MMF/Moriarty claimform - old QQ PDL

[2ltr16valve]

Sent what dx? Confused

[dx100uk]

sorry thought you meant the defence you'd sent

so you've not sent the cca request?

is that what you are saying?

[2ltr16valve]

Yeah I forgot the CCA request, sent cpr though.

Defence not submitted yet

[dx100uk]

Get it done tomorrow!!

 

that's the important one!!

 

should have gone weeks ago on the 6th!!

[2ltr16valve]

I’ll get it sent in morning once me coffee kicks in is it okay to send a cheque with it ?

[dx100uk]

no PO only

[2ltr16valve]

Dx is this going to QQ, motormile finance or Moriarty law ?

 

thanks

 

Also, this under section 77 only ?

 

Claimant is MMF, solicitors is Moriarty law

[dx100uk]

Read your thread post 9!!

[2ltr16valve]

Many appologies DX, been a very long night both babies have Silent Reflux and doctors can not medicate them for another two weeks until their a month old

 

CCA sent off, with PO - sent signed for.

[2ltr16valve]

I need to file my defence on this tonight I think as due by tomorrow ?

 

Where do I start

[dx100uk]

yes by 4pm tomorrow

 

so where did you get too

you need to add back in the CCA

 

as post 31 of that thread pointed too before

[2ltr16valve]

1.The defendant owes the claimant £292.81 under a regulated loan agreement with Casheuronet LLC T/A quick quid dated 03/09/2013

 

2. And which was assigned to the claimant on 01/12/2016 and notice of which was given to the defendant on the 01/12/2016 (Debt).

 

3. Despite formal demand for payment of the debt the defendant has failed to pay

 

and the claimant claims £292.81 and further claims interest thereon pursuant to the section 69 of the courty court act 1984 limited to one year to the date hereof at the rate of 2.45% per annum amounting to £7.18

 

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 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

2. Paragraph 1 is noted and accepted I have in the past had financial dealings with Casheuronet LLC T/A quick quid I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant who has to date failed to comply.

 

3. Paragraph 2 and 3 are denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served last year from either the Claimant or Casheuronet LLC T/A quick quid.The claimant is not in a position to demand any monies until it can legally verify they are legally entitled to.

 

4. On receipt of this claim I requested by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 77 request, copies of the documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date the Claimant solicitors, Moriarty Law, have failed to fully comply with this request.

 

It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

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

(b) show and evidence any cause of action and service of a Default Notice

© show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

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

 

5. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

6. On the alternative, as 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 82 A of the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

7.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.

[2ltr16valve]

Hi dx.

Did you edit my defence ?

Is it suitable to copy and paste into mcol now please ?

Also do I copy the red bit or just the defence

 

Kind regards

[dx100uk]

yes was about to post I have

 

just the defence not the red bit

 

let andyorch check it 1st please

[2ltr16valve]

Thank you dx. I refreshed and thought I was losing my marbles lol.

[AndyOrch]

Defence amended and checked in post #37.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[2ltr16valve]

Thank you Andy. Is it oky to add to MCOL now ?

[AndyOrch]

Yes.....as long as your happy with the contents.

[2ltr16valve]

Yes.....as long as your happy with the contents.

 

Thank you, yep reads okay to me - from what Ive learned anyhow. Thank you again, shall update once receive next step.

[2ltr16valve]

Had this for the IRL

 

We are in receipt of your complaint dated 04/12/2017 where you allege that QuickQuid irresponsibly lent to you.

 

In our assessment we look at:

• Affordability

• Creditworthiness

• Dependency

• Hardship

 

I’ve investigated your complaint and would like to bring your attention to the following points:

 

AFFORDABILITY & CREDIT WORTHINESS

The loan amounts you applied for were relatively low, with the highest loan amount being £ 200.1

 

The investigation of your complaint considered all relevant information contained in your application.

It was noted your monthly income was stated as £1400 per month.

I compared your income to your total monthly repayment for each loan you took with us.

 

From this I can see that the income you made during each payday loan with us was always more than enough to cover the amount you had to repay us for each loan and thus I cannot agree with you that your loans were unaffordable.

 

DEPENDENCY

 

You are claiming that you were dependent on loans.

Yet if you were dependent on taking out one loan to repay the other then you would have taken out numerous loans, for equal or increasing loan amounts, and with very little time between paying off one loan and taking out the other.

 

When I reviewed your loan history I see that you held a total of 1 loans which given the low number does not exhibit financial dependency.

I also note you had a Flex Credit account which is not a payday loan but a running credit account which is designed to provide customers with the option to drawdown credit up to their approved credit limit and repay it over a maximum of 10 months.

Just like a credit card, we are not under an obligation to conduct an affordability assessment each time you drawdown on your credit limit.

 

You are claiming that you were dependent on loans.

Yet if you were dependent on taking out one loan to repay the other

then you would have taken out numerous loans,

for equal or increasing loan amounts,

and with very little time between paying off one loan and taking out the other.

 

When I reviewed your loan history I see that you never had more than four consecutive loans with less than 15 days between loans.

 

HARDSHIP

Finally,

our records indicate that at no point did you notify us of any financial detriment or financial hardship.

Had you alerted us to your difficult financial situation, we would have put you in “hardship” status, as is our process.

 

We then would have frozen additional fees and interest while we worked with you to find an affordable repayment option.

 

CONCLUSION: COMPLAINT NOT UPHELD

 

Therefore it is for the above reasons we cannot agree that QuickQuid irresponsibly lent to you.

 

As this is our Final Response regarding your concerns to the above referenced account,

if you are not happy with this outcome I need to ensure that you are aware of the ultimate availability of the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

You have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service, free of charge but you must do so within six months of the date of this letter.

 

If you do not refer your complaint in time, the Ombudsman will not have our permission to consider your complaint and so will only be able to do so in very limited circumstances.

 

r example, if the Ombudsman believes that the delay was as a result of exceptional circumstances.

I have provided you with a link to the leaflet for your information to assist you if you decide to pursue this further course of action.

They can be contacted at:

The Financial Ombudsman Service,

Exchange Tower,

London,

E14 9SR.

[2ltr16valve]

Anything jumping out In their reply ?

 

I think ombudsman?

[dx100uk]

almost word for word what they have sent to others

 

FOS time

[2ltr16valve]

Had the PO back today from MMF with a compliments slip ...:

[dx100uk]

saying they dont need it?

 

dx

[2ltr16valve]

saying they dont need it?

 

dx

Just has a with compliments slip with nothing written on it