Claimant threatening summary judgement on stayed ccj claim. Should I reply?

[peterfranks]

next is their witness statement

[peterfranks]

then their proof of default and proof of assignment

[peterfranks]

Finally just a letter from them claiming that after 18 months they had sent me all the docs my defence had asked for

[peterfranks]

So that's all. As I mentioned earlier I cannot access my original defence since MCOL changed their system and because it has been so long I have misplaced my original receipts for proof of postage for my CCA defence claim.

Thanks for taking the time to help and as usual any assistance is truly appreciated.

[Amethyst]

Any assignment from newday to idem ? They seem to wash over that. Any evidence at all that idem owned the debt or had the right to assign it to Arrow ?

also the entry on the screenshot doesn't say the default notice was valid ( was it 14 days, was it only arrears etc ) so they should have to provide at least a recon.

What is the agreement they have sent ? Is it actually for an aqua credit card for the right year etc ?

[peterfranks]

Hi Amethyst thanks for taking a look!

No assignment from newday to idem .. only the one I attached which is from arrow saying in big bold letters notice of assignment, but it is from themselves saying that idem assigned the debt to them.

the original agreement they sent is a valid copy of the cc agreement with my signature from 2013.

As for the default notice apart from the screenshot they say is from idem .. they have sent nothing else.

Their whole defence statement plus exhibits is the size of the Mueller report!(, but I've been through it, attached the salient documents. and can not find any assignments not written by themselves or any default apart from the screenshot. The only valid document they have sent is a copy of the original credit card agreement.

[Amethyst]

Ok - Newday should have been the ones to issue the default notice so if that screenshot is Idems - well there's no evidence Newday issued a default notice, nor that if they did it was compliant, and no evidence that Newday legally assigned the debt to Idem - thus no evidence Idem had any right to assign the debt to Arrow.

Do they plead the date it was assigned to idem ? And how does that compare with the date of default ?

[peterfranks]

They say in their witness statement "4.....default notice sent to defendant on 10.09.2014.......the debt was sold to idem securities limited a screenshot of which is enclosed exhibit x"

this corresponds with the screenshot which says sent 11.09.2014. However it is impossible to make out who the screenshot is from..even with the colour version i have

[Amethyst]

And point out to court they have had two years to get their house in order and this is the first documents you have received

[peterfranks]

Thanks again Amethyst

So how should I approach my defence? Do I have a defence??? What should I use as exhibits?

[peterfranks]

Good morning!
I ve spent the bank holiday going over my defence/witness statement and could really use some help translating it into some legalese.

1.Claimant failed to respond to my original defence and claim was stayed.
2. After nearly two years they respond, but with inadequate documentation.
3. They provide no evidence of original assignment of debt from original creditor (newday) to idem securities.
4. They provided only a statement from themselves saying Idem securities had assigned the debt to them, not an original letter from idem.
5. They only provided a difficult to read computer screen printout claiming it as proof Newday issued me with a default notice.

Can anyone please give me a hand to script this into a legal sounding defence??? Thanks a lot

[jaguarsuk]

Good morning!
I ve spent the bank holiday going over my defence/witness statement and could really use some help translating it into some legalese.
1.Claimant failed to respond to my original defence and claim was stayed.
2. After nearly two years they respond, but with inadequate documentation.
3. They provide no evidence of original assignment of debt from original creditor (newday) to idem securities.
4. They provided only a statement from themselves saying Idem securities had assigned the debt to them, not an original letter from idem.
5. They only provided a difficult to read computer screen printout claiming it as proof Newday issued me with a default notice.
Can anyone please give me a hand to script this into a legal sounding defence??? Thanks a lot

Just going to lunch, but will knock something together this afternoon.

[jaguarsuk]

Okay, so you submit a Witness Statement not another defence, but try this on for size...

