stevensdrake just sent court claim

[krios]

I've moved this to the Legal Forum so the legal wallahs can cast an eye over it.

 

I would still like to see a reply to the jurisdiction issue on this. ANYONE??

[creditcorptrouble]

My understanding is that there is a convention similar to the Lugano convention that permits issuing proceedings between countries that have signed up to the convention.

 

What's really important to check though is whether proceedings were issued in Australia, if so, they cannot be issued in the UK as well, so get your Australian credit file and check if there's a judgment listed. Often the bank/credit card company have obtained a judgment and then companies like Credit Corp issue proceedings again. I have been given copies of documents just last week that confirms that they do this. They cannot be trusted and they are liars. And because it's a corporation of more than ten employees, they cannot be defamed (that one's for the moderators!).

[creditcorptrouble]

Having said that, I'd put in my defence that the court does not hold jurisdiction to hear the case and that it should be heard in Australia - then the burden of proving that the claim is capable of being pursued in the UK shifts to the claimant. There's nothing to be lost in trying.

[creditcorptrouble]

It appears that the relevant convention is the Hague Convention, of which Australia and the UK are both signatories.

 

I don't have time to read them just now, but the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgment Acts 1982 & 1991 are likely to be of relevance too: http://www.bailii.org/uk/legis/num_act/toc-C.html

[krios]

Having said that, I'd put in my defence that the court does not hold jurisdiction to hear the case and that it should be heard in Australia - then the burden of proving that the claim is capable of being pursued in the UK shifts to the claimant. There's nothing to be lost in trying.

 

Just found this. Sorry i cant post the link (yet) as i dont have enough posts to my name http://www.gillhams.com/articles/415.cfm

 

When a person out of the jurisdiction voluntarily enters an appearance before a court of England (other than to contest jurisdiction of the court), the court has jurisdiction over the defendant. The principle applies whether or not there is a previous agreement between the litigants. The rationale is based on the theory that a person who would otherwise not be subject to the jurisdiction of the courts consents to the jurisdiction by challenging the merits of the case.

Usually the first form of communication with a court by a defendant will be by filing an acknowledgment of service. It is at this point that the defendant notifies the court that it intends to contest the jurisdiction of the court. By failing to file an acknowledgment of service (assuming service has been properly effected), the claimant may proceed to obtain Summary Judgment on the claim. Any other step that amounts to a recognition of the court’s jurisdiction in respect to the particular claim will be taken to be a submission to the jurisdiction, such as filing a Defence or requesting an extension of time for filing a Defence.

Edited March 29, 2011 by cerberusalert

[krios]

"Any other step that amounts to a recognition of the court’s jurisdiction in respect to the particular claim will be taken to be a submission to the jurisdiction, such as filing a Defence or requesting an extension of time for filing a Defence."

 

Does the above quote mean you cant defend on anything OTHER than jusrisdiction??

Or you can as long as you have indicated you intend to chalange jusrisdiction??

[nicklea]

They cannot be trusted and they are liars. And because it's a corporation of more than ten employees, they cannot be defamed (that one's for the moderators!).

 

I'm afraid that you are mistaken on this point. There is nothing in the Defamation Act that refers to this.

[docker1]

Hi guys,

got my reply from stevensdrake this moring, they just said that i have recieved all their documentation to deal with my case.

Last november they sent me a photocopy of the Application form, Copy Statements of the account, Notice of assignment and Notice to commence legal proceedings. Any advise on where to go from here, I've been working on my defence, I have also recieved my australian credit report, there is no court action been taken over there, Should i just look at trying to settle on a part 36?

[krios]

I still think they have no JURISDICTION and put in a claim to chance their arm. If it was as easy as just putting in a claim form at the county court then DCA's would have been doing it for years. It cant be as simple as that? I just don't believe it. If and or when they come after me i will contest jurisdiction and nothing else until jurisdiction has been determined.

I feel they might just be putting in a claim at the county court hoping for either no defence or a defence that legitimises the courts jurisdiction.

 

I.E."When a person out of the jurisdiction voluntarily enters an appearance before a court of England (other than to contest jurisdiction of the court), the court has jurisdiction over the defendant"

 

You should get a solicitor and contest jurisdiction if they feel this is the way forward.

[krios]

It appears that the relevant convention is the Hague Convention, of which Australia and the UK are both signatories.

 

Couldnt find much on this but did find this.

 

 

“The Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extra-Judicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters” is a multilateral treaty governing the service within the territory of one Convention state of documents emanating from another Convention state. The United Kingdom is a party to the Convention. The treaty is stated in Article 1 to be of mandatory application (except where the address of a person is unknown).

