ccmugs looks excellent, this is similar and is what i have used before... Defence 1. Except where otherwise mentioned in this defence, I neither admit nor deny any allegation made in the claimants Particulars of Claim and put the claimant to strict proof thereof. 2. The Defendant is embarrassed in pleading to the Particulars of Claim as it stands at present, inter alia: - 3. The claimants’ particulars of claims disclose no legal cause of action and they are embarrassing to the defendant as the claimant's statement of case is insufficiently particularised and does not comply or even attempt to comply with CPR part 16. In this regard I wish to draw the courts attention to the following matters; 1. The Particulars of Claim are vague and insufficient and do not disclose an adequate statement of facts relating to or proceeding the alleged cause of action. No particulars are offered in relation to the nature of the written agreement referred to, the method the claimant calculated any outstanding sums due, or any default notices issued or any other matters necessary to substantiate the claimant’s claim. 2. A copy of the purported written agreement that the claimant cites in the Particulars of Claim, and which appears to form the basis upon which these proceedings have been brought, has not been served attached to the claim form. 3. A copy of any evidence of both the scope and nature of any default, and proof of any amount outstanding on the alleged accounts, has not been served attached to the claim form. 4. Consequently, I deny all allegations on the particulars of claim and do not know what case I have to meet. 5. Further to the case, on **/**/**** I requested the disclosure of information under CPR 18 and 31.14, which is vital to this case, from the Claimant. The information requested amounted to copies of the Credit Agreement referred to in the particulars of claim and any default or termination notices, a transcript of all transactions, including charges, fees, interest, alleged repayments by myself and payments made by the original creditor. Also any other documents the Claimant seeks to rely on, including any default notices, termination notice or notice of assignment, and a list of charges applied to the account. 6. To Date the Claimant has ignored my request under the Civil Procedure Rules, which was received and signed for by the claimant on **/**/**** and I have not received any such documentation requested. As a result it has proven difficult to compose this defence without disclosure of the information requested. 7. The courts attention is drawn to the fact that the without disclosure of the requested documentation pursuant to the Civil Procedure Rules I have not yet had the opportunity to assess if the documentation the claimant claims to be relying upon to bring this action even contains the prescribed terms required in Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) which was amended by Consumer Credit (Agreements) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI2004/1482). The prescribed terms referred to are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following-- 1. Number of repayments; 2. Amount of repayments; 3. Frequency and timing of repayments; 4. Dates of repayments; 5. The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable 8. The courts attention is drawn to the fact that where an agreement does not have the prescribed terms as stated in point 10 it is not compliant with section 60(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and therefore not enforceable by s127(3). The courts attention is also drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the consumer credit act 1974 and the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and Consumer Credit (Agreements) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI2004/1482) the agreement cannot be enforced 9. Notwithstanding points 7 and 8, any such agreements must be signed in the prescribed manner by both debtor and creditor. If such a document is not signed by the debtor the document cannot be enforced by way of section 127(3) Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. The claimant is therefore put to strict proof that such a compliant document exists. 11. It is neither admitted or denied that any Default Notice in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant. 12. Notwithstanding point 14, I put the claimant to strict proof that any default notice sent to me was valid. I note that to be valid, a default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237) 13. Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but would also give rise to a potential counterclaim for damages where damage occurs to my credit rating (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society - [1996] 4 All ER 119) 14. It is neither admitted or denied that any Notice of Assignment in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant. I furthermore have no knowledge of the Claimant as Assignee and put them to strict proof that they are legally entitled to act to recover the alleged debt. 15. Without Disclosure of the relevant requested documentation I am unable to assess if I am indeed liable to the claimant, nor am I able to assess if the alleged agreement is properly executed, contains the required prescribed terms, or correct figures to make such an agreement enforceable by virtue of s127 Consumer Credit Act 1974 16. In addition it is drawn to the courts attention that schedule 3, s11 of the Consumer Credit Act 2006 prevents s15 repealing s127 (3) of the 1974 Act for agreements made before s15 came into effect and since the Claimant makes no mention of the date of the alleged agreement, I cannot know if the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is the relevant act in this case, nor indeed if the Statute of Limitations Act 1980 (.58) is also relevant here. 17. In view of the matters pleaded above, I respectfully request that the court gives consideration to whether the claimant’s statement of case should be struck out as disclosing no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim, and/or that it fails to comply with CPR Part 16. 18. Alternatively, I respectfully request a stay in proceedings for 28 days so that the claimant may comply with the requests outlined in paragraph 8 above or until the court orders its compliance with the same. I will then be in a position to file a fully particularised defence and counterclaim and will seek the court’s permission to amend my statement of case accordingly. Statement of Truth I, ****** ******, believe the above statement to be true and factual ________________________________________________________________ **/**/****

