That's why it's so strange, apart from the odd document everything else was originally generated by them or the Claimant! I haven't made up my mind how or when I am going to respond yet.

Another strange development in this. I recently received a letter from the Claimant's solicitors stating that 'as per the court order dated ...' they required me to forward copies of some of the doucments included in my disclosure list. I haven't responded yet as I don't readily have the facility to copy. But some of the documents and corresspondence they are asking me to farward them copies of they actually originally sent me, including two versions of the terms and conditions.

Thanks for the replies. I think they have a tendency to bungle along and had a last minute panic with this, I don't think they have the capacity to be creative. The disclosure request from the court was just described as Standard Discovery, I think the 'missing' correspondence might be useful to me, it is very strange that it is not available they won't say where it is the form states they should. I had a quick look at the CPR disclosure rules and I think their disclosure is not sufficient or acceptabele. I had already previously complained to the Court that they had ignored my disclosure requests in the past. Am I not within my rights to send a SAR request to them, they have 40 days to reply but the case is a long way of so there is plenty of time.

Hi, I urgently need some advice with this court claim as it is still on going. I recently received a notice of allocation to fast track from my local court where the case has been transferred. It is scheduled to be heard later in the year. Meanwhile the DJ ordered each party to give every other party standard discovery by list. I sent my list to NR's solicitors and they have been very crafty in all this. On receipt of my list of documents they responded on the very last day sending everything by email, they seem to have prepared their list after they had seen everything that was included in my list. For example, I havehad three sets of terms and conditions to date, on my disclosure list I added the three sets of terms and conditions and included the file references which were at the bottom, the references show that the T&C's are later dates than the agreement. So suddenly on their disclosure they have added a fourth set of T&C's with a file reference date earlier than the agreement date. It looks like they never noticed the file references before and are now covering their tracks. But the T&C's mentioned on their disclosure are not the ones sent with the particulars of claim and I have never had sight of them either, they are not the ones sent to me with my original CCA request. Their disclosure list is very vague generally and don't actually disclose anything much at all really, they have always been reluctant to provide this information. They state that original correspondence sent by themselves to me, some of it is no longer in their control although they don't specify where it is. I have kept all this correspondencemyself, but didn't list all of it in my disclosure list. I t sounds like there is something there that they don't want to be seen, for example one letter from them states that the terms and conditions sent with my original CCA request are the correct ones but they are not the ones now appearing on the disclosure list. I now wish I had incuded all correspondence from them on my disclosure. On their disclosure they also state that the original agreement and it's T&C's has been destroyed. They also state that they object to correspondence between themselves and the claimant being inspected because these are 'privileged documents'. So apart from a few basic bits, such as the third DN and formal demand, contact notes etc it dosen't disclose much at all. What I need to know is can I flush the information out of them with a subject access request or by any other method? Should I contact the Court to raise my concerns, I really need to get all the letters they say they don't have included, can I do this at this stage as it not until I saw their disclosure and what they have done that I realised what a game this all is! Thanks in anticipation.

The original costs were just under £600 as the court proceedings were discontinued before I sent in a defence so they didn't need permission to start a second time. They tried to add these fees to my account and issued the second default notice with the fees included. The third default notice they have removed them again although they still appeared on the statement of account sent just before the third DN was issued. They recently sent a statement of account showing they had removed them at the time of the issue of the third DN to cover their tracks I suppose. The third DN the remedy date is correct and the arrears are much higher than the first and second DN so they have added on more 'missed' payments up to the date of the third DN. The third DN was issued October last year and the court proceedings were started jan/feb this year. The creditor made no contact with me regarding the continunance of payments normally into my account throughout, not since September 2009, all I had were the DN's and formal demands, plus a couple of annual statements. I mentioned all this in my defence that there was no regular contact in respect of missed payments etc. I am just gobsmacked at how they can do this to a person, it's not my fault my circumstances changed and I did offer them reduced payments explaining my situation, unfortunately now I could not even afford the payment I previously offered them. I think this particular creditor always takes hasty court action and rides roughshod over it's debtors, I get the feeling they have got away with it so are now quite blase about it. It is all very worrying.

I am not sure if the third notice is defective, the first two definately were. I thought there was a possibility that the third might be also as it did not tally with a 'statement of account' they had sent me a few days earlier. They sent me another statement recently which sort of rectified the error on the other statement. What I really need to know is if there is anything else I can do at this stage to challenge the comments made by their solicitors. Would I be liable for those legal costs if this went against me? Thanks

it is 17784.00 not including any legal fees. are you sure that is para 75 of the harrison case, that para is regarding the reissue of faulty DN's. i don't suppose there is anything I can do at this stage apart from wait and see what happens next. it all seems to be such a minefield

The total is £17784 the £10,000 is just for legal costs on the face of it! Can't think why, the orignal costs were just under £600, I have no idea what all those costs involve it's the first time I've seen them. I didn't quote Harrison at all wasn't sure of how I could use any of that. The statement is just that my defence is wihout merit, I put a lot of arguments into it so I suppose they mean the whole lot generally. Do I just have to wait and see what happens next, that extra £10,000 legal costs is worrying me the most it must be a mistake as it sounds too much.

Sorry I haven't been on here for a while have had a family crisis to contend with on top of everything else. I did send off a defence I had to do a DIY one due to lack of time, basically I put as much ammunition as I could into it, the 3 sets of T&C's, the refusual to accept my offer of reduced payments, the three DN's etc etc. I did the allocation questionnaire also, I stated on there that despite my CPR request for papers to be used by the claimant at court I had received nothing to date so was at a disadvantage. I have now received a copy of their allocation questionnaire where they state that my defence is 'without merit' and that they intend to proceed with a summary judgement application. They also state that their solicitors fees to date are £795 but the total cost of their legal fees is estimated to be £10,000.00! There is also a statement that there 'is no applicable pre-action protocol in this case'. That is basically where I am at with all this but I get the feeling it is looking a lot bleaker! Do those legal fees sound right apart from anything, if so that is scary!

Dear Mould Thanks for not forgetting me. I have been trying to read and digest that judgement from yesterday, hoping I might get some inspiration from it but I am not very good with all the legal jargon and it's all left me a bit up in the air about which way to go with all this. I still have a couple of weeks to do the defence and have been going over my paperwork again to see what I've got. I don't fully understand what you mean re the above, could you possibly clarify it a bit more. Sorry if I am being stupid! CG

Any news on that judgement due out today yet?

Thanks for that. Having read through it though I don't know if I am missing something but I just wondered why PT seems so upbeat it all. I thought this was a site to help the consumer and what seems the inevitable outcome of this rulling will kill the hopes of quite a few people. Could anyone give a brief history of the case.

that link dosen't seem to work

Yes I'd like to know that, I am going to wait until then before I do any more with this, I think that's best as it sounds so clear cut from what everyone is saying.

No my defence has not gone in yet and it dosen't hinge on the defective dn, I still have three sets of t&Cs but it is all looking gloomier now.