okay Version 3: 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 r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claim is denied as the Claimant/Solicitor has been unable to disclose any agreement or statements on which its claim relies upon. 3. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars and deny the notice was served pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925. 4. On receipt of this claim the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim from Restons Solicitors by way of a CPR 31.14. This request was signed for by the Solicitors on 24th August 2016. To date I have yet to receive a compliant response. 5. The Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim from Arrow/Global by way of a Section 78 request. This request was signed for by the Claimant on 23rd August 2016. To date I have yet to receive a response complying with the request. 6. Therefore with the courts permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) Show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; © Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5, it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, if 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. 9. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Thank you rouge. That is a useful point and may well come up later in the case.

Okay, V2: 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 r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. The claim is denied with regards to an amount due under an agreement. The Claimant/Solicitor has been unable to disclose any agreement or statements on which its claim relies upon. 3. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment the claimant refers to within its particulars and deny the notice was served pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925. 4. On receipt of this claim the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim from Restons Solicitors by way of a CPR 31.14. This request was signed for by the Solicitors on 24th August 2016. To date I have yet to receive a compliant response. 5. The Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim from Arrow/Global by way of a Section 77/78 request. This request was signed for by the Claimant on 23rd August 2016. To date I have yet to receive a response complying with the request. 6. Therefore with the courts permission the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show and disclose how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and (b) Show and disclose how the Claimant has reached the amount claimed for; © Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5, it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, if 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. 9. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.to the relief claimed or any relief.

1.The Claimant claims payment of the overdue balance due from the Defendant(s) under a contract between the Defendant(s) and HSBC dated on or about DATE IN THE NINETIES and assigned to the claimant on DATE IN 2014 Particulars a/c no – A NUMBER DATE ITEM VALUE a date in 2016 Default Balance A number above £14,000 Post reld Cr Nil TOTAL A number above £14,000 here is my proposed wording for my defence, all comments suggestions welcome; 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 r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Following the receipt of this claim the Defendant wrote to the Claimants Solicitors asking for further information and in particular a true copy of the Contract between the two parties, a notice of Assignment and a statement of account, all referenced or alluded to in the Claimant's claim. 3. The above letter was signed for by the Claimant's solicitors on 24th August 2016 and the Defendant has Proof of Delivery from the Post Office. To date no information has been provided. 4. The defendant also wrote to the Defendant with a request for a copy of the contract under Section section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. This letter was signed for by the Claimant on 23rd August 2016. To date no response has been received. 5. Therefore the claimant in their non compliance to my requests has frustrated my attempts to clarify their claim and against pre action protocols and should be considered when the question of costs arise. 6. In the absence of any response from either the Claimant or his solicitors the claim is denied. Until such time the claimant can comply with my section 78 request and CPR 31.14 the claimant is prevented from enforcing any agreements or seeking any relief. It is denied the claimant has complied with any pre action protocol and is yet to respond to my requests for clarification. It is denied the Defendant owes any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show how the defendant has entered into the agreements (b)Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for. © Show any evidence that a Recall Notice/Termination Notice was issued for the amount claimed. (d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim by way of a Notice of Assignment and evidence of its service. 7. As per Civil Procedure rule 16.5(4) I expect that the claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Okay thanks DX. I will now refer to other posts and place my draft defence here for comment/approval.

In post 4 Dx says don't sign anything.

Update: The letter to Restons requesting more information was received by them on 24th August 2016. Yesterday (6th September 2016) we received a letter back dated 2nd September 2016. I repeat word for word the text of the letter: Please find enclosed a draft letter which purports to come from you but which is unsigned. You will appreciate that we must ensure we are corresponding with the correct person and that anyone requesting information is entitled to receive it. Please ensure that all documentation is signed failing which we will not acknowledge receipt nor provide any response. Yours faithfully The original letter sent (unsigned as per CAG advise) was also returned. The CCA request to Arrow/Global was signed for on 23rd August 2016. As of yesterday's post there has been no response.

