chezt v's Littlewoods Catalogue **I WON**

[bill-k]

Hope I'm not stepping on toes, here. The links I have are these.

 

CPR 27:-

 

PART 27 - THE SMALL CLAIMS TRACK

 

CPR 32:-

 

PART 32 - EVIDENCE

 

[GaryH]

Yep, just look up the relevant CPR - part 32 contains the provision for requesting further info, and then.....

Extent to which other Parts apply

 

27.2

(1)The following Parts of these Rules do not apply to small claims –

(a)Part 25 (interim remedies) except as it relates to interim injunctions (GL) ;

(b)Part 31 (disclosure and inspection);

©Part 32 (evidence) except rule 32.1 (power of court to control evidence);

(d)Part 33 (miscellaneous rules about evidence);

(e)Part 35 (experts and assessors) except rules 35.1 (duty to restrict expert evidence), 35.3 (experts – overriding duty to the court), 35.7 (court’s power to direct that evidence is to be given by single joint expert) and 35.8 (instructions to a single joint expert);

(f)Subject to paragraph (3), Part 18 (further information);

(g)Part 36 (offers to settle and payments into court); and

(h)Part 39 (hearings) except rule 39.2 (general rule – hearing to be in public).

(2)The other Parts of these Rules apply to small claims except to the extent that a rule limits such application.

(3)The court of its own initiative may order a party to provide further information if it considers it appropriate to do so.

.....27.2(1)© tells you that part 32 does not apply to small claims.

[Dave777]

OK

[chezt]

OK

 

Dave what happened to your post?? I had a quick read earlier but have been out all day ... now it's vanished! It looked like interesting stuff matey ... what was the problem?

[chezt]

CHEERS MUCHLY BILL & GARY!

 

OK Then - I started a letter of reply & would just like to run it by you ... I'm pondering if I should add in the non-compliance stuff into it or leave as a seperate issue? I also need to 'play' with the wording at the end relating to the 'dummy' N266 form - here's what I have so far ...

 

Dear xxxx

I am in receipt of your letter received today dated 7th March 2007 regarding settlement my claim ref xxxxxxx

 

As previously advised, I confirm again that I am willing to accept the sum of £xx.xx to reduce the balance on the account as you suggest and confirm that I have received your cheque to cover my costs, being the sum of £xx.xx for the issue fee for this claim.

 

I have noted your comments regarding the default notice and whilst I do not agree with your principles that it should not be removed, I am willing to accept a pure amendment of the balance at this time. I shall of course be checking my credit file to ensure this is actioned.

 

I shall in due course be advising the courts that settlement has been received and once the entry on the register has been amended to reflect the true balance I shall close the action completely.

 

I note you refer again to the N266 ‘Notice to Admit Facts’ form which you ‘served’ upon me. I would ask you to note that I checked with the courts regarding this notice and they informed me that they had no such notice on their records. Accordingly this document was not authorised by the official courts seal and therefore this document was not officially or legally served by them. Furthermore, according to the CPR part 32 which includes provisions for a party to serve the other with a notice to admit facts, this doesn’t actually apply to the small claims track so is not applicable to this case. If you need further clarification of this then I suggest you refer to rule 27.2 (1) ©.

 

Needless to say I shall not be completing and returning this form.

 

I feel I must point out that I am very concerned at your attempts to falsely obtain this admission from me and see your attempts as being of a bullying nature of which I do not take kindly to. I shall be making the courts aware of this in my letter to them as I feel this should not be taken lightly.

 

I trust this is satisfactory and as you to note that I reserve the right to claim the refund of any future unfair charges which you may charge to the account.

 

(Last 2 paragraphs need some work ... I just kinda bung it down then have a fiddle later IYKWIM?)

[bill-k]

Are these bits any use, Chez?

 

We are both expected to deal with this matter honestly before the court, and in my view you do not appear to have done so.

