Thanks IGNM I will do that.... it did seem strange; I phoned the court just to check. The clerk said something along the lines of "if the Judge says it, it is so". I was sure he was wrong, but didn't want to rock the boat - I would far rather the claimant told the Judge he was wrong than me I assume it means I probably will get fast track rather than multi-track (if they don't strike out that is).

OK, an update... I submitted the AQ with a draft directions for striking out on the basis of the defective DN. Although the claim was for in excess of £20K, I asked for allocation to the fast track. A few days after I received a copy of the AQ from the other side, requesting multi-track and estimating their costs at £7,000 (for a hearing they reckon will take a day). In my AQ I said I was willing to negotiate, and included an offer of £1 a month when I sent a copy of my AQ to the other side. I heard nothing until today..... This morning, I received a copy of an order made by the DJ under CPR 3.3 allocating the case to the small claims track!!! (and offering free mediation)....Has anyone heard of this before, and what are the implications for the claimants £7,000 costs estimate

Bump

Hi guys, Sorry for the late hour, but I am in desperate need of some advice. Tonight I have been completing the AQ and putting together directions (with the invaluable advice of IGNM & 42man) and an amended defence to take to the court tomorrow or first thing on Friday. I have never received the DN, and when it eventually turned up (convieniently dated a month earlier than stated in the POC) it turns out to be defective. Perhaps I am a cynic, but I decided to check the termination notice (which I did receive) against the copy of the same sent eventually as part of my CPR request. It is similar, but substantially different; some amounts are different, the dates to pay the balance are different, and there is a complete paragraph missing as regards a charge. To me, it seems as the copy supplied in response to the CPR request has been created for the purpose....is this allowed, or should I be bringing this to the attention of the court, and if so , how? Thanks

Thanks

*phew*

Hi IGNM, I have just had a read of your defence (very comprehensive ). The only thing which struck me was the fact that you mention a statutory 7 days in respect of the default notice and not 14

Hi IGNM - thanks for all your help. I have posted up all the documents earlier. In the AQ there is a section F headed "proposed directions". 42man has suggested a draft direction above, which appears to be a request to strike out based on the defective DN. Should I use this direction and submit an amended defence? In my holding defence, I did reserve the right to submit an amended defence, and was simply going to send a copy to the court and a copy to the claimant (and wait for them to tell me I had done it wrong )

Hi IGNM, If you have something already in your arsenal then that would be great or alternatively I could put something together this evening and you could then tear it apart for me . I have put this evening aside to do the AQ as well, as they have to be in by the 5th...........I take it that the amended defence is in addition to the draft directions to strike out on the basis of the defective DN. Thanks

Hi 42 man, The info is great, thanks . The default notice was never received, and in the POC, it was referred to as having been dated the 3rd February...I did receive a termination notice dated the 6th February. My original CCA request generated a copy of the agreement, some terms & conditions and a copy of the termination notice, but no default notice. My CPR request generated nothing initially, but following a reminder, the same documents including a default notice turned up one day before the deadline for my defence (I had already filed an embarrased defence, so now need to file an amended defence). The default notice when it turned up was dated the 3rd January, and not the 3rd of February as stated in the POC. I am assuming that the claimants will state the reference to the 3rd Feb in the POC's is a clerical error, but it all seems very suspect to me, especially as this is the first I have honestly seen of any DN. It would appear that the DN supplied is flawed anyway due to the number of days (I wouldn't have had a clue about that if IGNM hadn't pointed it out)

Thanks both Is the section in red applicable in this instance. From the statement, the only charge appears to be a £25 default charge which would appear to have been added before the account was in dispute? I have to say that I didn't ever receive the default notice. I received the termination notice shortly after it was dated, and in my ignorance assumed that was it. The POC refers to a default notice dated the 3rd February (which, I assume, would have created problems for a termination notice dated the 6th Feb), so am I being unnecesarily sceptical about the default notice (when it turned up the day before the deadline for submitting a defence) being dated the 3rd January

Hi IGNM and thanks for all your help. I have looked through the AQ, and the only areas I am not sure about are the reasons for selecting fast track, and what if anything I should do about section F, proposed directions.

Thanks for all your help, it is very much appreciated

Hi IGNM, Thanks for that...sorry to be dense, but have you any suggestions as to how to word the ammended defence, and what is an N244 (am am very new to all this and a bit daunted by it all)

And the remaining attachments Statement Page 1.pdf Statement Page 2.pdf Termination Notice.pdf Terms & Conditions.pdf