Thanks as always Ford, you're a rock and a good ally. I'll be there but once the legal bollox starts I'm up the creek I fear.

. I'll be there but once the legal bollox starts I'm up the creek I fear.

then maybe try, without prejudice, settle prior then re a reduced amount!?

sounds corny, but have a real good think about everything. post back.

take it all the way then. but be prepared to stand your ground in court should it proceed to.

..but Isbo hasn't challenged their witness statement, which offers evidence that their claim is valid.

Not responding is as good as accepting it in my view

- a 'positive assertion' needs to be made as to why the evidence put forward does not adequately support the claim.

Where is the missing page from their witness statement?

Why hasn't anyone else asked about it,

or have you posted it and I can't see it?

If you take nothing else from me,

please consider this

- going into court without your head well and truly screwed on,

it's going to be a belittling (albeit polite) experience, and you will lose.

If you want to avoid a CCJ, get working on negotiating a settlement under a Tomlin Order.

You'll avoid the CCJ, get some control over the level of repayment, and you'll probably also have to pay back less than the claimed amount.

If you go to court and lose, you have to pay the whole amount.

However, I would advise on pointing me to the missing page,

so maybe then you can respond to the witness statement

and create the sense that you're not going down without a fight.

It might soften them up a bit before you attempt to settle.

But there isn't a missing page - that is everything I've had. The lot.

Now I don't know about you, but having never stood in a Court in my life, having no knowledge of the legal system nor the knowledge of what to say to challenge their witness statement (other than the fact that it didn't appear until magically two days before the hearing), I'm at quite a bit of a loss now.

I didn't join and post because I knew what I was doing,

I did so because I didn't, and still do not shamrocker.

All I can do is follow the guidance of kind souls such as Ford.

I can't do anything else, can I?

But there isn't a missing page - that is everything I've had. The lot.

You're clearly missing an important page from the witness statement, so you'd probably be best to contact them and ask for it.

BTW, I'm not trying to antagonise you here. I'm simply trying to apply some reality to your situation in a bid to get you the best possible outcome. Don't rely on the judge to take pity on you and dismiss their case - it won't happen unless you offer something back in response to their evidence.

Why go to court then?

 

I can't see points 4 to 8 in their witness statement - do you have them?

checked and you've not fwded this page isbo. there is a page missing between pages 10/11 of my upload I did

dx

Found it! It was stapled back to front on the reverse of another page. Sent to dx.

I know shamrocker but I'm at a bit of a loss and feel like I've wasted time and money.

good

lets see what it says.

and, being realistic , as i posted; have a good think about things. and, if you're (and/or your case is) not up for court, then consider entering into without prejudice negotiations, with whatever is in your favour.

You see Ford I've absolutely no idea if it is up for court or not.All I've done is follow advice on here mate.

You see Ford I've absolutely no idea if it is up for court or not.All I've done is follow advice on here mate.

let see what it is.

as i posted before, if you're not up for court (even if your defence is), then you may still get bamboozled if you're unable to argue it/counter what they say. even though a J should ensure a fair hearing.

it does seem though that the J has taken this into account by asking about your ability to attend any future hearings.

but, lets see what the missing info is.

OK I await with bated breath.

complete WS from claimant etc

ok, so it seems they are relying on Carey case re a recon agreement.

you said at the beginning, that it was circa 2006.

if so, the then s127(3) (4) Con Credit act wld come into play.

and that wld need to be argued,

basically saying that a recon is not acceptable. plus, they have been ordered to produce the originals.

you also said you dont recall a default notice and notice of assignment.

they'll need to show that they were issued and compliant,

and they have exhibited recons (but not the originals)

i presume your defence was one of the 'norms' re documentation.

(am not up to speed with the later stages re that and your witness statement)

then, there is the order on them to produce the originals at court.

lets see what the guys think.

so, do you think that you wld be able to argue those matters in court?

Looking at the order of 15th August point 2 regarding medical evidence have you done that isbo?

Yes, medical evidence is fine. I have plenty, sadly.

I'm OK to say a recon isn't acceptable, until the J asks why?

Their WS states that the agreement was entered into 12 June 2008.

A recon is only acceptable for the purposes of a s.78 request, then it is down to the discretion of the debtor to accept it as true or not. It's at the discretion of the Court to decide whether an agreement that doesn't comply with s.61 is enforceable, should enforcement action be taken.

EDIT: The above is in response to Ford in #265.

....... until the J asks why?

and the J prob will ask, and you'll need to answer that and try convince the J accordingly re those points mentioned.

Their WS states that the agreement was entered into 12 June 2008.

 

.

ah ok.

is that correct isbo?

if so, forget about s127 (3) (4)?

Christ on a bike, sounds like I need a solicitor.

ah ok.

is that correct isbo?

The memory isn't great, could be, honestly don't know.

The memory isn't great, could be, honestly don't know.

Do you have the recon they refer to within their WS?

I have to say that without the original and other evidence to the contrary (of the commencement date), you could always sling s.127(3) at them anyway, but do it within a supplementary witness statement and see what their response is. I still maintain that you'll need to submit another WS anyway.

Don't let all this confuse you too much - just read the points being made and take note of them. We're gently teasing relevant info out of you in a bid to arrive at the best course of action. It's all done to help you.

Their WS states that the agreement was entered into 12 June 2008.

 

A recon is only acceptable for the purposes of a s.78 request, then it is down to the discretion of the debtor to accept it as true or not. It's at the discretion of the Court to decide whether an agreement that doesn't comply with s.61 is enforceable, should enforcement action be taken.

 

EDIT: The above is in response to Ford in #265.

yes, i see what you mean. they wld still need to show that it was properly executed.

yes, i see what you mean. they wld still need to show that it was properly executed.

...obviously, the Court doesn't have that discretion on pre-April 2007 agreements.

they can claim what they like

until they prove by way of the agreement

the date it was taken out its mere speculation when it was entered into surely

they can claim what they like

until they prove by way of the agreement

the date it was taken out its mere speculation when it was entered into surely

That's the basis of my point above..e.g. without evidence to the contrary, etc. They'd need to dig out full account statements and prove the payments were made for that account from 2008 by isbo, or supply the original original signed agreement.

In all probability, the date they state is correct, but there's probably no harm in creating some hoops for them to jump through prior to sending them a without prejudice settlement offer.