 

 

 

I feel sure you will agree that the court will not view your conduct in this matter in a favourable light, and your stated concern about taking up valuable court time will, I am sure be also viewed with disdain.

[GaryH]

CHEERS MUCHLY BILL & GARY!

 

 

OK Then - I started a letter of reply & would just like to run it by you ... I'm pondering if I should add in the non-compliance stuff into it or leave as a seperate issue? I also need to 'play' with the wording at the end relating to the 'dummy' N266 form - here's what I have so far ...

 

Dear xxxx

I am in receipt of your letter received today dated 7th March 2007 regarding settlement my claim ref xxxxxxx

 

As previously advised, I confirm again that I am willing to accept the sum of £xx.xx to reduce the balance on the account as you suggest and confirm that I have received your cheque to cover my costs, being the sum of £xx.xx for the issue fee for this claim.

 

I have noted your comments regarding the default notice and whilst I do not agree with your principles that it should not be removed, I am willing to accept a pure amendment of the balance at this time. I shall of course be checking my credit file to ensure this is actioned.

 

I shall in due course be advising the courts that settlement has been received and once the entry on the register has been amended to reflect the true balance I shall close the action completely.

 

I note you refer again to the N266 ‘Notice to Admit Facts’ form which you ‘served’ upon me. I would ask you to note that I checked with the courts regarding this notice and they informed me that they had no such notice on their records. Accordingly this document was not authorised by the official courts seal and therefore this document was not officially or legally served by them. Furthermore, according to the CPR part 32 which includes provisions for a party to serve the other with a notice to admit facts, this doesn’t actually apply to the small claims track so is not applicable to this case. If you need further clarification of this then I suggest you refer to rule 27.2 (1) ©.

 

Needless to say I shall not be completing and returning this form.

 

I feel I must point out that I am very concerned at your attempts to falsely obtain this admission from me and see your attempts as being of a bullying nature of which I do not take kindly to. I shall be making the courts aware of this in my letter to them as I feel this should not be taken lightly.

 

I trust this is satisfactory and as you to note that I reserve the right to claim the refund of any future unfair charges which you may charge to the account.

 

(Last 2 paragraphs need some work ... I just kinda bung it down then have a fiddle later IYKWIM?)

 

Excellent job:)

[chezt]

Thanks for the 'nod' Gary & the extra bits Bill! (Mucho appreciated again!)

 

I didn't get a chance to finish & print the letter yesterday so I'm just doing it now. I've had another letter from LW sol today responding to my letter with the court bundle which obviously crossed in the post. They basically are saying that if I don't accept their offer it could be deemed as me acting unreasonably & therefore the judge may order costs against me. The reason for this they say is they have offered full settlement + 8% interest on a sum I haven't paid yet.

 

They also say they invited me to specify those documents which I proposed to rely on at the hearing but I did not respond .... Am I missing summat here but I responded to the COURTS order & not theirs - I'm the one taking them to court so it's not really for them to order anything is it? Besides they have had my court bundle now and I haven't received anything from them .... they state 'given our offer, we have not filed or served documents as we do not consider that any matters remain to be decided at a hearing' Spose they're being a bit presumptious really but hey ho!

 

They *believe it or not* are still noting I haven't acknowledged or responded to the notice to admit facts and are asking that I confirm by return either which facts in that notice I admit or that I refuse to admit any of the facts specified therein ...are they clutching at straws here??

 

Anyway, just wondering whether to reply seperately to this one or just incorporate it into my current one .....

 

EDIT: I've decided to leave the letter as it is (Bill I've added in your words too & left mine aswell ... thought I may aswell 'lay it on thick' eh?! )

 

I think I'll see what response if any I get from this before I decide whether to reply to today's letter ....

 

Must ring the court tomorrow regarding the settlement but obviously explain that I haven't yet seen proof of the balance reduction.

 

I'll keep ya posted!

 

ps - I'm sure I've still won ...

