Is Something Missing??

[GaryTravers]

i put in a claim for my parents, following the normal route and timescales..

 

Abbey were kind enough to put in a defence

 

anyway my dad recieved a letter from abbey, marked 'without prejudice' and it had an enclosed copy of the defence (the same as all the others i have read on here) - this was dated the 11th april..

 

on the 27th april, he recieved a letter from the county court themselves - 'N152 Notice that a defence has been filed', this is where im starting to wonder;

 

the leter states - "the defendant has filed a defence, a copy of which is enclosed with this notice. An allocation questionnaire is also enclosed which contains notes for guidance on how to complete it"

 

there was nothing enclosed with the letter , no copy of the defence, and no AQ....

 

the letter continues - "You must complete the allocation questionnaire on or before 14 May 2007 and return it to the court office at the court address...

 

A fee of £100 is payable by the claimant on the filing of their allocation questionnaire"

 

SO, what has happened exactly? there was no enclosed copy of the defence (although they got one direct from abbey) and there was no AQ (i had read many courts were not giving out AQs, but surely they wouldnt say on is enclosed if it wasnt...?)

 

do i just ignore the fact they have asked for it by the 14th, even though they havent given one? and paying £100 if its not there? not really sure what is going on, and i have read others' threads and i dont remember this coming up

 

any ideas?

 

thanks

[Guest ian cognito]

Looks like an admin arror, someone forgot to include the attachments, get in touch with the court asap and explain no enclosures in the envelope.

[GaryTravers]

i see, thanks ian

[GaryTravers]

strange, this morning a letter arrived (the same one but with newer dates, meaning there are 4 more days til the AQ deadline)

 

and this time there is a copy of the defence, and an AQ..

 

i say its strange as i didnt get round to calling them and letting them know yesterday...

 

anyway, im off to make sense of the AQ now

[Guest ian cognito]

I suspect someone got round to clearing their desk and found your paperwork!

 

There's a template in the library for the AQ, I found it isn't quite complete but just make the rest up as you go along!

[GaryTravers]

yeah i found it, filling it in after work...

 

cheers

[GaryTravers]

was just filling out my AQ (after i finally recieved it, down to the courts not so good admin skills in my case...)

 

anyway, i have to return my AQ by the 18th May 07, fine, but on the AQ they sent me it already had the date written in, on the top right corner, as 18/4/07 :o

 

now unless the calendar has changed and may is now the 4th month....?

 

can i simply walk round to the court office and request a new one, bringing the letter and current AQ with me? or would my dad need to, as he is the claimant?

 

thanks

[Guest ian cognito]

If it's only to get it corrected or re-issued I don't see a problem with you going rather than your dad, not doing very well are they? Think they're overworked?

[GaryTravers]

If it's only to get it corrected or re-issued I don't see a problem with you going rather than your dad, not doing very well are they? Think they're overworked?

 

that had crossed my mind

 

but i'll go round and pick up another, and have it back by the end of the day

 

thanks again ian

[Lula]

you dont need to get another, you can have a copy from here, fill it in and print it, there is also something new called an Abuse prder, basically asking the court to strike out the defence as an abuse of process. you may find it very usefull.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/abbey-bank/87766-abbey-abuse-orders-keeping.html

 

 

and

 

 

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/11644-allocation-questionnaires-guide-completion.html

 

 

ope this helps

[Guest ian cognito]

Would there be no consequence of doing this Lula when the return date on this form would be different than the one issued by the court - albeit the court one is obviously incorrect?

[Lula]

i dont think so, there wasnt for me when i did it, i would just fill it in as the correct date, ring the court though and point out their error and ask them to just confirm what the correct date is

[GaryTravers]

i have spoken to the court clerk, she said that the date is correct on their system, and i should simply cross out the existing date and write on the correct date :o

 

i thought thats not really upto scratch for official court papers....? did i see a pdf version of the N149 somewhere, if so i would feel more comfortable using that, without any crossings out...

 

and lula thanks for pointing those out, though the second link doesnt seem to go the right place, but i know where you were talking about.

 

and with the abuse order from what i read, this wouldnt so much apply as it was the courts error, both times ...

[Lula]

p.s. the Abuse of Process stuff is in addition to the AQ and doesnt supercede it, it explains the process in the section

[Guest ian cognito]

The link to the form is in the link Lula gave you

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/bank-templates-library/11644-allocation-questionnaires-guide-completion.html

[Lula]

i

and with the abuse order from what i read, this wouldnt so much apply as it was the courts error, both times ...