Hello all, Thank you for your interest DX. so far no response but I have done as you suggested and followed some threads elsewhere and as best as I can see I can expect Arrow to say they are not the creditor and return the £1 thereafter to go back to HSBC and try and source required documents, and that Restons will claim we received the required documents at the time they were originally produced or that they are not relevant to the claim. Will post back here when we see resposnes or when it is getting close to time to present a defence.

Thank you everybody for your comments and views. I am glad this thread attracted some interest. Thank you slick132 for your post which I think is particularly useful and I will act as you suggested. I will post back here with any developments. Thank you stjane for your comments and be assured I will pay my sister in law the £200 as she needs the money and then see what happens.

Hello all My sister in law accidentally paid £200 into my Barclays bank account instead of to my brother. This was an old business account I have which I had not used for about three years. The charges and interest has mounted up in I to the extent that it is £1200 overdrawn. I had not heard from Barclays at all for several years despite this being an unauthorised overdraft, no phone calls, no attempts to get me to credit the account, no letters. They just let it go. And so did I. Anyway my sister in law contacted me straight away and I said the best way to tackle this was for her to contact her bank and ask for the money to be returned via the Industry standard process for mistaken payments. This process allows for the return of the money within twenty days if I do not object and of course I do not. I then received a phone call from Barclays stating that they had received a request from my sister in law's bank (Lloyds) and they asked me how I intended to credit the account (with some £1200) so that they could return the money. I told them that it was not necessary for the account to be credited. I told them they should follow the industry standard process and return the money. There then followed a lengthy and unsuccessful (on their part) attempt to get me to restore the account. I told them that whether or not I did so should not be linked with their duty to return the money in line with the industry code as I (clearly stated) I was not objecting to it's return. Eventually they agreed they would do so. Much to my surprise my sister in law contacted me to say she had received a letter from her bank Lloyds saying they could not get the money back because I had objected!! This is entirely at odds with what I said to Barclays which was that I DID NOT object to the money being returned and that they SHOULD follow the industry Code of Practice. (I am somewhat familiar with this situation and the Code of Practice as I had earlier in the year made a payment into the wrong account in our business much to the annoyance of my partner and researched what to do though in this case the recipient was known to us and he returned it less £17 for a bottle of whiskey!). Barclays have taken no other action with regard to the account in the intervening two weeks except to keep it alive in their system and have just added another month of fee and interest charges. I have had no default notice, account suspension or anything else. Can I ask fellow CAGers the following: 1. Am I right to believe that not withstanding the state or status of my account that if a payment is mistakenly made into it and I do not object to its return then that return must be done and within a twenty day time scale? 2. Presuming the answer to 1. is yes then what should I do now? Many thanks for reading and I hope this thread will be interesting and entertaining!

Hello Just to confirm that the two documents were sent by signed for service on Monday 22nd August. The Service has been acknowledged.

Thankyou for prompt reply. Have drafted both letters in accordance with site guidance and will post by recorded delivery tomorrow.

Name of the Claimant ? - Arrow Global Date of issue – 11th August 2016 defence due by 4pm 12th sept What is the claim for – Non payment of a Credit Card debt. Particulars of Claim are stated as follows: 1.The Claimant claims payment of the overdue balance due from the Defendant(s) under a contract between the Defendant(s) and HSBC dated on or about DATE IN THE NINETIES and assigned to the claimant on DATE IN 2014 Particulars a/c no – A NUMBER DATE ITEM VALUE a date in 2016 Default Balance A number above £14,000 Post reld Cr Nil TOTAL A number above £14,000 What is the value of the claim? - A number above £14,000 Is the claim for a current account (Overdraft) or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? - Credit card When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? - before 2007 (mid 1990's) Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. - Arrow global Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? - yes from HSBC in letter dated 25th June 2014 saying it had occurred on a date in March. No corresponding letter was received from Arrow Global. Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? - yes 14th July 2012 Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? - No. Why did you cease payments? - The repayments became unaffordable. What was the date of your last payment? - 27th January 2012 Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? - No Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? - No Arrow Global sent one letter entitled “Annual statement in June 2016 in which it referenced the period 9th December 2013 to 30th April 2016. It did not contain the words “Notice of default Sums” anywhere. This is the only statement ever received. A request for a repayment loan from the bank was answered with a loan with an interest rate 1% less than the card rate!

