** won ** Moriarty Law v MasterCoder (QuickQuid)

[Amethyst]

Actually first can you give me the date from the original claim form... does that match the agreement they have sent ?

under a regulated loan agreement with Casheuronet LLC T/A Quick Quid dated **/**/****

[MasterCoder]

Actually first can you give me the date from the original claim form... does that match the agreement they have sent ?
[/U]

Yes, the POC states that it is a 'regulated loan agreement' dated 24/01/2013 which is the date of the first, (and now hopefully incorrect), CCA.

They do not state 'fixed sum loan agreement'.

[Amethyst]

Lovely jubbly

[Amethyst]

2018-10-25 12_48_27-Start.png

Apart from the second paragraph making no sense ( is the amount at the end of the extended period £250 or £312 ? ) there's nothing saying further credit can be extended, thus it must have been a new agreement, restricted use credit etc.

"you will pay £250" should be "you will pay £312.50" and "a total of £312.50" should actually say "a total of £499.50" ( as it's the extra months interest on top of the original amount owed )

[MasterCoder]

Yes, I went back and doubled checked all of the agreement myself. Extension would be to just extend the repayment schedule but not actually change the amount.

Borrowing another £50 would have voided the old agreement and a new one would have formed that included the balance from the old loan plus the new borrowed amount.

Bang to rights I think

[Amethyst]

Hmm we don't mention a CCA request - did you send one?

[MasterCoder]

Yes, sorry, that's an oversight on my part.

I sent a CCA back in June which MMF responded to on the 28th June providing a copy of the agreement that I have scanned and uploaded.

When I received the letter before claim from Moriarty Law, I responded asking for the Agreement, (again), the default notice and the notice of assignment. I must add that they also state that they sent the same agreement and a statement of account; i've just found it tucked in the envelope, I don't know how I missed it!.

Interestingly though, it would seem that Lantern (MMF) are aware of the new loan that was taken out (or maybe they're just dense and don't actually realise it).

The statement shows "Amount of the principal loan advanced" as £300; the original loan plus the addition of the £50. They say the opening balance at the start of the period was £250

The transactions show the £250 credit and the additional £50 later.

In any case, I would argue that in order to give me more money, a new agreement would have had to have been in place since the original is for a fixed amount and NOT for the new amount.

EDIT: Stuck to the statement is a purported copy of the notice of assignment from Lantern - it doesn't have my address on, just an old email address that I don't have access to, but more to the point it is dated 4/1/2018 and not 20/12/2017 - I certainly didn't receive that notice. Nor have I received notice from QQ.

I don't know how i've missed these until now, I'm such an idiot. Sorry Amethyst

[Amethyst]

Ahhhh - can you chuck over a copy of all that please ( email if it's easier - admin@legalbeagles.info )

[MasterCoder]

Here you go Amethyst - i've redacted them too.

Thanks again!!

[Amethyst]

Okay good job you spotted those. Okay more amendments needed... just getting coffee and maths brain out ....

[MasterCoder]

Thank You Amethyst for all your help.

If I don't reply immediately it's because I've got to take my wife to hospital, she had surgery last week and they suspect an infection. As if I wasn't stressed enough already!!

Again, thank you for efforts and advice.

MC

[Amethyst]

1. The Defendant received the claim xxxxxxxx from the Northampton County Court Business Centre on 30th September 2018

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

3. This claim is for a high cost short term credit loan agreement dated 24/01/2013 between CashEuronet LLC t/as QuickQuid ("QuickQuid") and the Defendant regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

4: It is admitted that the Defendant entered into an agreement with QuickQuid on 24/01/2013 for a Fixed Sum Loan of £250 however it is denied that any terms of the agreement were breached and it is denied that there is any sum outstanding under the agreement. The Claimant is put to strict proof thereof.

5. In June 2018, the Defendant received a formal "letter before claim" from Moriarty Law (representing the Claimant). The Defendant responded within 30 days disputing the claim and requesting further documentation, specifically the agreement, default notice and notice of assignment.

6. Further, following receipt of the claim in this case the Defendant sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimant’s statement of case pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to the Claimants Solcitor ( Moriarty Law). He requested the Claimant provide copies of the Agreement, Default Notice and Notice of Assignment.

7. Further, in June 2018 the Defendant sent a formal request for a copy of the original agreement pursuant to s.77 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 ( Duty to give information to debtor under fixed-sum credit agreement ) to the Claimant. Failure to comply full with the request creates a situation whereby the agreement is unenforceable pursuant to s.77(4).

8. The Claimant has provided a number of documents in response to those requests; a copy of an agreement dated 24/01/2013; a copy of a notice of assignment; and a statement of account. No default or termination notice has been provided.

9. The Agreement provided by the Claimant is dated 24/01/2013 and details a fixed sum loan of £250 repayable over 3 installments with a total sum payable of £437.50.

10: The Statement of Account provided by the Claimant is dated 23/07/2018 and states the date of agreement as 24/01/2013 however details the Principal Loan advanced as £300, which would appear to be incorrect.

11: A further Statement of Account provided by the Claimant is dated 06/03/2018, however the Defendant has not previously received such a statement. The Statement of Account states that the Principal Loan Advanced is £300.

12. The Statement further states that on 24/01/2013 the 'Principal' advance was £250 and then a further 'Principal' of £50 was advanced dated 27/02/2013.

13. The copy of the agreement provided dated 24/01/2013 allows for a one month extension for repayment of the fixed sum loan, however does not contain any term relating to a further advance or any option to "rollover".

14. It is the Defendant's contention that the agreement concluded after one month with the full amount due having been settled in full.

15. It is the Defendant's contention that were a further advance of £50 obtained this would have been as part of a new agreement dated 24/02/2013 which served to settle the agreement dated 24/01/2013. The Defendant denies entering into any such agreement and the Claimant is put to strict proof thereof.

16. The Claimant is required to provide full details to demonstrate how the sum of £387 claimed has been arrived at and whether it is legally owed under the agreement dated 24/01/2013, which is denied.

17.It is denied that CashEuroNet LLC t/as QuickQuid 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. The Claimant is required to prove that the any Default notice relied upon complied with the requirements of s88(4A) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and that the notice was in the prescribed form as required by The Consumer Credit Enforcement Default and Termination Notice Regulations 1983.

18. No notice of termination was received by the Defendant.

19. The Claimant has not provide any copy of a Default Notice or Notice of Termination to the Defendant.

20. 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.

21.It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.

[Amethyst]

Thank You Amethyst for all your help.

If I don't reply immediately it's because I've got to take my wife to hospital, she had surgery last week and they suspect an infection. As if I wasn't stressed enough already!!

Again, thank you for efforts and advice.

MC

I hope things are okay with your Wife and the hospital have managed to get any infection under control xxx Looking after her is far more important than this so just get it filed when you can and then you will be able to relax and concentrate on helping her get better xxx

[MasterCoder]

Thank you Amethyst for your help on this. I am back with my wife this morning at the hospital but will lodge this defence when I get home. It is excellent work you've done there and I cannot thank you enough for the time and effort you've put into it.

I can't see how they can argue against this. Though I suppose they could just produce another agreement.

Let's see what they come back with.

[Amethyst]

No worries xxx
Yes they could produce another agreement and amend the claim. I think it's more likely they'll either ditch it or you'll have opportunity to settle the claim for a sensible % discount to just get it out of your hair. See how things go in any case.
Love to your wife xxxx