No. The problem being, the Court might see that as an application and say you need to pay an application fee as a result.

They likely won't accept that by email. You'll need to make an application to the Court using form N244 and pay a fee for them to consider it. A Judge is more likely to send the claim to your local Court for them to deal with the application, rather than having Northampton dealing with it as is. If it's not on the correct form, with the correct fee, they can ignore it and you'll be out of time to enter a defence.

Ok, good to hear. I'm not trying to be a bully, but some times tough love is a good thing What you're proposing seems very reasonable. You've made a CPR request and they haven't complied. The next step is to ask the Court to force compliance. TBH, you're unlikely to get a strikeout on your first attempt, (you're more likely to get one of those unless orders, where the Court orders their compliance with your CPR request or ("unless") they will be struck out) but at least this will show the other side that you know what you're doing and that you aren't going to lie down and die.

Ok, so you're clearly not heeding my advice to take this easy and to calm down, so I will help you with the strike out order application. I still feel you're bolting too early - what happens if they comply with your request tomorrow, for example? Anyhoo... A SO application needs to state the rules under which you are applying for a SO and then go on to say why those rules applying. Rather than reinvent the wheel, you're better off using a previous application and simply amending it to suit your claim. See here: (you'll need to remove the references to a counter claim, as this was entered some way further in to the process than you are, currently, but you'll hopefully get the gist of it) http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?134396-car2403-v-HFC-Bank-(Default-removal)-(Claim-2)&p=1268593&viewfull=1#post1268593 Again, ask questions if you're not sure

Ok, but this is something you need to go through, Brother - we're all here and waiting to help. We've all been here before, so we know what you're feeling. This is why i'm saying take your time. These emotions will undo your case later on in the process, because you will make mistakes and won't be able to undo them. if you don't believe that I know what you are going through, just search for threads with "car2403" in the title and look at some of the earlier ones - the proof is here, laid bare, for you to see What I would say is don't sit and wait for updates to your thread, instead look at other Barclaycard threads and see what those posters had to go through. You'll see that BC have a very defined process, so we can almost guarantee what will happen next - being this prepared will pay dividends. You have until Friday at the latest, we can guide you as you go, but ultimately this is your claim and you have to take decisions on what to do next - doing something now, while you're feeling like this, though, won't help as it will probably be wrong. CAG is a resource to be used (and abused ) so make maximum use of the time you have. This is the only way you will start to feel comfortable about all this.

I don't think you should be rushing this. You need to understand what you're doing and the implications. If you have until Monday, the Court needs to receive it by close of business on Monday, therefore you have until Friday to send something to them by special delivery, if need be. The Court won't be able to help as they can't provide legal advice. What I'm doing is pointing out the options and giving you sufficient information to make an informed decision.

No! Take your time! You have to get this right... Take a look here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?241827-Legal-Action-how-to-start-off.-IMPORTANT-IF-YOURE-BEING-SUED

No, you will submit this holding defence online. The Court will then send the claim to your local County Court, where you'll be asked to complete an allocation questionnaire (AQ) and the Court will then issue directions for the management of the claim and set a hearing date. What you're saying, in effect, is that you can't defend the case as it stands, which is your defence, and asking the Court to manage the claim around that. No, it's the same as above, you just use a different form and a different process. The outcome is generally the same, however. Because they are relying on you not knowing your stuff and not being able to defend it - 98%+ of the claims they bring will result in either default judgments for them as the defendant ignores it, or enters a defence that isn't a defence. Most defendants don't have access to the fantastic resource that is CAG, whereas you do. This is a business. If this works for them and makes a profit in the long run, they will continue to do this. Because we can show the debt is uneforceable in Court, I'd say 10% of the balance would be a reasonable starting point to begin with.

Ok, cool. So, you now have 4 options: 1 Send what you have to the Court and tell them the other side have agreed to an extension. The downside is that this is open ended, as they don't have a timescale to comply within. If you do this, I think the Court will want a Directions Hearing/Case Management Conference, whereby you'll be asked to attend the Court with the other side to thrash out how to manage the claim moving forward. 2 Apply to the Court for extra time in the form of an Application Notice - this will ask the Court to grant extra time for the defence. Same downsides. Same outcome. (possibly) This will attract a Court fee. 3 Submit a holding defence, stating that you can't defend the claim as is and asking the Court to refuse the claim on the basis of a lack of paperwork. In essence, this is a combination of 1 and 2, but you don't have a to pay a fee. (Entering a defence is free) 4 Enter a full defence, based on the paperwork that you have received, as the debt is currently unenforceable. Whatever you do, we're going to be sending them a without prejudice letter, stating that you want to settle, making a reasonable offer and asking them to withdraw the claim on that basis. Have a look at other BC threads, as they tend to not want to settle early doors in either case - you'll need to know what you're up against. Let us know what you want to do, and ask as many questions as you need to in your thread in the meantime. Just ensure you take one of these options before the Defence is due, as BC could win by default (despite what that letter tells you!) and that would be a very bad, bad thing.