1. I <<YOU>> of <<YOUR ADDRESSS>> am the defendant in these proceedings as Litigant in Person.
2. On <<DATE>> the claimant issued a claim through money claim online and the particulars of claim were insufficient to allow me to properly asses my position.
3. I made a request under CPR 31.14 to inspect the documents mentioned in the Particulars of Claim served as a well as a request for documentation under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
4. The claimant failed comply with either request and I filed a defence as such within the deadline of the court.
5. The claim was subsequently stayed.
6. On filing of this application the claimant has now served some documentation, but in my opinion this falls far short of their requirement in these proceedings.
7. I disagree with multiple points in the claimants witness statement and will now address those individual points using their numbered paragraph.
8. Paragraph 4 is denied,

1. The claimant claims issue of a letter on 10/09/2014 entitled “0013 COLLTRS” marked NY02 to be issue of the default notice, but without a copy of “0013 COLLTRS” we only have the word of claimants counsel it was a default notice.
2. For the avoidance of doubt it is denied the letter in NY02 is for a default notice, but if it were the case the screenshot showed the issue date of a default notice it does not show the default notice was compliant with the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
3. If a default notice was issued, it should have been issued by New Day Limited (‘New Day’), however the illegibility of NY02 makes it impossible to determine whom sent “0013 COLLTRS.”
4. I assert that the issue of “0013 COLLTRS” is in fact the issue of a debt collector’s letter by Idem Capital Securities Limited (‘Idem’) and not a default notice by New Day. And in any event the claimant is unable to evidence any default notice compliant with the Consumer Credit Act 1974 was served.

1. Paragraph 5 is denied,

1. I do not recall receiving any such letters as those marked NY03 or any other notice of assignment.
2. The claimant has failed to evidence a notice of assignment from New Day of the alleged debt being assigned to Idem.
3. The claimant has failed to evidence a notice of assignment from Idem of the alleged debt being assigned to them.
4. The Law of Property Act 1925 s.136 specifically talks about the assignor’s obligations and the claimant has failed to provide any evidence from either assignor. Producing a notice of assignment as assignee does not alone satisfy that assignment was lawful as the claimant’s counsel asserts and counsel has failed evidence the assignment from New Day as an assignor to Idem, and then further with Idem as an assignor to the claimant.
5. It is for these reasons I believe the claimant has no right to bring a claim as they cannot prove themselves to be the lawful owners of the alleged debt.

1. Paragraph 13 is denied for the reasons set out in this Witness Statement in point 4 and had the claimant provided documentation at that time I would have been in a position to raise the points 8 and 9 of this Witness Statement.
2. Paragraph 15 is denied, Pursuant to CPR 7E 5.2 (2) the claimant had every opportunity to avail me of a detailed Particulars of Claim and in failing to, along with failing to evidence their claim for two years I believe their conduct to have been unreasonable pursuant to CPR 27.14.
3. Paragraph 16 is denied for the reasons set out in paragraph 9 of this Witness Statement and I challenge counsel for the claimant to evidence that Notice of Assignment was “left at the last-known place of abode or business in the United Kingdom” pursuant to the Law of Property Act s.196(3).
4. Paragraph 17 is denied for the reasons set out in paragraph 8 of this Witness Statement.
5. Paragraph 18 is neither admitted or denied, but shows the deliberately unreasonable conduct of the claimant in this claim.
6. Paragraph 19 is fervently denied, for the reasons set out in paragraph 9 of this Witness Statement the claimant has failed to provide sufficient evidence to the court of the chain of assignment between New Day, Idem and finally the Claimant or that a default notice compliant with the Consumer Credit Act 1874 was ever issued.
7. I respectfully request that the stay on the claim be lifted, that the claim is dismissed and that an order be made that the claimant pay me costs due to their unreasonable conduct in the claim pursuant to CPR 27.14.
8. In the event the stay on the claim is lifted and the court adjudges the matter be heard at trial I respectfully request leave to amend my defence and that the claimant bear the cost of the amendment given their deliberately obstructive stance as highlighted in paragraph 14 of this Witness Statement.

It'll need formatting per the Witness Statements guide.

Para 12 is potentially a trap for their counsel, I think she might have quoted the wrong part of the law and if so it puts dents in her credibility. In court when questioned as to how it was "left" if she responds that it was posted to you, then you say "But you quoted s.196 paragraph 3 which states the notice was left, not paragraph 4 relating to the posting of notices. Are you sure there aren't other things you have gotten slightly wrong within your statement?"

If she comes up with some crock about an agent leaving it, just move on.

[peterfranks]

What a gargantuan effort Jaguarsuk..... thank you so so much!

I will read it carefully tonight ..format it then post tomorrow for you to check.

the case is in court in two weeks time and I dont expect the claimant to have a representative present. But if they do, what should I expect?

Also should I use their relevant documents as also my exhibits?

Thanks again!

[jaguarsuk]

Yeah, for some reason the site has messed about the the numbers when copying from word.

I’ll answer the other Q’s in more detail tomorrow.