creditcardmug is right, you are on the right lines but it's needs quite a bit more meat...let me know if pre or post April 2007, i can tailor one of my defences for you if pre-2007.

this will be easier if it is pre-april 2007: have they given you any idea when the alleged agreement is supposed to have been executed?

hi give me a while...

Hoofie, what happened here?

Ollie did you get costs?

guys, have you taken this anywhere?

ok, time for an update. first up, great news - default removed. :D In response to both my CCA request and LBA, Low confirmed that they could not locate the agreement with the OC and the account was being closed. My file has been updated to show a 'settled' account with no negative markers whatsoever or default, and a balance of £0. It has stayed that way for some time now, as I wanted to make sure they weren't pulling a fast one. Thanks supasnooper for your help! Although my account was in dispute before the default was applied (which obviously gave me a stronger hand when threatening court action, which I was absolutely a few days from doing), this thread might prove useful comfort for anyone challenging pre-April 2007 ONLINE credit agreements, as clearly they couldn't produce one)

can anyone here provide a personal anecdote of having recent experience of SLC activity on their credit file?

pblackie and expatscot, have either of you heard any more from slc or any of their agents?

hunni, what happened with this?

Strangely, the default on my credit file has now disappeared? I have checked all three CRAs and nothing there - I haven't contatced them at any point. Anyone know if a) they routinely remove after five years rather than the standard six? or b) they have decided to remove all defaults regardless of age under legal pressure?

Strangely, the default on my credit file (Jan 2005) has now disappeared? Anyone know if a) they routinely remove after five years rather than the standard six? or b) they have decided to remove all defaults regardless of age under legal pressure?

yes, it's not too late to get that fee exemption request in, if you phone the court and ask them not to bank the cheque, unlikley they have done so yet - explain you are sending the EX160 immediately.

hi guys - i admit no action taken yet on this, as beginning to think that with less than a year to go there's not a lot of point in pursuing this, given the fact that I don't know if this is statute barred: nobody has actually answered my questions on a) does the statute barred clock start ticking from the date you make a deferral or on expiry of that deferral (as noone is expecting you to make contact during the deferred year) and b) i haven't admitted in writing. I wonder if it may be best to let sleeping dogs lie for the moment and just accept the default, which will fall off next Jan.

cab, useful post thanks : a succinct and cogent explanation of assignments - where was this info from, as am assuming it was c+p?

hi flopper, no i wasn't charged, I tried to cancel via site mail but got no reply so rang them and put it all in a follow up email confirming the conversation and the person i spoke to. my problem with them was that after signing up techincal problems meant i couldn't access my file. i also felt that the site design once in was so amateurish and unnavigable that i didn't want anything to do with a comany like this, the fact they were so hard to contact was the final nail. seemed like an incredibly poor outfit designed to make it really really hard to a) actually use the service, b) get your money back. my experience seems to be typical of most caggers by the looks of this thread. flopper, they CAN'T access your credit card AND debit card details simply because they can access your credit file for you. CRAs don't have access to your payment details EXCEPT to the one card you used to pay for the service. if they have confirmed cancelled, this should be enough - as i said, this is terrible, amateurish company but not actually a [problem] site. And, if you paid by visa debit, or by any credit card, you can get the transaction reversed if they do take it as the bank is jointly liable for any losses you incur through no fault of your own (i.e. having already cancelled according to site t and cs. hope this helps.