The prevailing view at present is that if the Hague Service Convention is available, then it must be used. The basic mechanism it establishes for extra-territorial service of process involves the transmission of documents between the central authorities of the two countries concerned. Each convention country is required to designate a central authority to whom formal requests for service must be addressed.

Within England, the central authority is the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs or, alternatively, the Senior Master of the Supreme Court. In practice, all requests for service are dealt with by the Senior Master. The request sent to the Senior Master must comply, in form and content, with the requirements of the Hague Convention and of the Rules of the Supreme Court. The Senior Master is required to arrange for service to be effected in accordance with the provisions of RSC, Order 69.

Once service has been effected, the Senior Master will send to the person from whom the request was received a certificate, sealed with the Court Seal, stating when and how service has been effected. In addition to creating the basic central authority procedure for service, the Hague Convention also recognises and permits the use of the following methods of service.

[krios]

Docker have a look here and see if anything here helps. Maybe a mod will make the link work... http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?194738-Help-please-Claimant-admits-no-cca-yet-continue-claims-**Won-discontinued!**/page5&

Edited April 2, 2011 by cerberusalert

[cancan987]

Just thought i would add to this post...

 

I have just recently gone through exactly all of this with SD and Credit Corp. My Solicitor suggested going down the jurisdiction route.

 

Creditcorp were chasing me for Approx $18000 Australian Dollars.. I received County court papers from SD....After several meeting's with my Solicitor and his rising costs, I decided to offer SD a settlement....we eventually agreed at £2500.00. I have just paid this. I do believe that i had a case with Jurisdiction, although felt that with the costs of a solicitor a settlement was the best thing for me. I felt like spitting on the cheque as i sent it off....hopefully its all now behind me.

 

I wish you all the luck and success....

[krios]

Hi Cancan,

I dont want to litter Dockers thread with too many posts but could i just ask you did/do you have your own home. I just wondered if they chase harder i they know you own your own home?

Cheers

[docker1]

Hi cancan987,

Thanks for your words of advise. Can i just ask you how much did you offer on your first offer and did it take long to get to the final sum. I think i will also end up settling with these b*****ds but i need to settle for as little as possible.

thanks docker1

[creditcorptrouble]

A number of people I have spoken to have managed to settle for 30% of the amount asked, but with having to put in some effort. That will give you some sort of guidance.

[cancan987]

Hi again to alll,

 

Yes i do own my own home & business with plenty of equity in both..so i was a very good target for them to keep chasing me. In my experience they did chase me very hard, in the end i was resonably happy with my settlement.

 

docker 1 my first offer was £1000, £1500 etc etc until i reached the £2500 that i paid. SD were never that quick in getting back to me, although when they did they always wanted me to act fast. In the end i did mess them around a little just to annoy them....but in the end the most cost effective way for me was the settlement i paid. Best of luck

[cancan987]

Hi again to alll,

 

Yes i do own my home & business with plenty of equity in both..so i was a very good target for them to keep chasing me. In my experience they did chase me very hard, in the end i was resonably happy with my settlement.

 

docker 1 my first offer was £1000, £1500 etc etc until i reached the £2500 that i paid. SD were never that quick in getting back to me, although when they did they always wanted me to act fast. In the end i did mess them around a little just to annoy them....but in the end the most cost effective way for me was the settlement i paid. Best of luck

[docker1]

Thanks cancan,

i think i will try that, did you just send a straight letter offering the money without prejudice.

 

docker1

[cancan987]

Hi docker1,

 

Yes that is what i did, although it was confirmed by email too.

[docker1]

hi everyone,

can anyone advise me please is it 14 or 28 days to file a defence once the AOS has been sent?

[William415]

hello docker1,

 

Your case is of very high interest to a number of folks on this forum. Please do keep us updated on how things are progressing.

 

W

[creditcorptrouble]

The answer to the question is it depends - see Part 15.4: http://www.hrothgar.co.uk/YAWS/framecpr/part15.htm

[creditcorptrouble]

If you're not ready - ask SD for an extension. It is considered bad form in professional circles to refuse the courtesy of a 14 or 28 day extension. You can always file a defence that doesn't say much and then seek orders filing an amended defence at a later date. It is not uncommon to file an amended defence following disclosure as often the facts of the case change at that point.

[docker1]

Hi guys,

Yes I'm still about, I've sent my defence yesterday with help from creditcorptrouble,(thanks again) I've also sent a part 36 letter offering to settle, I posted that letter last week and still have not heard anything back.

I will keep you posted. fingers crossed eh.

[krios]

Here is some more info on Jurisdiction

http://www.hrothgar.co.uk/YAWS/framecpr/part11.htm

 

Good luck Docker.

Edited April 13, 2011 by cerberusalert