RBS Mint Loan - Court Action Started & Dodgy DN issues

[citizenB]

You seem to be in good hands Pumpkin.

[citizenB]

Just having a read to see where you are at.

[citizenB]

Have now attached some information on my proposed AQ. Would appreciate any help available.

 

Proposed Answers for Allocation Questionnaire

 

 

A Settlement

1. Given that the rules require you to try to settle the claim before the hearing do you want to attempt to settle at this stage? NO

I would say YES to this, it looks good for you, especially if the other side say no

 

4. If you answered No to Q1, please state below the reasons why you consider it inappropriate to try to settle the claim at this stage. Reasons: The Claimant has no right of action.

 

As you are likely to be changing this to yes, then you dont have to put anything here.

 

B Location of Trial

Is there any reason why your claim needs to be heard at a particular court?

As the claim has already been transferred to my local court I am planning to answer NO to this question.

This is correct, if you are at your local court already you dont want it shifting.

 

C Pre-action protocols

You are expected to comply with the relevant pre-action protocol. Have you done so? I don’t understand what this means so don’t know if I have done it or not.

I dont think there are any pre action protocols for you to follow. I will seek out the correct wording for you.

 

D Case management information

What amount of the claim is in dispute? I was planning on entering the total sum of the claim as I dispute all of it – is this the right thing to do?

Yes, the full amount being claimed is the sum that will be in dispute

 

Applications

Have you made any applications in this claim? I am planning to use the N150 to ask the DJ to strike out the claim, so this isn’t strictly an application is it?

Unless you have or intend to put in a proper application for a strike out or other application then the answer will be NO.

 

Witnesses

I’m planning on just putting my name in here as the defendant.

Just you , witness to facts

 

Experts

Not planning on asking or using any experts or expert evidence.

Then NO will be the response to this one

 

Track

I do want to ask for Small Claims Track as opposed to Fast Track. The reason I will give for this is that the case is straightforward and the claimant has no right of action.

 

Yep, that could help get it shifted down to SCT, it is entirely down to the Judge though.

 

E Trial – Straight forward bit

 

F Proposed Directions

Do I need to create any proposed directions in relation to my request for the DJ to strike out the claim.

 

Other Information

I intend filling in this bit to ask the DJ to strike out the claim and give reason why, basic summary of case etc.

 

 

Also, do I have to get the Claimants agreement to move case to SCT?

 

The track allocation is down to the Judge as far as I know. If I understand correctly, until the court gets the AQs back then the claim is still trackless.

 

 

F and other information, I am not too sure of, so will try and seek out some advice on those for you.

[citizenB]

Have flagged the post up for site team attention in respect of the two questions I was unable to answer.

[citizenB]

Just make sure you submit your AQ on time.. if you are going for the application, then you will need to amend that bit on your AQ.

[citizenB]

But the damn agreement doesnt endure.. they terminated it.. didnt they ? So where do they get off believing they can issue another default notice.. ?

 

On top of which.. this is an agreement governed by the CCA 1974 and they cannot have s69 interest. How many times do they have to be told.. grrrrrrr..

 

The Claimant pleads that this claim concerns an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act, 1974. However, the Claimant claims interest pursuant to section 69 of the County Courts Act, 1984 which the Claimant should surely know they are not entitled to by virtue of the County Courts (Interest on Judgment Debts) Order, 1991 (SI 1991 No. 1184 (L. 12)) in particular section 2(3)(a), which clearly prohibits such an award:

 

· The general rule

 

2(3) Interest shall not be payable under this Order where the relevant judgment - (a) is given in proceedings to recover money due under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974;

[citizenB]

with great respect cB - that's the wrong quote - it's the one used by CAG most, if not all the time, but that is for Judgement debts i.e. debts following Judgement.

 

I will dig out the right bit, it's about not allowing S69 interest on a claim where there is a rate of interest already applicable. A CCA claim, by it's nature, has a rate of interest applicable i.e. contractual rate. If the lender forgot to include a rate for post termination contractual interest then that's their tough

 

 

 

 

 

jmho

 

 

Aha, thanks gh. I stand corrected. Tis good that someone is on the ball

[citizenB]

didnt think that you needed to provide skeleton arguments for small claims either, but in the event that they have, it would be in your interests to provide one as well You need to go through each point carefully to look for hidden pitfalls.