Yes I know that. But what is the purpose to advising most threads to say no to the document question. Is there some hidden tactical advantage in there of someone as to offering to mediate and then saying you dont' have the documents at the last moment?

You don't need the documents though. The other side would need to produce them if it went to court, but to mediate you just have to make an offers to each other. The mediator doesn't even see any documents.

Can someone just explain what is the point of answering no to one of the 3 questions. Even if the other side has not responded to the CCA or 31.14, why not take advantage of the mediation to make a low offer?

I did. I couldn't find a single one where claimants failure to comply with CPR 31.14 and CSA S 77/78 had led to a success for the defendant in the court room

Many thanks for that OK I put "witness statement" in the search CAG on the red toolbar and read through the first 100 or so threads that came up. Out of them just 2 had a witness statement that addressed the CPR 31.14 and CSA S 77/78 non-compliance issues and in neither case had the witness statement been approved by others on the forum, and neither of them had actually worked What was there were a lot of threads where despite putting in the CSA 77/88 and CPR 31/14 requests straight after receiving the claim form, the claimant had not complied until giving the documents to the defendant on the way into the court room which the judge then accepted I don't want to wait until the court room to see their documents, not least because in the majority of cases described the judge allowed them. I want to take pro-active action now to have the claim stayed unless/until they comply. and ultimately struck out So the question becomes, is that possible, i.e can I issue an application within the current proceedings for the claim to be stayed/struck out for non compliance with CPR 31.14 and CSA 77/78 and if so how do I write and issue this application? 2nd question, what is the specific statute or case law that makes the distinction between pre 2007 agreements needing the signed agreement to be produced and post 2007 agreements not needing

Please can someone explain the significance of the pre or post 2007 start of agreement issue? thank-you. Is there a link to a thread with such a witness statement in, I've had a look and can't find one

How?

Thank you Surely that will just result in Mediation failing and it proceeding to court. Is there no way of getting the court to order compliance wit the CCA and CPR 31.14 with the stick that the claim will be struck out unless they do

so this has now moved on a little 1) Hoist have obviously indicated they want to proceed as about 30 days or so after filing defence I received the notice of proposed allocation to small claims track to fill in 2) Received what seems to the the standard response to the S77-78 request from Robinson Way refusing to comply and stating that since a defence has been filed all documents will be requested by Howard Cohen as part of this process 3) received no response at all from CPR 31.14 request, they just ignored it So I guess two questions 1) What to do next and 2) What is the purpose of making the CPR 31.14 and CCA S 77-78 request if the claimant can just ignore them with impunity. Is there no way of getting the claim stayed or struck out on the grounds they have not complied with either request

Ok I understand that, but still don't get the relevance of the clause. S 136 doesn't define what the requirements are for compliance, it just says that an assignment is effectual in law. Is the sole argument there that if notice has not been given, then assignment cannot have occurred or are there other requirements, perhaps elsewhere, for assignment to have legally occurred?

Thank-you, much appreciated Quick question so I understand what I'm arguing here, What is the relevance of the law of property act s 136 clause?

draft defence below Particulars of Claim 1.The claim is for the sum of £xxx in respect of monies owning under an agreement with the account number xxx pursuant to The consumer credit Act 1974. 2.The debt was legally assigned by xxx (ex xxx) to the Claimant and notice has been served. 3.The defendant has failed to make contractual payments under the terms of the agreement. A default notice has been served upon the defendant pursuant to s.87(1) CCA. The claimant claims 1 The sum of £xxx 2 Interest pursuant to s69 of the county court Act 1984 at a rate of 8% from the xxx to the date hereof is the sum of £xx 3 Future interest accruing at the daily rate of £xx 4 Costs Defence 1 The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had dealings with Barclaycard but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and a section CCA Section 78 request 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to Section 136(1)The law of Property Act 1925 and sec 82a of the CCA1974 4. Paragraph 3 is denied I have not been served with a Default Notice pursuant s 87(1) of The Consumer Credit Act 1974. 5. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and; b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for and; c) show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 88 CCA1974 d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim 8. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed 9. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of section 136 of the Law of Property Act and section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 10. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Quick question, is it allowed to send CCA to claimant via their solicitors address in Leeds since that is the address on the claim form for sending documents, I have had problems in the past getting proof of delivery from outside of the UK

So send the CCA to Hoist's address in Jersey, correct? Am reading through all the other threads now to find a no paperwork/holding defence, many thanks for that.

Sorry forgive me, my mistake, it was SAR I sent to OC, not CCA. The address on claim form for Hoist is in Jersey, surely that is offshore