Tweet
Evening All
I was hoping you can help advice a very good friend of mine on the next steps please. I believe I have gone as far as I can and now require inputt from your good selves. In a nutshell a claim form was received from Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd via Howard Cohen and Co on 1 March 2016. On receipt I advised my friend to send a request under Section 77-79 CCA with a £1 postal order to HPH2. The claim relates to an old Barclaycard for less £5k but once interest hasbeen added Claimant is lookingfor £5,643.30.
On 17th March a reponse was received from Robinson Way acknowleging requesting and advised that the account is now with the client's solicitor who have issued a County Court claim and all documents will be requested as part of the process and returned the £1 fee. We immediately wrote back to them reminding them of their obligations under CCA and at the same time made a fresh request to their Solicitors.
As time went on with no response from both sides we filed our defense denying the claim and ask them to prove the debt with evidence of agreement etc.
1st April acknowledgement of defece was received from the Courts and stated where the claimant wishes to proceed
after receiving a copy of defence they must contact the court within 28 days after that period has elaspsed the claimwill be stayed and the only action the claimantcan take will be to apply to a judge for an order lifting the stay.
Nothing more was heard of this albeit having to complete the required directions questionnaire which was duly completed.
On 29th June out of the blue a general form of judgement or order was received from the court asking the claimant to file and serve fully particularised POC which attached copies of all documents they rely on in support of their claim and a statement of account showing when the alleged debt was accrued and when last payment was made. In default claim to stand struck out without further notice. This had to be done by 4pm 22nd July.
A day before the deadline Howard Cohen complied with the order and my friend received an amended POC. The information in the POC totally wrong and their key defense was quoting "Carey v HSBC" and stating they have complied with s78 by providing a reconstituted versionof the executed agreement. However, this is far from the truth as the version provided is ineligible and states my friends current address rather the old address which has been written typed onto the first page. Furthermore the said reconstruted agreement does not show the credit limit, the number of frequency of repayments and interest rates. The date f when the card was taken out was wrong etc.
Following receipt of the claimants amended claim I then proceeded to ring the court to find out what was going on as I belive the case was stayed and when was this lifted.
I followed this up with an email stating "Dear Sir/Madam
Following on from my telephone call this morning, I am writing to put my concerns on record in relation to the above case.
My understanding was that this case was stayed following a letter from HM Courts & Tribunals Service to the Claimant dated 1st April 2016.
Can you please confirm when the Claimant made an application to the District Judge for an order lifting the stay and why was I not aware of this.
Secondly, an order was made before Deputy District Judge Duncan on the 29th June requesting the claimant to file and serve fully particularised particulars of claim by the 22nd July. The Claimant had failed to follow the directive issued by the Deputy District Judge Duncan. The Claimant has not provided any concrete evidence as required merely the Claimant had used this opportunity to amend it's initial claim.
Finally, can I also point out at this stage that Claimant is yet to comply with sections 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act. This information was requested in writing and sent to Claimant on 8th March 2016.
I am now calling on the Deputy District Judge to strike out the claimant's claim.
I look forward to hearing from you in due course."
On 3rd AUGUST further direction order was received rom the court lsting the case for hearing on 16th Sept the claimant should pay the fee by the 5th August and other directions including when witness statements should be submitted etc.
I rang the Court to find out what happened to my email of the 2nd and they confirmed that it was with the judge and the initial dirction and earing had been set before receipt of my email.
Now my question is firstly, has the correct procedures been followed by the court here. Secondly, do we have a right to put in an amended defence in light of the claimants amended POC.
Any help comments will be much appreciated as we are running out of time pronto.
Kind Regards
NMNP
I was hoping you can help advice a very good friend of mine on the next steps please. I believe I have gone as far as I can and now require inputt from your good selves. In a nutshell a claim form was received from Hoist Portfolio Holdings 2 Ltd via Howard Cohen and Co on 1 March 2016. On receipt I advised my friend to send a request under Section 77-79 CCA with a £1 postal order to HPH2. The claim relates to an old Barclaycard for less £5k but once interest hasbeen added Claimant is lookingfor £5,643.30.
On 17th March a reponse was received from Robinson Way acknowleging requesting and advised that the account is now with the client's solicitor who have issued a County Court claim and all documents will be requested as part of the process and returned the £1 fee. We immediately wrote back to them reminding them of their obligations under CCA and at the same time made a fresh request to their Solicitors.
As time went on with no response from both sides we filed our defense denying the claim and ask them to prove the debt with evidence of agreement etc.
1st April acknowledgement of defece was received from the Courts and stated where the claimant wishes to proceed
after receiving a copy of defence they must contact the court within 28 days after that period has elaspsed the claimwill be stayed and the only action the claimantcan take will be to apply to a judge for an order lifting the stay.
Nothing more was heard of this albeit having to complete the required directions questionnaire which was duly completed.
On 29th June out of the blue a general form of judgement or order was received from the court asking the claimant to file and serve fully particularised POC which attached copies of all documents they rely on in support of their claim and a statement of account showing when the alleged debt was accrued and when last payment was made. In default claim to stand struck out without further notice. This had to be done by 4pm 22nd July.
A day before the deadline Howard Cohen complied with the order and my friend received an amended POC. The information in the POC totally wrong and their key defense was quoting "Carey v HSBC" and stating they have complied with s78 by providing a reconstituted versionof the executed agreement. However, this is far from the truth as the version provided is ineligible and states my friends current address rather the old address which has been written typed onto the first page. Furthermore the said reconstruted agreement does not show the credit limit, the number of frequency of repayments and interest rates. The date f when the card was taken out was wrong etc.
Following receipt of the claimants amended claim I then proceeded to ring the court to find out what was going on as I belive the case was stayed and when was this lifted.
I followed this up with an email stating "Dear Sir/Madam
Following on from my telephone call this morning, I am writing to put my concerns on record in relation to the above case.
My understanding was that this case was stayed following a letter from HM Courts & Tribunals Service to the Claimant dated 1st April 2016.
Can you please confirm when the Claimant made an application to the District Judge for an order lifting the stay and why was I not aware of this.
Secondly, an order was made before Deputy District Judge Duncan on the 29th June requesting the claimant to file and serve fully particularised particulars of claim by the 22nd July. The Claimant had failed to follow the directive issued by the Deputy District Judge Duncan. The Claimant has not provided any concrete evidence as required merely the Claimant had used this opportunity to amend it's initial claim.
Finally, can I also point out at this stage that Claimant is yet to comply with sections 77-79 of the Consumer Credit Act. This information was requested in writing and sent to Claimant on 8th March 2016.
I am now calling on the Deputy District Judge to strike out the claimant's claim.
I look forward to hearing from you in due course."
On 3rd AUGUST further direction order was received rom the court lsting the case for hearing on 16th Sept the claimant should pay the fee by the 5th August and other directions including when witness statements should be submitted etc.
I rang the Court to find out what happened to my email of the 2nd and they confirmed that it was with the judge and the initial dirction and earing had been set before receipt of my email.
Now my question is firstly, has the correct procedures been followed by the court here. Secondly, do we have a right to put in an amended defence in light of the claimants amended POC.
Any help comments will be much appreciated as we are running out of time pronto.
Kind Regards
NMNP
Comment