Court Claim Lowell (T-mobile) -

[gary2176]

08/09/2017

Particulars of Claim: Please type out in full excluding names/account numbers:
1) the defendant entered into an agreement with Vodafone under the account reference ********* ('the Agreement)
2)The Defendant failed to maintain the required payments and the service was terminated.
3)the agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 28/08/2015 and notice given to the defendant
4)despite repeated requests for payment the sum of £395.35 remains due and outstanding
And the Claimant claims
a)the said sum of £395.35
b)interest pursuant to s69 county courts act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.118, but limited to one year, being £31.63
c) costs

request sent for CCA and CPR 31.14 no agreement was sent to me but they did reply with 3 copies of letters sent from lowell saying i owe the amount please call to discuss repayment etc

[Amethyst]

Re: Court Claim Lowell (T-mobile) -

Hi Gary

It sounds like you are at the stage of filing your defence.

Do you happen to know if the agreement with TMobile/Vodafone included purchase of a phone/handset ? or was just an airtime contract ?
Any idea when the account was opened, or when you defaulted on it?

Example Defence is a good starting point for the defence.

[gary2176]

Re: Court Claim Lowell (T-mobile) -

Hi Amethst yes getting ready to fill in defence which is bit im asking for advice on,

To be honest i dont even remeber having a t-mobile account but whenever i have taken out a mobile contract it has always been phone and sim card package usally with so many minutes txts free etc.

i have checked noodle credit report as well as call credit experian and checkmyfile to see if this t-mobile account shows on any of them even in closed section and its doesnt and without some sort of paperwork im unable to determine when the ccount was originally opened or defaulted on

[jeff silver]

Re: Court Claim Lowell (T-mobile) -

The example defence is basically asking the court to strike out their case unless they provide a copy of the agreement you had with T-mobile. I've also just received a claim from lowlife and although I still have a copy of the agreement with t-mobile I wrote to lowlife a letter of request under CPR 31.5 as I'm not sure if they mean the original agreement or the one made when I upgraded the phone. Lowlife have written in response saying that it was not a consumer credit agreement and therefore they do not have to provide a copy - meaning I can now file either the example defence asking for the case to be struck out unless I get a copy of the agreement or I can file a full defence (which in my case is based on the phone being unfit for purpose and the unilateral increase in the monthly charge by T-Mobie entitled me to cancel the agreement without incurring any early termination penalties).

[gary2176]

Re: Court Claim Lowell (T-mobile) -

Ive sent this as my defence i hope its ok and i havent done anything wrong its basically the template with some bits removed





to whom it may concern



I am filing my defence on the above claim due to my money-claim online password not working since the start of this claim


In the Northampton County Court Business Centre:


Lowell Portfolio ltd


and

Claim No: [XXXXXXX]

I received the claim [XXXXXXX] from the Northampton County Court Business Centre on 12/9/17

Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

This claim appears to be for a mobile phone agreement .

It is denied that the Defendant has entered into agreement with T-Mobile for provision of credit.

The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate information to enable me to properly assess my position with regards the claim.

The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.


The Claimants statement of case states that the account was assigned from T-mobile to Lowell Portfolio Ltd on 28/08/15. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.

It is denied that T-mobile served any Default notice on the Defendant pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served upon the Defendant.

On the 18/09/17 I sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimant’s statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to Lowell Solicitors Limited. I requested the Claimant provide copies of the Agreement, Default Notice and Notice of Assignment.

Lowell solicitors Limited has not sent any of these documents to me.

On the 18/09/17 I sent a formal request for a copy of the original agreement to Lowell Portfolio ltd pursuant to section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1 fee.

The Claimant has failed to comply with s 78 Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s 78 Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.


Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation. Therefore, it is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed.
I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case else the Claim should stand struck out.

In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment.

It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.
Statement of Truth
The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true.
Signed

[jeff silver]

Re: Court Claim Lowell (T-mobile) -

It seems fine except most mobile phone contracts are not consumer credit agreements (generally they are contracts for services not credit) and therefore any aspects of the defence relating to the Consumer credit Act won't be of any effect however the main points of the defence look ok to me - i.e. the claimant has given you enough information to prepare a defence.

Your point about the password is interesting because I cut and pasted my password 5 times before it worked on the MCOL site. - it can be a real nightmare logging into the site sometimes.