lowells/lowell solicitors - claimform - old Lloyd's Credit Card 'debt'***Claim Discontinued***

[martin2006]

No paperwork/holding defence if they dont respond or send the goodies. Thousands of them on here to use and adapt to your POC

[Pewpew]

update, apparently they have responded to the CPR request,

i won't know till tomorrow for sure

but have been told it contains a second blurry sheet that looks like the one uploaded

(im guessing this is the T&C's)

if it is the T&C's

is it a case of ringing them to arrange payments?

[dx100uk]

NO whatever made you think that?

[Pewpew]

whats the other defence for it? because it can't be read? will that stand in court?

[Bazooka Boo]

whats the other defence for it? because it can't be read? will that stand in court?

 

Absolutely, It MUST be legible.

[dx100uk]

can we see it

a T&C is usual more than I page too

[Pewpew]

There is no more "blurred" sheets just the one posted in a earlier reply, they have sent the assignment letters etc (which they told me they didn't send as no address was available via a earlier phone conversation) along with account information

 

My defence is due in tomorrow and i have no idea if this right but i have been checking alot of posts and found this so i have edited it slightly

 

1)The defendant entered into a consumer credit act 1974 regulated agreement with Lloyds under account reference XXXXXXX

 

2)The defendant failed to maintain the required payments and a default notice was served and not compiled with

3)The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 06/14 and notice was given to the defendant

4)Despite repealed requests for payment, the sum of £1000 remains due and outstanding

5)the said sum and interestes bit is here

 

Lowell solicitors limited -v- XXXXXXX

Claim No:XXXXXXXXX

 

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 have been unable to disclose any legible agreement or any terms and conditions on which its claim relies upon. (paragraph 1 of Particulars of claim)

 

3. I am 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. (paragraph 2 of Particulars of claim)

 

On receipt of this claim I requested information pertaining to this claim from Lowell solicitors limited by way of a CPR 31.14. To date I have yet to receive a compliant response. This was posted on the DATE and signed as received on the DATE. The claimants Solicitor, Lowell solicitors limited, responded to this request on DATE.

 

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 agreement was legally terminated to allow the claimant relief.

 

(d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

4. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5, it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

5. 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 crediticon Act 1974.

 

6. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief including interest pursuant to S69 of the county courticon Act. (paragraphs 3,4 and 5 of the Particulars of Claim)

 

Signed

Me

 

Is this ok for a defence?

 

also they haven't sent the default notice as they are requesting it from the original creditor and forwarded upon receipt

 

the deed of assignment will not be sent as it confidential between our client and the original creditor containing information which you are not entitled to see, no other deeds/agreements exist

 

There is the credit agreement (the one uploaded)

letter from llyods saying they have sold the debt on

a letter from lowell introducing themselfs

then some account statements

[Pewpew]

i was thinking maybe change . The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature, to . The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature as no legible agreement of which the claim relies on has never been sent.

 

im really at total loss if this is right or wrong, i have been checking forum posts (not always logged in)

 

I have less than 4 hours but would like to have it done at the latest for 3pm, i understand i can't change my defence but surely its better to submit something rather than nothing? (i am starting to flap a little bit now) also if the MCOL is down does anyone have the email address i can't find the post that some had posted it in

[dx100uk]

jiggle around with this

and match it to your POC.

 

 

 

########Defence #######

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. Paragraphs 1 & 2 are noted and is accepted that the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with MBNA. Given the age of the alleged agreement I cant recall the precise details or nature of any breach and have therefore sought clarity from the Claimant by way of a section 78 request and a CPR31.14.

3. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer crediticon Act 1974 or of any legal assignment or Notices of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) as stated by the Claimant or by MBNA.

4. A request for information pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act (section 78) was made on the 13th December 2016 and response was received on the 18th December 2016.

The claimant has disclosed what purports to be an application form originating at the the time of application 1998.It is deficient of any prescribed terms as laid out by the CCA1974 nor was there any Terms and Conditions enclosed with the application.

It is therefore averred that what the claimant has responded with does not satisfy the request of a section 78 given the age of the alleged agreement (pre 2006 CCA amendments is not an executed agreement and is unenforceable pursuant to sec127.1 a and 3 of the Credit Consumer Act 1974.Any repeal is not applicable as the allegeded agreement is pre 2006 CCA2006 amendments and therefore.