Hello My ex wife has received a County Court Claim from Arrow Global. They seek over £14,000 for an HSBC Credit Card Debt that was defaulted in 2012 and purchased by Arrow Global in 2014. The pack has no supporting documents such as a copy of the original contract, statements etc. Their Stated Particulars of Claim (suitably Redacted) are as follows: The Claimant claims payment of the overdue balance due from the Defendant(s) under a contract between the Defendant(s) and HSBC dated on or about DATE IN THE NINETIES and assigned to the claimant on DATE IN 2014 The account was defaulted in 2012 and is not Statutory barred and was last acknowledged in 2012 so the stat bar does not come into effect until 2018. The account was opened in the mid nineties so I think I am correct to say it comes under the older Consumer Credit Act so would expect a part of the defence to be that they must produce a copy of the contract and we can examine to see if it is valid. I am about to acknowledge service and get the additional 14 days so I will need to put a defence in on or around 4th September. I would be most grateful for any advice as to how to proceed with this defence. I imagine we are at the first instance looking for production of documents and supporting evidence. How do I ask or that as part of the defence. Many thanks.

I would like to see a ruling that prevents multiple numbers being used to contact you. I had a credit card company and their in house "Debt Collector" call me from over 30 different town and cities around the UK (and I am looking at you Vanquis!). They only have the one office, and certainly don't have an office in my own area!!! Thir use of this technique must surely be harassment!

I could not agree more. We need a campaign to identify which shops and shopping centre use Parking Eye and refuse to shop there. Money talks.

thanks brigadier

Great, many thanks. Clearly I don't need to do anything. Odd though. You would think if they bought the debt they would continue the entries on from the previous card supplier. Seems to be a bi of a loophole in the system.

Hi All I failed to pay back a credit card in 2013. In due course the card company defaulted me and posted the default with one or more of the credit reference agencies in October 2013. Lowell bought the debt and the account totally disappeared from my Noddle credit report. It has now reappeared with a single entry showing a default for September 2014 (even though the main body of the report shows the original default date) so in effect bringing forward the default date by eleven months. That means I will have to wait an extra eleven months before the default disappears from my credit report. Any advice on what action to take to resolve this would be much appreciated.

UPDATE SOLVED Hi all, I now have my numbers switched back on under my control on pre-pay SIMS! I am not entirely sure how this came about but I had done the following: Contacted Ofcom who said what was going on was legal. Contacted the EE executive office who were only marginally helpful. Contacted Hertfordshire Trading Standards as Avenir are in Borhamwood. Their response was that they would not intervene but I should go via my local CAB and they would monitor what was happening on a National Basis! CAB who said what was going on was legal. EE executive office again where the original "owner" of the problem was not there. Went over the whole thing with him again and then wrote a full summary of what went on and what I thought of the whole thing. Wrote to my local MP copying him in on the above email. I immediately got an email from the MP (or more likely his office!) saying he was making investigations). The following day I was contacted by an individual in EE only too ready to help. That lady IMMEDIATELY re-activated my two numbers and asked what I wanted to happen. I elected to move the numbers to pre-pay and got two EE pre-pay SIMS and they have now been transferred, along with some complimentary credit. At the same time I had another communication from Trading Standards stating that as a result of the intervention of the MP they were looking at the case and giving me a named contact. That contact did indeed call me but by then EE had sorted out my problem. I am now content because I have my numbers back. I do not know how the other 300 odd members of the defunct Myphoneclub are faring but I told the trading standards contact that as far as I was concerned they could stop but should consider the fate of these other users and make sure they were being treated fairly. I am not sure what conclusions to draw from the episode except that if you make enough noise on their social media and bring in big guns you can get what you want, particularly as I was in the right. It is a pity I was forced to do this. If EE had been more switched on and/or responsible instead of acting like a bunch of hand wringing robots their reputation, not to say future profitability would be in marginally better shape than it now is. Any questions or comments please feel free to post and thanks for all contributions.

By the way interested viewers might like to take a look at EE's facebook page. It is absolutely covered in customer complaints and adverse comments. Never seen the like anywhere else. Who at EE thinks it is a good idea to keep that page up!

