by way of a section 77 CAA request. 

4. At the time of submitting my defence, the claimant was in default of this request, unable to comply with this request and was therefore unable to proceed and enforce the claim or request any relief. 

5. Paragraph 11 is denied.  I maintain that I was unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly provided by the Claimant pursuant to the LoP Act 1925.

6. Paragraph 16 is denied. I maintain that default notices were never received. The Claimant is put to strict notice that default notices were issues to, and received by, me.

7. Paragraph 22 is denied. A Termination Notice by the Originating Creditor dated 28/10/20 (exhibit 20 – 24 of ‘LON1’) was never received by me.  The claimant is put to strict proof to further evidence and verify the service of the above.

8. Paragraph 29 is acknowleged.  I received a letter from the Claimant advising that ‘requested documents’ were available via the customer portal (page 46 of ‘LON1).  Alternatively the letter suggested emailing Drydens Fairfax and request the documents via email, but advising that I would be required to answer a selection of Data Protection Act questions.  It is my view that these were tactics to frustrate my section 77 CAA request and gain personal information from me.

9. Paragraph 36 is denied.  I did not receive a copy of the letter dated 22 March 2023 (pages 57-58 of ‘LON1).   The claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit at paragraph 8, pages 1 to 8 of ‘LON1’ are the true terms and conditions as issued at the time of inception and execution of the agreement.  The copies provided are illegible.

10. In accordance with CPR 31.15(c) I sent the claimant a £1 postal order to for their reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with my CPR 31.14 request.  The Claimant has assigned this sum towards the alleged debt without my consent and expressly against my direction.   The claimant, in their witness statement, fails to acknowledge the letter sent to me, dated 31/1/23 which evidences this action.   

Stay of Proceedings

9. Paragraph 38 is noted but unfounded and misleading to the court.  The Claimant did not respond to my request for information pursuant to CPR 31.14. Given that the claimant readily issued a claim based on documentation referred to within their particulars one would assume that they would be more than happy to comply to prove that any claim is valid and therefore eradicating any need to defend or proceed to trial. Therefore the request to lift the stay should be denied as the above is not a true or accurate reason or occurrence of events.

Application to strike out/Summary Judgment

10. Paragraph 40 should be denied. I believe I have every opportunity in defending this claim successfully and it should be allowed to proceed to trial. The claimant is put to strict proof to respond as to why it presumes my defence has no reasonable grounds for defending given that all its exhibits are questionable or invalid with the current legislation.

13. Having regard to the above it is respectfully requested that the claimant’s application is denied and the application for strike out/summary judgment is dismissed. In the circumstances the court is invited to conclude that there are reasonable grounds to suppose that I will be able to successfully defend the Claimant’s claim at trial.

I'd be really grateful for further pointers. 

Do I need to add my own exhibits - the letter dated 31/1/23 which show 20 odd pence being  used towards each of the loans?

[dx100uk]

bring back in that they refused or WHY to send further deferment forms and the FOS rulings.

 

On 30/07/2023 at 17:51, dx100uk said:

i would include somewhere that erudio did not from 2020 send out their deferment forms, thus you are now in this position, if they had, you would have deferred and that would have been the end of the claimant issue.  the FOS have several cases whereby the castigated erudio for not sending forms out (regardless to your phonecall. which to date erudio have not referred too..lets hope they dont)

 

 

[RC710]

So, with the lack of opportunity to defer included again.. 

 

IN THE ******* County Court 
Claim No. ***********

BETWEEN:
Claimant
***********

AND
Defendant
************

_________________________ ________

WITNESS STATEMENT OF **********

I ******, being the Defendant in this case state as follows;

1. It is my understanding that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct, disputed or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed - 10p to 15p in the £1 and which the original creditors have already written off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income. They then issue claims to circumvent and claim the full amount of debt to maximise profit.

2. As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights. This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information). The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.

3. Paragraph 5 is noted. I have had financial dealings with The Student Loans Company in the past. On receipt of this claim, I could not recall the precise details of the agreement or any debt and sought clarity by way of a section 77 CAA request. 

4. At the time of submitting my defence, the claimant was in default of this request, unable to comply with this request and was therefore unable to proceed and enforce the claim or request any relief. 

5. Paragraph 11 is denied.  I maintain that I was unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly provided by the Claimant pursuant to the LoP Act 1925.

6. Paragraph 16 is denied. I maintain that default notices were never received. The Claimant is put to strict notice that default notices were issues to, and received by, me.

7. Paragraph 22 is denied. A Termination Notice by the Originating Creditor dated 28/10/20 (exhibit 20 – 24 of ‘LON1’) was never received by me.  The claimant is put to strict proof to further evidence and verify the service of the above.

8. Paragraph 29 is acknowleged.  I received a letter from the Claimant advising that ‘requested documents’ were available via the customer portal (page 46 of ‘LON1).  Alternatively the letter suggested emailing Drydens Fairfax and request the documents via email, but advising that I would be required to answer a selection of Data Protection Act questions.  It is my view that these were tactics to frustrate my section 77 CAA request and gain personal information from me.

9. Paragraph 36 is denied.  I did not receive a copy of the letter dated 22 March 2023 (pages 57-58 of ‘LON1).   The claimant is put to strict proof to verify and confirm that the exhibit at paragraph 8, pages 1 to 8 of ‘LON1’ are the true terms and conditions as issued at the time of inception and execution of the agreement.  The copies provided are illegible.

10. In accordance with CPR 31.15(c) I sent the claimant a £1 postal order to for their reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with my CPR 31.14 request.  The Claimant has assigned this sum towards the alleged debt without my consent and expressly against my direction.   The claimant, in their witness statement, fails to acknowledge the letter sent to me, dated 31/1/23 which evidences this action.   

11. The claimant has not at any point provided any further opportunity to defer since the alleged default in 2020. Erudio been criticised by the Financial Ombudsman Service for this practice.

Stay of Proceedings

12. Paragraph 38 is noted but unfounded and misleading to the court.  The Claimant did not respond to my request for information pursuant to CPR 31.14. Given that the claimant readily issued a claim based on documentation referred to within their particulars one would assume that they would be more than happy to comply to prove that any claim is valid and therefore eradicating any need to defend or proceed to trial. Therefore the request to lift the stay should be denied as the above is not a true or accurate reason or occurrence of events.

Application to strike out/Summary Judgment

13. Paragraph 40 should be denied. I believe I have every opportunity in defending this claim successfully and it should be allowed to proceed to trial. The claimant is put to strict proof to respond as to why it presumes my defence has no reasonable grounds for defending given that all its exhibits are questionable or invalid with the current legislation.

14. Having regard to the above it is respectfully requested that the claimant’s application is denied and the application for strike out/summary judgment is dismissed. In the circumstances the court is invited to conclude that there are reasonable grounds to suppose that I will be able to successfully defend the Claimant’s claim at trial.

[RC710]

dx100uk / andyorch 

Is this along the right track?   I'd welcome any thoughts to strengthen it further.  

I have to finalise this this evening because I will have no access to a printer after 9am tomorrow, and I'll need to make the post with it (special delivery).  

Apologies. I know you must be very busy. 

Thank you