[bill-k]

I prefer to keep replies separate, when there are several threads of correspondence. If a letter is produced later, then you can produce the reply to it without any other complications being brought in. Also, if there are several different people writing to you, then they all get their own replies. If the left hand knoweth not what the right hand is doing, then this keeps that confusion going !!!

 

JMVHO, of course !!

[chezt]

I prefer to keep replies separate, when there are several threads of correspondence.

 

I agree - thanks

 

Righto update again .. I'm getting really pee'd off with this now tbh!

 

I got another waffling response to my last letter .. I'm sure this trainee sol guy is just playing with me as some sorta training excercise you know!

 

Anyway, in brief (well I'll try!)

 

He notes I have yet to return the consent order setting out the settlement & asks for me to return it so they can file it with the court (thought my letter of acceptance would have been ok but hey ho!)

 

States 'I have today written to the court to notify them that this matter has been settled and that they are waiting for me to return the draft order so that it can be filed (Cheeky so n so's ... surely it's not settled till I tell the court it is!!!)

Mentions the default again & they have made it clear there is no agreement to remove this or amend it beyond complying with the existing obligation to ensure it reflects the balance owed (This is what I asked them to do!? & it still isn't done!)

Re the N266 ... 'there is no requirement for a form N266 to be served by the court & indeed there is no requirement that the form be used at all ( eh?) A notice to admit facts may take form of a letter from the party wishing to give such notice & whether or not a notice is given by means of a N266 or letter does not require a court seal. (are they just waffling here or what?) Accordingly the form was not sent to court & not served by them( yeah I know I told YOU that!)

Rule 27.2 (1) does release parties to a claim on the small claims track from their obligation to comply with specific part of the civil procedure rules, but you appear to believe (or have been advised that) this means that it is not open to a party to seek an admission of facts. We do not accept that this is the case. We have asked you to admit certain key facts (which we understand are not in dispute) in order that the time allocated for the hearing can be used more efficiently (So they are saying I'm wrong here aren't they?)

The suggestion that we have somehow sought to bully you into making an admission is entirely without foundation and the contention that the court will not look upon our conduct in a favourable light is not a plausible one. As regards the parties' obligation to deal with this matter honestly before the court, we note that your claim sought to recover sums of money you had yet to pay together with interest on these sums, and that you signed a statement of truth in support of this claim (Actually I never claimed interest on these until it went to court which is basically part of the procedure ... clutching at straws here me thinks!?)

 

They still also ask for me to return the signed consent order .... Do you think this will be ok - It all looks pretty straight forward to me

 

I'm so pee'd off with all this palarva that I'm gonna now write to the court explaining the case is settled as far as the monetry side of it is concerned - I will of course mention the non-compliance to the CCA request & the default notice (for what it's worth)

 

I'm gonna also continue/follow up with the non-compliance stuff too ... I'm really not looking to deny my debt but if they can't comply with the request then why shouldn't I follow it through? I'm not gonna look at re-claiming back past paid monies but I'm gonna see how I get along with the non-enforceable bit .... comments anyone?

[chezt]

Been thinking ... Is there really any point mentionmg the non-compliance stuff to the court or am I just wasting my ink? I dunno if I really want to be composing stuff which probably won't get read or noted anyway IYKWIM?

[chezt]

How's this for a letter to court ....

 

 

Claim Number xxxxxxxx

 

Defendant - Littlewoods Finance Co Limited

 

 

Dear Sirs

 

I refer to the above matter and the hearing scheduled for DATE at TIME

 

The Defendant has advised me that they have themselves written to you informing you of a settlement but I trust no action was taken from this as the direction should be made by the Claimant and not the Defendant. Therefore I am required to inform you that the defendant has settled my claim with interest and costs, and that the hearing should be cancelled. My claim xxxx is hereby withdrawn.

I would ask the court to note that I truly believe that the Defendant had no intention of defending this claim and at no point has the Defendant submitted copies of any documents of which they intended to rely on at the hearing. I would suggest that the fact that they stated they would defend was purely delaying tactics on their part as I believe their intention was always to settle the claim rather than to defend it.

