MMF/Moriarty Default CCJ (filed DQ late) - Old Lending Stream PDL - ***Judgment set aside***

[vic synex]

Hello everyone,

 

I had a payday loan in June 2019 from MMF which, for numerous reasons, I was unable to maintain. 

 

Fast forward to September 2019 and Moriarty Law sent a Court Claim for the outstanding balance but under the name of Lantern. I submitted a defence stating that I had never had an account with Lantern and had received no advice of any change of ownership of the debt. The court requested I send an DQ , which I did and then heard nothing until January when Moriarty threatened enforcement action. I checked my credit file and found my defence had been struck out and Judgement awarded. 

 

I have applied to have the Judgement set aside and have a hearing via telephone on Thursday morning. This morning I received a bundle from Moriarty including a lot of things I've never seen before including the notice of assignment. There is, however, no mention of a Default Notice being served, nor is there any statements showing the balance.

 

is the lack of a Default Notice still an acceptable defence or is there anything else I should think about?

Edited March 9, 2021 by vic synex

[Andyorch]

What evidence did you submit with your application to set a side ...the reason it should be set a side ?  Your initial defence has already been struck out...why did you not defend that application ?

 

Andy

[vic synex]

My Set Aside application was based on not receiving any paperwork regarding my Defence being struck out and Judgement awarded. Absolutely nothing received in regard to the case so assumed it had been stayed with Moriarty's penchant for not attending hearings etc.

[vic synex]

This is the timeline from MCOL

 

A claim was issued against you on 25/09/2019

Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 09/10/2019 at 13:49:15

Your acknowledgment of service was received on 09/10/2019 at 16:05:19

Your defence was submitted on 23/10/2019 at 15:27:22

Your defence was received on 23/10/2019 at 16:05:08

DQ sent to you on 11/11/2019

DQ filed by claimant on 27/11/2019

General sanctions order was made on 19/12/2019

Your defence was rejected on 17/01/2020

Defence was struck out on 17/01/2020

A judgment was issued against you on 27/01/2020 at 19:26:54

An application to set aside (remove) judgment was submitted on MCOL on 01/12/2020 at 12:01:11

An application to set aside (remove) judgment was submitted to the court on 02/12/2020 at 01:05:09

Your claim was transferred to PLYMOUTH on 15/12/2020

[Andyorch]

Why did you not submit your DQ ?

[vic synex]

My DQ was sent late due to being diagnosed with terminal cancer and being in hospital. I responded to the General Sanctions Order and sent it on Christmas Eve.

[Andyorch]

And you met that date within the unless order and submitted by date ?

[vic synex]

Yes, my suspicion is that due to the Christmas period, it either didn't arrive or arrived late.

[Andyorch]

Fine...then all you will need is proof that it was sent...take a copy of your DQ dated...ideally you should of made application to request relief from sanctions pursuant to CPR 3.9...but can incorporate the request at the hearing.

 

https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=f6c0a679-ecbf-421e-bb33-2fd02897e9e7

[fkofilee]

MMF Renamed Lantern 

ML do a lot of stuff for them. 

Lantern will have purchased the PDL from a 3rd party. Who was the Original Loan with? 

 

Lantern should beable to tell you.

[Andyorch]

Quote

I had a payday loan in June 2019 from MMF 

 

[dx100uk]

MMF are a debt buying DCA now know as lantern, even has their own forum here...

 

look at the claimform VS..and the POC it will tell you who the original creditor was and when they sold the debt on to lantern

 

might be best if you fill this out VS..

 

You have received a Court Claim ISSUED IN ENGLAND & WALES What you need to do - Financial Legal Issues - Consumer Action Group

[vic synex]

Thanks for the help so far Guys, however I've been looking for info on the original loan as the dates didn't seem right and found a corker.

 

The original PDL was Lending Stream and it was taken out in June 2015. This shows on my CRF as defaulted in January 2016. The Lantern account is also on my CRF with a start date of May 2019 and a default date of November 2019, two months after the claim was commenced.

 

In the bundle from Lantern, there is two notices of assignment, Lending Stream to MMF which was allegedly sent to my previous address in 2017 and one from MMF to Lantern sent to my current address (been here since September 2015)

 

So the debt is showing twice by two different companies, how do I deal with this please Guys?

[dx100uk]

the duplicate CRA file entries are not a part of the claim and can be deal with that afterwards.

you need a defence for why you didn't pay the loan in the 1st place....

it doesn't appear to be SB'd, so you might be on a loser here, 

 

 

[vic synex]

My defence centred around not having any knowledge of a debt with Lantern. CPR requests went unanswered, no Default Notice, no annual statements. As far as I was concerned, the debt wasn't mine!

[dx100uk]

well you now know it is...

 

so you originally send a crp 31:14 to Moriarty and a CCA request to Lantern, neither of which gained any paperwork, but ofcourse they don't have to produce anything until it gets to the discloser stage, and as your DQ failed, (which might now be resolved at the hearing if the judge agrees) , you are back to hoping they don't have the signed agreement nor the default notice etc..

you might also request the return of your set aside fee too if the judge agrees request relief from sanctions pursuant to CPR 3.9

 

 

[vic synex]

Thanks so far everyone. 

 

The default date for the Lantern account is two months after they commenced proceedings, the other account doesn't show as defaulted. With the lack of DN and generic CCA how would I prove this to the Judge as it's a telephone hearing?

[Andyorch]

You file and serve your documents/statements by PDF not less than 48 hours pre telephone hearing

[vic synex]

Success, Judgement set aside. The Claimant didn't answer the phone for the conference call, Judge wasn't too happy.

 

Defence was struck out due to late return of DQ but after explaining the situation regarding my cancer treatment, the Judge accepted this as a valid reason for the late return.

 

The Judge will order the Claimant to re-issue the POC and when I receive it have 14 days to submit a defence.

 

Thanks for the help everyone.

[Andyorch]

 Comeback if they reissue the particulars.

 

Andy