However, regardless of the position of either party in court, Judge Waksman is clear about complying with regulation 7 of the Consumer Credit (Cancellation Notices and Copy Documents) Regulations 1983 he states: (69) “If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under the unilateral power of variation, under the agreement, is a copy of the executed agreement as varied, a sufficient copy for the purpose of section 78 (1), or must the creditor provide a copy of the original agreement as well?” He answers this in his summary in para (108): (108) “Accordingly I conclude that regulation 7 requires a copy of the executed agreement in its original form as well as a statement of the terms as they are at the time of the request”. He further confirms this in his Summary Findings 234: (234/ 4): If an agreement has been varied by the creditor under a unilateral power of variation, the creditor must still provide a copy of the original agreement, as well as the varied terms; I've been away for a while so this might have changed but I haven't heard it has!! I'm sure someone else will advise

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?380935-Claim-Form-Received-***-Settled-by-Tomlin-Order*** Just to give you a flavour of how close I came to court and how it transpired to Settle A

MBNA are a lender and their core business is lending. They do not want to proced to court in the main. They write the debt off against tax liability and sell it on to someone who will pursue you. With the debt probably being allocated to Fast Track the risk you have is the potential for huge costs if you lose. As opposed to Small Claims where costs are limited, usually dependant on protocol followed by each party! Whilst your DN is a credible arguement, and as The Mould quite rightly points out your defence has presidence to refer to, it all comes down to the DJ (undertsanding and willingness to understand) on the day; and there is a huge risk with the DN arguement. It is not the most solid and iron clad defence scenario's IMHO. Would it be a prudent measure to enter into negotiation for a settlement figure on installments? It could save you time, money and risk and should it go to court, shows an element of mediation? Just my opinion and I know it may not be for everyone.

Absolutely Andy... Glad you pressed that point and glad I was so receptive to it. We all think our case is iron cast but I now understand about weighing up the risk/ reward ratio. Thanks again A

Your a star Ford- thanks

Hi Andy Sealed Tomlin Order received today!!!!! No review period, fixed term and fixed payment amount with a 75% discount to claim. GET IN!!! The risk of going to court was simply too risky re costs... Thanks to all contributors!! Donation made a few weeks ago and worth every pound A

You should probably type out the Particulars of Claim- so experienced people can comment. I would certainly ask for the documents they refer to in their POC so you know what they refer to.

Hi Ford Tomlin Order signed and sent by DCA sols earlier this week. Just waiting for sealed copy from court to stay claim under TO. I have a raft of emails that are without the phrase 'without prejudice' which show agreement to settle, so they would be mad to try pull a fast one. A

I'm no expert David but part of the set aside criteria that is considered is the length of time since the judgement to the set aside application: CPR 23.10 (2) An application under this rule must be made within 7 days after the date on which the order was served on the person making the application. Like I said I am no expert.

Good idea,,first thing tomorrow Thanks A

Confirmation from Claimant the TO has been signed by their sols and filed with the court. Just need confirmation from the court!!

You could always plead 'you thought his name was Richard?'

Ford A big thank you for all your input, advice, opinions and more. I really appreciate the time you have taken to comment A

You are an absolute star Andy and all the others who have contributed, advised, warned, argued and guided. I am not sure there are thanks enough to explain just how delighted I am. Surprised how much I have learned and what a mine field it can be..... Hoefully I can share my experience with others as well and make a contribution to the CAG cause along the way Once the TO is finalised I will revert back... fingers crossed

Well looks like there is no hearing to be had...... SETTLED!!! at a huge discount and no review period... fixed term, fixed installments...... RESULT!!!

Andy School boy error... apologies and thanks for removing. I will send and see if they go for the omittance of the review period. Thanks again A

Thanks Andy I'll let you know tomorrow but they seem v keen to settle now! I'm all for that! A

Hi Ford Hope your well? I've pm,d Andy and the claimant seems to want to negotiate again, even agreeing to discuss to COB tomorrow! Received TO tonight which I have edited to omit the six monthly review. Just want Andy to look in then hopefully agree tomorrow A

Claimant has requested I send a letter to vacate my application hearing next week. They will forward a proposed TO for me to consider. Upon agreement of the TO they will forward to the CC to stay the original claim in respect of the settlement.... Does all this sound about right? Do I need to watch anything... I do not want to do anything wrong at this stage..... Thanks A

Email reply:- They would consider settling via a TO if this can be agreed today!!!!!! Settlement at my last proposal, each party to cover own costs....... Holy Sh*t..... (apologies for that)....... aarrgghh

Apologies Andy, the Agreement does not comply with CCA1974. The agreement refers to various clauses that are not in the T&C's A

Apologies, the above post is a bit of a panicked ramble... I have this morning emailed the claimant a copy of the letter I have from the OC confirming which T&C were in force at the time the agreement was signed. The letter included the T&C the OC refers to. The letter therefore confirms none of the T&C the claimant relies on are the correct ones. Further, the T&C stated by the OC as the ones in force at the time I signed the agreement are not compliant with CCA74. Lets see what I get back.... Very interresting Monday morning A

I sent a letter OC with the T&C claimant is relying on (or was relying on) asking if these were in force at the time of signing. They have replied with 'no' and supplied the set in force at the time of signing (the OC set have never been provided by the claimant! and is not the claimants first or new set!) I may need to change a few things with my defence I think

We have not reached Standard Disclosure as yet. They went for SJ and attained it. I did not recieve any application or supporting evidence at that stage, just a DO stating SJ. I filed application to SA and SO and supported this with my WS. Only after I filed this has this new compliant set of T&C been included

Hi Set aside and strike out hearing next week. I submitted my WS to support my application to SA and SO. The claimant has now produced a fully compliant set of T&C which addresses every aspect of my WS....... This set has never been produced in 4 years of dispute..... My WS was based around the T&C they had previously produced? They have confirmed twice a different set were in place, until they recieved my WS and now these? Further the OC has confirmed a totally different set were in place... Any advice?