 

I have also requested Littlewoods to remove a default notice placed on my account whilst the account was in dispute which they have refused to do. I would ask you to note that besides being unethical it also left me without the opportunity to include it in the original particulars of claim.

 

Also, On 23rd December 2007 I made a request to the Defendant under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a true copy of the credit agreement under which the account is conducted. The Defendant to date has failed to supply the exact documentation required under the act despite issuing reminders to the Defendant outlining their duty to do so. The Defendant is now in default under s78 [6] of the act due to their non-compliance therefore the Defendant is not entitled to enforce the agreement in law.

Yours faithfully

chezt

I'm thinking of maybe just leaving out the red italics bit ....????

[chezt]

And a letter to LW ...

 

Without Prejudice

Dear xxxx

 

With reference to your letter dated DATE received 17th March 2007 regarding settlement my claim ref xxxxxxx

I saw no reason to return the consent order for you to file with the court regarding the settlement of this claim as it is the duty of the Claimant not the Defendant to advise the court of the direction in proceedings. I can confirm I have written to the court withdrawing the claim and confirming the details of the agreed settlement.

I have again today checked my credit record and note that the entry on the register has still to be amended. I would be grateful if this could be actioned without further delay and that confirmation of this be sent to me by return.

I trust this is satisfactory and once again ask you to note that I reserve the right to claim the refund of any future unfair charges which you may charge to the account.

Yours faithfully

chezt

I haven't made any further reference to the N266 form as I don't fully understand this enough to argue it, so if anyone has anything useful I ought to add please feel free to comment

[chezt]

Letter printed minus the bit in red italics to post today

[GaryH]

Rule 27.2 (1) does release parties to a claim on the small claims track from their obligation to comply with specific part of the civil procedure rules, but you appear to believe (or have been advised that) this means that it is not open to a party to seek an admission of facts. We do not accept that this is the case. We have asked you to admit certain key facts (which we understand are not in dispute) in order that the time allocated for the hearing can be used more efficiently(So they are saying I'm wrong here aren't they?)

They are trying it on by the looks of it. Of course they can seek an admission of facts, yes thats fine, but you've no obligation to give it to them. Part 32 does'nt apply to small claims - its as simple as that.

 

What were the facts that they were trying to get you to admit anyway?

[Guest willowb]

Chezt hun, why mark your letter 'without prejudice'?

 

Wxxx

[bill-k]

GaryH - post #275 - FWIW here is my VHO on it :-

1. The credit provider was separated a few years back from LW Home Shopping Ltd. and became LW Finance Co. LW tried to get agents & customers to sign a new contract with the new provider. This might be a ploy to show mistaken identity of the defendant and/or to wriggle out of the CCA default/breach.

2. The admittance "all of which was past due" looks like a tripwire to me.

3. This seems like another tripwire - in effect admitting that the "charges referred to..." were all part of the "past due" balance above, and thus had not actually been paid.

 

I fogot to mention another letter received yesterday enclosing an N266, Notice to admit facts which was served on behalf of the defendant. It's a form (on behalf of the court) asking 'for the following facts of part of case in this claim ..

 

1. The claim relates to a credit account provided to the claimant by LW (the account')

2. That the date of final account prior to the claim balance was £xxx all of which was past due

3. That the balance of the account includes each of the charges referred to in paragraph 2 of the POC'

 

It also says 'we invite you to specify by return those documents on which you propse to rely at the hearing of this matter, in order that we may seek to agree these for purposes of a trial bundle

 

Should I be worried about that? In the offer letter it states that If I reject the offer from them that this notice still stands

 

Is anyone familiar with this form - could it be related to the fact they can't find the CA & can use this instead?

[GaryH]

Thanks Bill.

 

Yes, I would agree that there is something not quite right about it. If in doubt, don't sign it - you're under certainly no obligation to, dispite what they may say.

