Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Oh yeah, I messed up the numbering. So should I keep paragraph 1-3, then use my original ones for the CCA? No CPR / NOA or DN. Thank you for your patience. I don't really fully understand all this legal stuff.   Revised draft 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 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.   1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with Shop Direct Finance Company Limited but I do not recognise the account number referred to by the Claimant.    2. Paragraph 2 is noted but not admitted. The Claimant would not be aware of any alleged breach or in a position to plead such fact as an assignee as the defendant did not enter into any agreement with the claimant and is therefore put to strict proof to verify the alleged statement of its particulars.   3. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served over six years ago.    4. On the 04/08/2018 I sent a formal request for a copy of the Credit Consumer Agreement to the Claimant pursuant to section [77 or 78] of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1 fee. <---- do i need to delete 77 or 78? 5. On the 12/08/2018, the Claimant sent confirmation they were unable to provide a copy of the agreement and that any account they had was unenforceable so therefore the Claimant has failed to comply with [s77 (1) / s 78 (1)] Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of [s77 (4) / s 78 (6)] Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.    Thanks
    • Ok, you haven't got the set aside yet so you can't file the 'full blown' defence we would normally file upon receipt of a claim form, you need to await the set aside and if a subsequent hearing is requested to file what you have.   your 1st no.5. Is about the only relevant bit above. But no a cpr is not a cca and you didnt send a cpr or any other request for noa or dn?   DX
    • DRAFT 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 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with Shop Direct Finance Company Limited but I do not recognise the account number referred to by the Claimant.  2. Paragraph 2 is noted but not admitted. The Claimant would not be aware of any alleged breach or in a position to plead such fact as an assignee as the defendant did not enter into any agreement with the claimant and is therefore put to strict proof to verify the alleged statement of its particulars. 3. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served over six years ago.  4. On the 04/08/2018, I requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a Section 78 request. <<- is this the CCA request? 5. On the 12/08/2018, the Claimant sent confirmation they were unable to provide a copy of the original agreement and that any account they had was unenforceable so therefore, the Claimant has failed to date to respond to the CPR and remains in default of the section 78 request. <<- their response to CCA request 3. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment / balance / breach requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and (b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and (c) 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 should prove the allegation that the money is owed. 5. On the alternative, if the Claimant is 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. I believe the facts stated in this Defence are true.
    • just copy and past the text into a msg box here then its far easier to edit/quote for us please   dx  
    • Hi dx   Thank you very much. That has been a great help. I have been searching the forum, but wasn't finding anything that I thought was relevant to our situation.   Find attached v2 of draft defence.   Have I missed anything? are the other documents ok?   Thanks cag-ddv2.pdf
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

bp v abbey x2


bp
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5212 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

Well i've finally got my head down and round two began on 30yh April. Prelim letter sent. let's see how long this one takes!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

hi all, i've not said anything for a while, bit too much going on at home.

 

Update: finally put claim in and Abbey had to respond by the 6th Aug. They acknowledged with he intention to defend on the 26th July, i've jut had an email from my favourite person at Abbey our lovely Inga to say that just in case i didn't know, abbey are applying for a stay of all cases, i've asked my court and they have said that my case is still ongoing. Is there a generic response to the courts when the banks ask for a stay? has a stay of all cases been agreed?

 

any advice would be much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks Michael, just found the link. Sorry i was just being lazy!

 

On a lighter note, right under Inga's email was "Ashurst, winner of law firm of the year 2007" God! i wonder what they had to do to get that? fob as many people as poss? offer lower amounts to claimants thereby still saving their clients money?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I decided to be a bit cheeky and asked her if this new strategy of avoiding paying out money also applied to abbey suspending all future charges from its customers accounts? lets see if she replies to that!

Link to post
Share on other sites

well she's a busy woman1 this is her reply

The whole purpose of the commencement of the Test Case is to clarify the law in this area. Abbey will continue to post updates on its websites to keep customers informed on progress of the Test case.

I feel like sending a message asking why if this issue needs clarification, why has abbey applied thse charges and why does still apply them while the issue is going to court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Quick update, i received the usual letter, Abbey will be asking for a stay of my case, they've acknowledged my case twice! and today, i got a copy of their defence. This defence is different from the other one back in April. Does anyone know if a copy of their new defence is posted on this site somewhere?

 

4.3 if the defendant honoured the payment instruction in question, the Defendant thereby accepted the claimant's offer.

 

4.4 Accordingly, the claimant became bound to pay interest and charges in relation to that loan at the stipulated rate.

 

4.5 That liability does not at common law, constitute a penalty charge.

 

 

 

 

So these are longer Breaches of contracts but loans? Anyone recognises this? Is this the new standard defence?

 

Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi BP long time no speak, yes it represents a change, BUT it is in response to Abbeys changes of terms and conditions, and if you have seen them then you will know that they are penalty charges by a different name, they have just changed what they call it and (so they say) how they apply it. unfortunately even Abbey cant backdate their own terms and conditions, so it really means jack IMHO, nontheless, i think that GaryH might like a look at it

Lula

 

Lula v Abbey - Settled

Lula v Abbey (2) - Settled

Lula v Abbey (3) - Stayed

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Lula hun thanks very much.

 

I guess i'll just have to send the usual strike outs but include a copy of their prev defence. first thing, need to find out if they have asked the court for a stay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Funnily enough I got exactly the same defence through yesterday for my o/h's claim.

unfortunately even Abbey cant backdate their own terms and conditions

Exactly. They've defended based on terms which weren't even thought of at the time the charges were taken, let alone in existance. Its a completely invalid defence. I'm going for summary judgment on mine - I.e an application that the defence should be struck out and judgment granted without a full hearing becouse the defence has no real prospect of success.

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick Q, since i'll be applying for a strike out, will i still need to complete my AQ and pay the fee? Got to return my AQ by the 31st of Aug.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, 'fraid so!

Please remember to DONATE! Help CAG keep up the fight!

 

 

Any advice or opinion is offered informally & without liability. Use your own judgment and if in doubt seek advice of a qualified and insured professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...