Three Mobile / Lowell / Dryden court claim

[Mike_hawk]

Ok, will keep an eye on your thread.

 

You can attach your defence in pdf or word/doc format on here. Only visible to forum members so it should keep it fairly safe from prying eyes if it worries you.

 

Just stick to the facts, don't open yourself up to argument that doesnt exist in its pleading.

[thunderballs]

Ok, will keep an eye on your thread.

 

You can attach your defence in pdf or word/doc format on here. Only visible to forum members so it should keep it fairly safe from prying eyes if it worries you.

 

Just stick to the facts, don't open yourself up to argument that doesnt exist in its pleading.

 

It's more or less the same as the one you referred me to via PM, minus a couple of bits not relevant to my case.

 

Does it read OK to you?

 

Also, should the CPR letter be going to Drydens or Lowells - or both?

Edited March 17, 2013 by thunderballs

[Mike_hawk]

It's more or less the same as the one you referred me to via PM, minus a couple of bits not relevant to my case.

 

Does it read OK to you?

 

Assuming the paragraphs reconcile, can't cross check the 2 on my phone.

 

I would perhaps make the first point a tad stronger, denying any cca regulated agreement was ever entered into.

 

Plenty of time yet, wait on others to look in on monday.

 

Cpr to counsels stated service address on claim pack

[Mike_hawk]

Have you ever received a notice of assignment?

If so, did it identify exactly what was being assigned?

[thunderballs]

Have you ever received a notice of assignment?

If so, did it identify exactly what was being assigned?

 

I don't recall ever getting such a document, but I did get threat-o-grams from the usual suspects.

 

All the more reason for requesting a CPR letter, I guess.

Edited March 17, 2013 by thunderballs

[thunderballs]

Assuming the paragraphs reconcile, can't cross check the 2 on my phone.

 

I would perhaps make the first point a tad stronger, denying any cca regulated agreement was ever entered into.

 

This is entirely true.

 

 

Plenty of time yet, wait on others to look in on monday.

 

That I will.

 

 

Cpr to counsels stated service address on claim pack

 

So, Dryden's get the CPR letter, then? Due to the wording of the CPR letter, it means that the CPR letter would have to be the next course of action.

 

And can the AoS and defence be submitted on the same day? Personally, I don't see why not, unless there's a relevant reason for not doing so.

 

Sorry for replying to the same comment twice - just there's always something else that comes to mind later on.

Edited March 17, 2013 by thunderballs

[thunderballs]

Hi, 'guest'.

[Mike_hawk]

If it were me i'd ack now and serve the part 31 about 14 days prior to last date available to file defence. I wouldnt want its response prior to entering a defence.

 

Allow 3 days service for first class post and 7 days for it to respond.

 

This would leave you 4 clear days to file your defence in the event that you have any problems accessing your case online.

[thunderballs]

If it also turned out that the daily interest rate that they've given on the form was incorrect, would this have any impact on proceedings?

[Mike_hawk]

I'm sure t would be regarded as a 'slip', the interest on judgment is the least of it's concerns.

[thunderballs]

I'm sure t would be regarded as a 'slip', the interest on judgment is the least of it's concerns.

 

Just having worked it out, it doesn't tally up so I thought it may have been something else I could have highlighted - may have been a bit more rope for them to hang themselves with, if nothing else.

[thunderballs]

Well, AoS is now in. CPR letter and defence comes next.

[thunderballs]

Hi

 

I was informed before that Lowell lost a court case in relation to mobile contracts (especially termination fees).

 

Wondering if anyone could shed some light on that - the more detailed, the better.

[kp278]

Hi, update please I have the same issue regarding lowell/drydens/o2. i've been waiting 30 days since my cpr was sent. extension runs out on 18th april

[tifo]

If the POC is wrong then the claimant should apply to amend it with the defendant claiming any wasted costs as a result of this.

 

Also, the POC has been signed (by the firm) as true when in fact it contains errors. At the most they will cite admin errors due to the claim being electronically done and that no prejudice has taken place. However, if the whole wording is wrong then you cannot draft a defence. So you should use an embarrassed defence and ask for the claim to be thrown out with no reasonable grounds of success with such pleadings.

[thunderballs]

Defence is due in middle of next week apparently (confirmed this with the court), but wondering if I slightly amend one paragraph in my proposed defence submission. It reads :-

"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.

I have requested disclosure of the documentation that the claimant claims to rely on, but it has failed to grant relief."

[thunderballs]

Bump. Sorry - just wanting to get a few opinions on the post directly above.

[dx100uk]

hit the triangle

 

dx

[thunderballs]

Which triangle?

[dx100uk]

report a post

and ask for help

 

dx

[thunderballs]

Done that.

[steampowered]

I have requested disclosure of the documentation that the claimant claims to rely on' date=' but it has failed to grant relief."[/size'][/color]

 

Personally I do not think this is necessary. You are not at the disclosure stage of the proceedings yet and your Defence already explains that they need to prove the debt. If you still want to mention it I think it would be good to be a little more specific, e.g. something like "The Defendant has made a CPR 31.14 request asking for disclosure of the documents referred to in the Claimant's statement of case but these have not yet been provided".

[citizenB]

Responded to reported post, however steampowered beat me to it

[Mike_hawk]

Hi tb

 

Responding to your pm... 3 days later

 

Yes, I'd agree with sp, it would seem sensible to add a short paragraph noting the disclosure request and its failure to respond.

[thunderballs]

Defence is now in - got a letter from Dryden's (later on in same day as it happens).

 

Their letter's the 'we'll get copies of the documentation you asked for and allow further time to respond' I was expecting.

 

So, what would happen now, especially now that the defence is already in?