[chezt]

They are trying it on by the looks of it. Of course they can seek an admission of facts, yes thats fine, but you've no obligation to give it to them. Part 32 does'nt apply to small claims - its as simple as that.

 

What were the facts that they were trying to get you to admit anyway?

Yes Gary they are saying you are wrong aren't they! I may add a paragraph into my letter to them just to reiterate the part 32 not applying bit ... thanks again!

 

Chezt hun, why mark your letter 'without prejudice'?

 

Wxxx

Errrr dunno really ... I just left it on from a previous letter I sent when we were discussing the account in more detail I think .... I can delete it as I haven't printed it yet - do you think I ought to? (I spose I may want to produce this in court as part of the next installment eh?!)

 

GaryH - post #275 - FWIW here is my VHO on it :-

1. The credit provider was separated a few years back from LW Home Shopping Ltd. and became LW Finance Co. LW tried to get agents & customers to sign a new contract with the new provider. This might be a ploy to show mistaken identity of the defendant and/or to wriggle out of the CCA default/breach.

2. The admittance "all of which was past due" looks like a tripwire to me.

3. This seems like another tripwire - in effect admitting that the "charges referred to..." were all part of the "past due" balance above, and thus had not actually been paid.

 

Bill thanks for stepping in with this reply whilst I've been busy ... mucho thanks!

 

Thanks Bill.

 

Yes, I would agree that there is something not quite right about it. If in doubt, don't sign it - you're under certainly no obligation to, dispite what they may say.

I'm deffo not signing it 'cos I think it's some part of a last ditch attempt of summat to do with the fact they can't produce an agreement ... Cheers Gary !

[chezt]

Thought I may now add this paragraph to my letter to LW ...

 

I note you refer again to the N266 ‘Notice to Admit Facts’ form. Of course I understand that you can seek an admission of facts if you so wish but basically I am under no obligation to respond as Part 32 does not apply to small claims. Once again I can confirm that I shall not be completing and returning your N266 form.

Does that sound ok?

[Guest willowb]

I can delete it as I haven't printed it yet - do you think I ought to? (I spose I may want to produce this in court as part of the next installment eh?!)

Yes, don't include it unless it's something you don't want the Judge to be privy too;)

 

Your response is fine Chezt but seen as I'm in a toxic mood may I rework it slightly???? no need to use it girl, it just gives me pleasure:)

 

With reference to your concern regarding my contentions as to your N266 ‘Notice to Admit Facts’ form. Of course I understand that you can request an admission of facts if you so wish to do so but you must be aware that I am under no obligation to respond as Part 32 does not apply to small claims. As I am a litigant in person and you are an experienced legal firm, I would have expected you to know that but if I am wrong then, for the benefit of this case, please correct me. Once again I can confirm that I shall not be completing and returning your N266 form.

that felt good:D

 

Wxxx

[bill-k]

I'm in a toxic mood may I rework it slightly???? no need to use it girl, it just gives me pleasure:)

"Toxic mood" - Love it !!!

that felt good:D

I enjoyed it in a "secondary enjoyment" kind of way, too !!

[chezt]

Toxic mood eh ... cor get a load of t'old Britney 'Willow' spears there!

 

PMSL ... Of course you may rework & I shall be adding tht bit of 'snide' into my letter right away ... I'm basically past caring with this lot ... Pass me your avatar hunni!!

 

(As I'm also in a toxic mood atm I'm just about to post a letter I'm working on in reply to my recent Abbey c/card letters ..... take a peek if u get chance ..... It may need some comments as I may have gone TOO toxic!)

 

Cheers one n all!

[chezt]

I enjoyed it in a "secondary enjoyment" kind of way, too !!

 

That sounds a bit ...... well u know! Let's just not go 'there' eh!

[Guest willowb]

......*shakes head*.....aaannnywaay....link the Abbey thread Chezt, I absolutely hate them so it'll be fun for me to help if I can:cool:

 

Wxxx