I think there's a problem here, in that they don't have a timescale to comply within. Your CPR request gave a specific timeframe, so why would we 'accept' that they can now have as long as they want to comply, when the time on YOUR claim is ticking away?This needs to be managed by the Court, I'd suggest, as it's seriously prejudicing (sp?) you, while favouring them.When is the defence due, exactly? I think we need a holding defence that the debt is unenforceable without the documentation, plus a request for directions from the Court on how to proceed with the claim as you can't, technically, defend until they've disclosed the basis (and supporting paperwork) of their claim against you.

Yes, but didn't remove the protection in s.127(1)(i)... Has anyone seen any not enforced yet, though? Anyhoo, we're off topic, so...

s.65 or s.127(3)?

Such a s.61 failure is, in effect, totally irrelevent thanks to s65 and s127(3) It already is thanks to the effect of s.127(3)

We won't be waiting for them to agree. If they don't comply with the CPR in time there's 2 options - apply to the Court for an order enforcing their compliance with your request, allowing extra time to submit a defence, or submit a holding defence saying much the same and awaiting further instructions. If we wait for them to agree, they won't, they will win by default. This we must avoid.

Yes, the problem is that the DPA covers data - data is what they've sent. They should be supplying information to allow you to decipher it, however.I'm guessing a response to the CPR request will 'fill the gaps'.In reply to your CCA request, though, they should be supplying statements showing how the account balances are made up - see s.78(1)(a), (b) and s.78(4).

Has there already been a SAR done? 14 days is more than enough. We will need the term notice. We know this game, Caro, don't we... They won't reply in time, we can't ask for additional time to defend, so we'll try a holding defence to comply with the court's orders and seek to amend when (if!) they do comply, me thinks...

Not until they sufficiently particularise their claim and provide you with the supporting documentation, no. We'll just need to know when they've replied to your requests for more information or if there's 4/5 days before the Defence is due at this stage. In meantime, look back over the thread and make sure you understand everything that has happened so far. It's the use of this time to 'prepare' yourself for your arguments at a later date that will get you more comfortable with what to expect, etc, in the process to come.

Do the SAR as well, why not... The application form is currently unenforceable as it doesn't contain the prescribed terms. Replies to the CPR/SAR will confirm this. If you're willing to pay, this will mean you start from a strong negotiation position on the outstanding balance - they won't want an unenforceable debt on their books, so any reasonable attempt at settlement should get them thinking. I'd say a without prejudice offer of something you can afford, along with a defence to their claim, should do the trick Let's worry about the defence when you need it - you can't do anything until the CPR has been responded to. If they drag their feet, we'll be notifying the Court and asking for extra time to defend, or forcing their compliance with your CPR request if need be... Patience, my young padawan...

An application can be an agreement, but it needs to contain the prescribed terms - if they were sent, but aren't part of the document ("the application") then it's unenforceable. Don't worry about them not signing it, as that wouldn't make it unenforceable, only enforceable by a Court order. (s.65) The letter in post 18 is misleading. Dangerous for them given the issues in CPUTR in the link I posted about

That was about recon agreements complying with CCA requests - this is totally different. They haven't even attempted to recreate 'an' agreement, here.

Unfortunately not. I just like to bring order to chaos at times

What you have there (via Caro) is an application form with no prescribed terms - irredeemably unenforceable under s.127(3) CCA as it was taken out in 2003. Did you receive anything else from them that has credit limit, interest rates and payment terms on it that may be 'linked' to the document you've shared so far? If not, they don't have a hope in enforcing in Court.

This is very dangerous. Quoting this, that, and the other rule, which refers to this, that, or the other rule, is just going to lose you favour with any Judge on first contact. By all means outline your case, but don't start relying on technicalities to defend your position in that way. Do so at your peril. I should know...

Why are you still giving them time of day? Pay what you can afford - you've demonstrated that is sufficient more than enough. I hate to say it, but I told you so... Interesting wording in the complaint response - "We" (as in process) but "I" (as in my work) meaning that anyone else dealing with future complaints can simply say the last person got it wrong. This is harassment, but continuing to feed them by responding in a 'common sense' fashion and not dealing with it effectively isn't going to get you anywhere with their approach. They want you to pay more to stop this action, but that's just perpetual as it will all start over again if you do. Be strong... At the very least, please read this: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?307385-CPUTR-2008-questions-and-advice

It was very successful for those - including me - that did so in the past, but as has been pointed out, things have changed and the worm has turned these days...