Tweet
Hi, there is clearly a lot of great information on the forum and I spent a few hours putting our defense on moneyclaim.gov.uk (see below), I have received a letter from Lowell Solicitors which I've uploaded along with what looks clearly like it's been written to look like it's from BT (no letterhead etc.), is it fake? I'm assuming although I don't have a record this debt is from an very old issue with BT which I added to the defense, I'd even go as far as saying the debt is older than 6 years but I'm not sure how I find out.
This is a fabulous website and I have tried to avoid getting in touch because there is so much information already available, but I would welcome any advise as to what to do next. I think I'm close to just paying up.
Thank you in advance!
The Defendant received the claim ….. from the County Court
Business Centre in Northampton on ….
Each and every allegation in the Claimant (“Lowell”) statement of
case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.
This claim appears to be for a telecommunications agreement with
BT Plc.
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 BT PlC to Lowell Portfolio on …. The
Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.
On the …. the Defendant sent a request for inspection of
documents mentioned in the claimant’s statement of case under
Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to Lowell Solicitors. The Defendant
requested the Claimant provide copies of the agreement with BT
PLC, Notice of Assignment and Deed of Assignment.
The Claimant has not sent any of these documents to me.
In that letter the Defendant also asked the Claimant if we may
agree to extend the time period allowed for filing of my defence
pending receipt of documents (as allowed under CPR 15.5), but they
have failed to respond at all.
On or about 2012/2013 the Defendant has entered into an agreement
with BT PLC for the provision of broadband services.
The Defendant admits entering into an agreement with BT PLC but
for the reasons set out in this Defence, denies that she is liable
to pay the Claimant as alleged or at all.
From the start of the agreement, the Defendant experienced several
hours each day where a broadband service was unavailable, causing
the Defendant several hours of lost business on a weekly basis.
Over several months, the Defendant contacted BT PLC on numerous
occasions to address the issue of no broadband service. Various
troubleshooting issues were carried out including visits to the
Defendant’s office from BT engineers but were unable to diagnose
and/or resolve the broadband issue.
By reason of the matters stated above, performance of the contract
became impossible on the part of BT PLC and the Defendant was
discharged from further performance of the contract by mutual
agreement.
In the alternative, BT PLC were in fundamental breach of the
contract in that they were unable to provide any reliable
broadband service at the Defendant’s premises. Accordingly, the
Defendant accepted BT PLC’s fundamental breach, notified them of
this and no further payments were made.
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.
This is a fabulous website and I have tried to avoid getting in touch because there is so much information already available, but I would welcome any advise as to what to do next. I think I'm close to just paying up.
Thank you in advance!
The Defendant received the claim ….. from the County Court
Business Centre in Northampton on ….
Each and every allegation in the Claimant (“Lowell”) statement of
case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.
This claim appears to be for a telecommunications agreement with
BT Plc.
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 BT PlC to Lowell Portfolio on …. The
Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.
On the …. the Defendant sent a request for inspection of
documents mentioned in the claimant’s statement of case under
Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to Lowell Solicitors. The Defendant
requested the Claimant provide copies of the agreement with BT
PLC, Notice of Assignment and Deed of Assignment.
The Claimant has not sent any of these documents to me.
In that letter the Defendant also asked the Claimant if we may
agree to extend the time period allowed for filing of my defence
pending receipt of documents (as allowed under CPR 15.5), but they
have failed to respond at all.
On or about 2012/2013 the Defendant has entered into an agreement
with BT PLC for the provision of broadband services.
The Defendant admits entering into an agreement with BT PLC but
for the reasons set out in this Defence, denies that she is liable
to pay the Claimant as alleged or at all.
From the start of the agreement, the Defendant experienced several
hours each day where a broadband service was unavailable, causing
the Defendant several hours of lost business on a weekly basis.
Over several months, the Defendant contacted BT PLC on numerous
occasions to address the issue of no broadband service. Various
troubleshooting issues were carried out including visits to the
Defendant’s office from BT engineers but were unable to diagnose
and/or resolve the broadband issue.
By reason of the matters stated above, performance of the contract
became impossible on the part of BT PLC and the Defendant was
discharged from further performance of the contract by mutual
agreement.
In the alternative, BT PLC were in fundamental breach of the
contract in that they were unable to provide any reliable
broadband service at the Defendant’s premises. Accordingly, the
Defendant accepted BT PLC’s fundamental breach, notified them of
this and no further payments were made.
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.
Comment