Hi highlander 1. start a new thread, you'll get more replies that way. link to it on this thread so people can fid their way there. 2. best to start two threads, one for each account, this avoids confusion and maintains focus. 3. re the first DN, paste it up, and if you paid it off IMMEDIATELY then surely the breach will have been remedied = no default? more details required. regards, avatari

Hi arcacia, that's okay, no problem. Sorry to hear baout the finances, hopefully this will help: 1. A judge will expect you to put in the set-aside request IMMEDIATELY that you become aware of the CCJ. There may not be a defined time-limit, but the more time goes by, the less the chance of the applciation being accepted - especially if the court has reason to believe you have been aware of the judgement but not previously acted. 2. You may claim exemption/remission from the fee if you fufil criteria (being out of work and on limited means is likely to qualify). Simple file the claim with the EX160 form attached (click link for guidance and form): http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex160a_web_0709.pdf Hope this helps. Get that Claim in now! if you really are serious about this, the court will look less favourably on you if you wait, when the courts specifically have a system to help those who would be disadvantaged in accessing justice by being less financially well-off. The claim will be accpeted regardless of the fee remission request outcome, which is handled separately - it will not be delayed while they decide if you qualify. in filling it out, you will be able to see if you qualify, so there is little risk as long as you are honest an can provide evidence (banks statements/bills etc). Please don't let this cause you to prevaricate any longer, if your credit record is important to you.

shadow, looks like arcacia has done a disappearing act again... just found this thread, I discarded thread after no reply for more than a month...looks like same thing happened again...but i found your advice really helpful to me all the same, useful info for future, thanks! arcacia, did you proceed with the claim? How did it go/is it going? please tell me after all the effort you put in preparing, that you went for it!!

ok, this certainly isn't a CCA, let alone an enforceable one! At best, it's an internal data capture form used in the application process, it does not prove you understood the terms or conditions, nor specifies any of the preescribed terms (credit limit, apr, interest rate) that makes a document an enforceable CCA. it also doesn't even say it's an agreement. in short, there is (IMO) ZERO chance that this doecument alone could be used in court to enforce a debt. BUT just because they can't (won't??) provide it now (regardless of your lawful CCA request) doesn't mean that the creditor won't 'magically' find an enforecebale CCA after court proceedings commence by one or other party. Until then, and pending the judge's decision should it come to court, you can't be made to pay.

byt the way, see http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2004/uksi_20043236_en.pdf for the detail on Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004

I don't think so based upon what can be seen here, the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (Electronic Communications) Order 2004 dictates that an electronic signature is required in place of a normal one - this can be just a tick in the box. what would be required is a screenprint of your application with clear link to the terms and conditions: the document scanned here is just a back-office data management form. where is page 2 of 2?

tsugi, a rather late response to your post admittedly (while I trawled the posts looking for interesting stuff). Probably the clearest, most succint and apposite explanation for why the banks are guilty of far more than simply running a business. Too right about the moral aspect, too. What a shame that the Supreme Court didn't see it the same way.

re CCJ, as foolish girl says, look at the set aside option - if you can prove you weren't at the address when the papers were sent out, then you can show you had no opportunity to defend. This gives you a VERY strong chance of judgment being set aside - I know, I've successfully set aside a CCJ in exactly that situation. re default, as you are probably missinga lot of paperwork, I recommend a Subject Access Request rather than just CCA, this will give you more information which might prove useful in removing default on technicality. agree with foolish girl that 'settled/satisfied' on either or both will have little or no effect whatsoever. paying off does not remove fact that record shows you failed to keep to credit agreements, which creditors don't like. banks will always suggest you satisfy/settle ccjs/defaults to help your file - it's in their interests to do so! settling only has this effect with the banks: "if you pay us back, this might help your credit-worthiness...oooooohh, thanks very much....ahhhh, no you can't have a credit card/loan with that credit record!" have you still got the Default Notice? if not, definitely SAR. hope this helps