MMF / Moriarty Law / old Uncle Buck

[katyviolet09]

Name of the Claimant ? MMF

Date of issue – 12th April 2018

What is the claim for –

 

The defendant owes the claimant £587.43 under a regulated agreement with uncle buck LLP 29/4/2013 and which was assigned to the claimant on 22/11/2013 and notice of which was given to the defendant on 22/11/2013 (debt).

 

Despite the formal demand for payment of the debt the defendant has failed to pay and the claimant claims £587.43 and further claims the interest thereon pursuant to section 69 of the country court act 1984 limited to one year to the date hereof at the rate of 8% per annum amounting to £46.99

 

What is the value of the claim? £764.42

Is the claim for - payday loan

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? after

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor

or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim? mmf

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Yes

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Possibly yes

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? Not sure probably

Why did you cease payments? could no longer afford payments

What was the date of your last payment? 2013

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? no

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? no

 

Good Evening all.

The above is what you ask for.

I have spent a long time over the past few weeks/month reading other threads & posts & I believe I have proceeded correctly so far without bothering anyone.

 

I have added pdf all the correspondence between myself & MMF Lantern & Moriarty Law.

 

TIMELINE

 

LETTER 21/7/17 MORIARTY LAW been instructed by MMF : Ignored

LETTER 7/8/2017 MORIARTY LAW "FINAL DEMAND BEFORE PROCEEDINGS" : Ignored

LETTER 4/1/2018 MORIARTY LAW "LETTER OF CLAIM" : Ignored

LETTER 22/1/2018 MORIARTY LAW "FINAL DEMAND BEFORE PROCEEDINGS" : Ignored

LETTER 12/4/2018 MORIARTY LAW "COUNTY COURT CLAIM ISSUED"

A claim was issued against you on 12/04/2018

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 13/04/2018 at 17:30:56

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 16/04/2018 at 01:04:33

I sent a CCA Request to MMF on 17/4/2018 signed for received by them 18/4/2018

CPR 31:14 request to Moriarty Law on 17/4/2018 signed for received by them 18/4/2018

 

LETTER 20/4/2018 LANTERN postal order returned

LETTER 20/4/2018 LANTERN two copies of agreements for other payday loans irrelevant to this claim

LETTER 12/4/2018 MORIARTY LAW copies of STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT & NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT

LETTER 12/4/2018 MORIARTY LAW copy of agreement & electronic signature

 

I am @ the stage of submitting my defence & I believe the due date is tomorrow 14/5/2018 by 4pm.

 

The below is my 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. The Claimant claims £587.43 is owed under a regulated loan

agreement with Uncle Buck Finance LLP. I did not recall the

precise details or agreement and have sought verification from

the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a Section 77

and CPR 31.14 request who are yet to comply.

 

3. The Claimants statement regarding the assignation of the debt

is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of

Assignment allegedly served on ************ from either the

Claimant or Uncle Buck Finance LLP.

 

4. It is therefore denied 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 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. 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 Claimant's particulars in order to

establish what the claim is for. To date the Claimant solicitors,

Moriarty Law, have failed to fully comply with this request. The

claimant in an attempt to comply with my section 77 request has

sent me two copies of agreements which are not connected to this

claim.

 

6. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove

the allegation that the money is owed.

 

7. 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.

 

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.

 

So please I am asking & observations made:

1. As I have received the copies of the statement of account & notice of assignment, copy of agreement & electronic signature I presume I will have to change the above defence slightly or shall I just submit anyway on mcol & let Moriarty presume I haven't received docs after all not signed for by me????

 

2. Have I got my dates correct for submitting.....I hope so!!!??

 

3. No default notice received by Moriarty is that good for me? .

 

4. Two copies of agreements for other payday loans irrelevant to this claim from Lantern

 

Thank you in advance for any help received & I will continue to update this post to help me record what I have done, so you can advise & others can hopefully gain vital info

Thanks Again

lizmlbundle.pdf

[jon8214]

hi theres no DN as you state - fatal to claim

 

and also only one 1/2 of the NOA - should be 2 one from OC and one from DCA

 

youve left the ref number on the NOA please redact

 

one of the admins will be along to advise you further

[dx100uk]

yep no DN is fatal and they never attend court either

On your defence

 

I do not recall ,,,,,,not did not ..

[Andyorch]

Tomorrow (14th) your defence is due.

 

 

Andy

[katyviolet09]

two no AN is fatal and they never attend court either

On you defence

 

I do not recall not did not ..

 

Two no ANs ?? do you mean DN (default notices)

[katyviolet09]

Perfect ty I thought id double check....I will change DID NOT to DO NOT grammar noticed by dx.

Apart from that defence looks ok?

[Andyorch]

The claimant in an attempt to comply with my section 77 request have provided me with various copies of other agreements which have no connection to this claim.

 

...rest is fine.

 

 

Andy

[dx100uk]

yes flipping predictive text

[katyviolet09]

So I have submitted this now ready for tomorrow :

 

The below is my 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. The Claimant claims £587.43 is owed under a regulated loan

agreement with Uncle Buck Finance LLP. I do not recall the

precise details or agreement and have sought verification from

the claimant and the claimants solicitor by way of a Section 77

and CPR 31.14 request who are yet to comply.

 

3. The Claimants statement regarding the assignation of the debt

is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of

Assignment allegedly served on ************ from either the

Claimant or Uncle Buck Finance LLP.

 

4. It is therefore denied 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 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. 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 Claimant's particulars in order to

establish what the claim is for. To date the Claimant solicitors,

Moriarty Law, have failed to fully comply with this request. The claimant

in an attempt to comply with my section 77 request have provided

me with various copies of other agreements which have no

connection to this claim.

 

6. As per Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove

the allegation that the money is owed.

 

7. 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.

 

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.

Edited May 13, 2018 by katyviolet09

[Andyorch]

Yes ....thats okay.

[fkofilee]

Just an FYI

In one of their letters they claimed you borrowed £385 and in their agreement they say £400 - So what is it MMF?

Thats the Uncle Buck Agreement...