 

 

LOL Gary, the Abuse of Process order is asking the Judge to strike out Abbeys defence as an abuse of process as they have never entered a court room to defend despite entering defences, it has been done about 3 times that i know of and seems to becoming more prevalent as the Courts loose patience with Abbey and other banks wasting court time

[GaryTravers]

LOL Gary, the Abuse of Process order is asking the Judge to strike out Abbeys defence as an abuse of process as they have never entered a court room to defend despite entering defences, it has been done about 3 times that i know of and seems to becoming more prevalent as the Courts loose patience with Abbey and other banks wasting court time

 

taxi for me?

 

sorry im at work between reading i kind of didnt read properly what was meant by it.... oops

 

anyway, is there any 'risk' or complications that may occur if i go down this route? or should i stick to the 'normal' way?

 

also, if using that info to be added to section G of the AQ, do i not need to use the draft order for direction as mentioned in the 'new strategy for AQs'?

 

sorry if im being dumb

[Lula]

Gary, the worst that can happen is that the judge will ignore it, and i think that it also takes into consideration in the alternative, the new strategy for AQ's

[GaryTravers]

you're right, its covered on attachment 2A from there..

 

thanks..

 

i should probably be doing this in my own time, at work i keep missing things so i have to re-read them

[GaryTravers]

guys, one more quick question, i was gonna go the chat room and ask, but it doesnt seem to load properly...?

 

anyway, about using the 'abuse order' method that was pointed out, i have a quick question on the sample list of settled claims;

 

"Since May 2006, I am aware of over 100 claims of this nature in which the Defendant has filed an acknowledgement of service, then a Defence, then an allocation questionnaire, then has breached the order for pre-hearing directions, then has finally settled without liability shortly in advance of the hearing or trial. A sample list of these claims, including their claim numbers, is attached (attachment 1B)."

 

Anyway i was wondering about the mention of '100 claims'... as this is abbey specific, the defendant, abbey have 38 claims on that spreadsheet, so i should only filter the abbey results from the spreadsheet and mention '38 claims' and not 100?

[GaryTravers]

bump?

 

also, if anyone can answer, for attachment 1C 'text of order made by Lincoln County Court' do i copy this into to word as it is? do i need to give it a header or anything?

[Lula]

guys, one more quick question, i was gonna go the chat room and ask, but it doesnt seem to load properly...?

 

anyway, about using the 'abuse order' method that was pointed out, i have a quick question on the sample list of settled claims;

 

"Since May 2006, I am aware of over 100 claims of this nature in which the Defendant has filed an acknowledgement of service, then a Defence, then an allocation questionnaire, then has breached the order for pre-hearing directions, then has finally settled without liability shortly in advance of the hearing or trial. A sample list of these claims, including their claim numbers, is attached (attachment 1B)."

 

Anyway i was wondering about the mention of '100 claims'... as this is abbey specific, the defendant, abbey have 38 claims on that spreadsheet, so i should only filter the abbey results from the spreadsheet and mention '38 claims' and not 100?

 

Hi Gary, no leave them all on, it shows the judge that it is not just Abbey doing it, but it is rife across the board - sorry I havnt replied earlier - a girl has to do some housework sometimes

[GaryTravers]

Hi Gary, no leave them all on, it shows the judge that it is not just Abbey doing it, but it is rife across the board - sorry I havnt replied earlier - a girl has to do some housework sometimes

 

its ok, i'll let you off ;-)

 

(joking of course, its all appreciated no matter when )

 

although, now that i have you back on board, do you know if i should header each attachment that is going with the AQ? referring to each as 1A, 1B etc?

 

and with the 'text of lincoln order' , im not sure on point 4 -

 

"4/ If the defendant objects to the proposed strike out it is ordered to file by ______________ a schedule setting out all claims of this type in England and wales which have proceeded to a final contested hearin"

 

by?

 

thanks in advance : )

[Lula]

Hi Gary, if they are not numbered (have you downloaded them and checked?) then number them, leave the date bit on the order blank, the judge will decide

 

- still not finished the housework!! LOL

[GaryTravers]

judge will decide? was just thinking that this is copy of a previous order made, i didnt think a judge would need to decide on anything with it....seeing as their is a separate draft order...

 

im talking about this....

 

point 4 as quoted previously is making me wonder, and sorry about the housework:p