Thank you for your reply. Avenir say they cannot give me the PAC code (needed to port the number away anywhere) as I am neither the account holder (myphoneclub is the account holder) or the receiver/administrator for myphoneclub (of which one is not yet appointed). I know this is baffling. They cannot give me the PAC code yet they can sign me to a new two year contract! This is what I am up against and why I think it is dirty business.

Hullo all I was a member of an organisation called myphoneclub which provided connections via Orange(EE) on a 30 day contract basis. I ported my two numbers in from Carphone Warehouse over a year ago. On 7th February I received an email from myphoneclub to say they had ceased trading and called them. They advised that someone from orange would be in contact to sort out the phones. On or around 20th February I was contacted by Avenir Telecom a reseller of EE(Orange) who offered to put me on expensive 2 year 4G EE contracts. I refused. No other service from EE was offered to me or available even though I asked and my request for PAC codes was refused as they said they had no control of the numbers. I contacted Orange direct who refused to speak to me as I was "not the account holder" but took my word that myphoneclub had gone bust and disconnected my service and that of hundreds of others. The following day after I contacted the Executive Office the service was restored and I was advised Avenir could offer all the services of EE including prepay and 30 day contracts. Getting back to Avenir they said they could not, blaming EE who they hate and my service has gone down once again. This has been a long saga and I have only provided the high lights but here is my best understanding of the situation: Orange has a distributor called Avenir Avenir sold Orange services to myphoneclub. Orange say this makes myphoneclub Avenir's customer. Avenir are insistent they will only reconnect numbers on two year contracts and both Ofcom and Citizen's Advice have said contractually they are within their rights. I dont want to be forced into long and expensive contracts for a dubiuous 4G service I dont need but I dont want to lose my numbers. It particulary galls me that they should use the threat of permanent loss of numbers to force people to sign up, particularly people who joined myphoneclub in the first place in order to avoid long contracts. I would be most grateful if anyone can come up with any solutions. It has been suggested to me that I sign the contract then cancel within the time limits of the distance selling regs, getting my PAC's at that point though I don’t think that is much of a flyer. What I really want is some sort of business or contract law that I can apply in order to get a pre pay or sim only contract out of Avenir or failing that a strategy along the lines of first sign to restore the service then sue using the following......??. Is there any kind of unfair business practice legislation, or abuse of dominant position provisions anywhere. Any thoughts or ideas most welcome. Put your questions here. If you are ex myphoneclub in the same boat, please make yourself known either on here or privately if you prefer. Lets form a a gang!

Thank you steampowered I will take your reply back to my friend and try to get some clarity on the points, particularly the aspect of a legally binding contract between mother and daughter. My current impression is that there was nothing written down as such (they were family after all) so we would need to rely on the statement of the mother and proof of previous payments if it came to asserting the claim. I understand (but will clarify) that the car is the only thing of value in the estate.

Hullo all I would appreciate any help and opinions you can give on the following: A lady friend of mine borrowed quite a lot of money (I believe in excess of £9000) in order to buy a car on behalf of her daughter. It was agreed between them that the daughter would repay by instalments and all went well until the daughter was discovered to have a terminal brain tumour. Sadly and inevitably she died leaving some £5,200 still to be paid to her mother. It then turned out that the daughter left the car in her will to her boyfriend. As there are no other assets in the estate my friend understandably wants the car to be sold in order to repay to her as much as possible (It is thought the car would get maybe £4K now). She has had a letter from the executor agreeing that she can have the car but the boyfriend has instructed a solicitor who has written insisting the car is legally the property of the boyfriend and demanding it be handed over. My friend currently has custody of the car in a secure place. I wonder if anybody can comment and in particular answer the following: 1. Am I right in believing the estate must settle creditors claims with whatever assets it has to hand, irrespective of individual bequests? 2. Is it the responsibility of the executor to ensure this happens? 3. Is my friend within her legal rights to now sell the car in order to recover what she can in light of the letter from the executor or is this strictly the responsibility of the executor? 4. Given the poor mental condition of the unfortunate daughter, can her will be challenged? I will get some wording of the various letters of the case put up here as soon as I can. Many thanks to all for reading and commenting.