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

A CPR 31.14 request was made by signed for delivery on 8th January 2017 . To date the Defendant has received no response or acknowledgment from the Claimant’s legal representative with regard to the CPR 31.14.

5. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

b) show how the Defendant’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and

c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and

d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant proves the allegation that the money is owed.

7. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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.

8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief

[Old Cogger]

ccbcaq@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk

[Pewpew]

Does this look ok? i was thinking of adding a d) provide legible documents; and or is this not needed?

 

1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are 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. Paragraphs 1 & 2 are noted and is accepted that the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with Llyods. Given the age of the alleged agreement I cant recall the precise details or nature of any breach and have therefore sought clarity from the Claimant by way of a section 78 request and a CPR31.14.

3. Paragraph 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer crediticon Act 1974 or of any legal assignment or Notices of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) as stated by the Claimant or by MBNA.

4. A request for information pursuant to the consumer crediticon Act (section 78) was made on the 23rd March 2016 and response was received in November 2016.

The claimant has disclosed what purports to be an application form originating at the the time of application 2007 however this application is illegible, It is also deficient of any prescribed terms as laid out by the CCA1974 nor was there any Terms and Conditions enclosed with the application.

It is therefore averred that what the claimant has responded with does not satisfy the request of a section 78 given no legible copy of the said agreement has been received nor has any terms and conditions relating to the agreement

CPR 31.14 request was made by signed for delivery on 23rd March 2017 . To date the Defendant has failed to respond with a legible copy of the agreement or any terms and conditions

5. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and

b) show how the Defendant’s alleged debt has reached the amount claimed for; and

c) show the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice and subsequent Notice of Sums in Arrears in accordance with the Consumer Credit Act 1974; and

6. As per Civil Procedureicon Rule 16.5 (4) it is expected that the Claimant proves the allegation that the money is owed.

7. On the alternative, as the Claimant claims to be 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.

8. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief

[Pewpew]

i have seen a mistake where it says MBNA and changed it to Llyods

EDIT: just waiting to see if you guys approve then will submit the defence

[dx100uk]

Align it to the red poc para numbers in post32

[Pewpew]

1)The defendant entered into a consumer creditact 1974 regulated agreement with Lloyds under account reference XXXXXXX

 

2)The defendant failed to maintain the required payments and a default notice was served and not compiled with

 

3)The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 06/14 and notice was given to the defendant

 

4)Despite repealed requests for payment, the sum of £1000 remains due and outstanding

 

5)the said sum and interestes bit is here

 

 

changed

 

2. Paragraph 1 is noted

3. Paragraph 2 & 3 & 4 are denied

 

3. Paragraph 2 & 3 & 4 are denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer crediticon Act 1974 or of any legal assignment or Notices of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) as stated by the Claimant or by Llyods. There has been no mail received regrading this debt in any context until i made first contact

[dx100uk]

Spell Lloyd's properly...

[Pewpew]

can't believe that and i did that wrong twice! updated to Lloyds sending in the defence now

[dx100uk]

Point 4 its not an application form its one page only of the agreement

[dx100uk]

Slow down I'm working through it noaw

[dx100uk]

You can't simply copy n paste any old defence

It'll get blown out the water if it doesn't read properly

[Pewpew]

ok sorry, i thought it was good to go, i will wait

[dx100uk]

You shouldn't be lumplng 2 3 4 together

 

Answer then in individual paras

As they have used individual ones in the poc

[Pewpew]

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. Paragraph 1 is noted and is accepted that the Defendant has in the past had financial dealings with Lloyds. Given the age of the alleged agreement I cant recall the precise details or nature of any breach and have therefore sought clarity from the Claimant by way of a section 78 request and a CPR31.14.

3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of any service of a Default Notice pursuant to section 87 of the consumer crediticon Act 1974

4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am not aware of any legal assignment or Notices of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1) as stated by the Claimant or by Lloyds.

5. Paragraph 4 is denied. There was no requests for payment or any other mail regarding the alleged debt before I made first contact slightly before 23rd March 2016

6. A request for information pursuant to the consumer crediticon Act (section 78) was made on the 23rd March 2016 and response was received in November 2016.

 

 

Hows that, with the rest of defence as above?

[dx100uk]

that doesn't sound bad off you go

[Pewpew]

so its no good? if it is bad i will ring up and sort out payments instead of just loosing due to poor evidence

[dx100uk]

I meant doesn't off you!