MCOL claim from Cabot/Mortimer Clarke

[foobar]

My immediate concern is that there is an application hearing listed for (a week Friday (25th)) next Monday (21st) on the request under 31.14, and that may need to be withdrawn. If the case proceeds to trial, I am very much not in a position to pay any judgment on the original amount within 30 days, let alone any additional costs.

Re: the DQ, do I need to do anything other than address this in the complaint to the Court Manager, or do I need to raise it with anyone else? Do I need to ask for one to be sent and/or the trial date vacated? Do I need to complete and send one anyway?

[echat11]

My immediate concern is that there is an application hearing listed for a week Friday (25th) on the request under 31.14, and that may need to be withdrawn. If the case proceeds to trial, I am very much not in a position to pay any judgment on the original amount within 30 days, let alone any additional costs.

Re: the DQ, do I need to do anything other than address this in the complaint to the Court Manager, or do I need to raise it with anyone else? Do I need to ask for one to be sent and/or the trial date vacated? Do I need to complete and send one anyway?

a) My immediate concern is that there is an application hearing listed for a week Friday (25th) on the request under 31.14, and that may need to be withdrawn.

Yes, email the Court and the Creditors solicitors withdrawing the application as they have now complied with the request.

b) Re: the DQ, do I need to do anything other than address this in the complaint to the Court Manager, or do I need to raise it with anyone else?

It's an Admin issue, so the Court Manager can deal with it, but you should have lodged a Complaint months and months ago.
Raising a Complaint now, with the Hearing so close, I'm not sure what they will do. No you don't need to raise it with anyone else.

c) Do I need to ask for one to be sent and/or the trial date vacated? Do I need to complete and send one anyway

You'll have to see what they say before any of those questions can be answered.

[foobar]

It's an Admin issue, so the Court Manager can deal with it, but you should have lodged a Complaint months and months ago

Are we getting confused over the timescale? This was barely a couple of weeks ago. When I was following up with the listings team originally, the staff member did say in relation to the trial listing that they "had to perform some gymnastics to fit it in", so it does seem like things have been moving a little quicker than usual at the local court.

I have called the court to ask about both this and the application. The confirm that they have no record of DQs being requested or received, and that they referred my original request for an explanation to a judge (who then just listed the application and gave no further explanation). They have told me that both the initial decision to directly allocate and list for trial and the subsequent listing of the application are judicial actions, not admin issues, and there would be nothing they could do, other than refer any queries to a judge. I take from this that there's no point in me pursuing a complaint via the Court Manager.

For the application, the court have suggested that if I just ask for it to be withdrawn it would probably go before a judge anyway, and I'm concerned that there may be costs implications there. They suggested agreeing a consent order to withdraw the application, and there would be no fee because the application itself has already been "paid for" (via HWF). Which of these two would you suggest?

In the meantime, I'm firing up the scanner for the documents to see if there is anything I'm missing.

[echat11]

Are we getting confused over the timescale? This was barely a couple of weeks ago. When I was following up with the listings team originally, the staff member did say in relation to the trial listing that they "had to perform some gymnastics to fit it in", so it does seem like things have been moving a little quicker than usual at the local court.

I have called the court to ask about both this and the application. The confirm that they have no record of DQs being requested or received, and that they referred my original request for an explanation to a judge (who then just listed the application and gave no further explanation). They have told me that both the initial decision to directly allocate and list for trial and the subsequent listing of the application are judicial actions, not admin issues, and there would be nothing they could do, other than refer any queries to a judge. I take from this that there's no point in me pursuing a complaint via the Court Manager.

For the application, the court have suggested that if I just ask for it to be withdrawn it would probably go before a judge anyway, and I'm concerned that there may be costs implications there. They suggested agreeing a consent order to withdraw the application, and there would be no fee because the application itself has already been "paid for" (via HWF). Which of these two would you suggest?

In the meantime, I'm firing up the scanner for the documents to see if there is anything I'm missing.

a) Are we getting confused over the timescale? This was barely a couple of weeks ago. When I was following up with the listings team originally, the staff member did say in relation to the trial listing that they "had to perform some gymnastics to fit it in", so it does seem like things have been moving a little quicker than usual at the local court.

I'm concerned that you have a Hearing in a few weeks. If you can't get it relisted, then you need to prepare for it.

b) I have called the court to ask about both this and the application. The confirm that they have no record of DQs being requested or received, and that they referred my original request for an explanation to a judge (who then just listed the application and gave no further explanation). They have told me that both the initial decision to directly allocate and list for trial and the subsequent listing of the application are judicial actions, not admin issues, and there would be nothing they could do, other than refer any queries to a judge. I take from this that there's no point in me pursuing a complaint via the Court Manager.

Admin sends DQ's to the parties not the Judge. Something is clearly wrong, as to why they weren't sent out.
If the DQ's are not received back from the parties, then the Court may give any direction it considers appropriate.

c) For the application, the court have suggested that if I just ask for it to be withdrawn it would probably go before a judge anyway, and I'm concerned that there may be costs implications there. They suggested agreeing a consent order to withdraw the application, and there would be no fee because the application itself has already been "paid for" (via HWF). Which of these two would you suggest?

Consent seems to be the best approach as your worried that there maybe cost implications.

[foobar]

Wednesday: Wrote to MC including a draft consent order along the lines of "1. Application withdrawn. 2. No order as to costs."
Thursday am: No response received, wrote to court directly.
Thursday pm: I get an odd response from MC (attached redacted), thanking me for withdrawing my defense and admitting the claim (!?), and that they expect the hearing to go ahead (put a pin in this).
Friday am: Called court for update, was told judge was awaiting a reponse from claimant.
Friday pm: Got email from court saying they hadn't responded so the judge declined to withdraw.

Hearing was this morning. The judge opened with a summary of where he thought the case was, then proceeded to hit about half the talking points I'd prepared unprompted, tearing into the solicitor over the delay of 5 months, then asking if I thought that was a fair summary. "In stronger language than I'd have used, but yes, sir." He asked me why I was withdrawing the application, I told them that they'd finally complied with my request, and that there was no point ordering them to do what they'd already done. Judge agreed, and said he would enter an order along the lines of "1. Application withdrawn. 2. No order as to costs." I was given leave to file an amended defence, but the trial date was going to stay.

Remember that pin? Turns out that MC had made an application to strike out my defence and apply for summary judgment, and had not agreed to withdraw my application because they were seeking to use the hearing to get this application heard. I don't know the details of this, and the judge wouldn't disclose the details, other than that it had been made, but that it had not been listed and on that basis he wasn't going to deal with it. Judge directed that it be listed for the same time as the trial and that the hearing extended to accommodate it. I expect I'll see it in the coming days.

So now I have until 4pm Friday to pull together the bundle, statements, and an amended defence.

[foobar]

Attached are some of the documents from the bundle of documents that I received last week. I've not included all the card statements they sent, but I've included:

1. The cover letter, which for some reason is dated for the end of August. They say they have "enclosed a copy of [my] Defence for ease of reference." (They have not.) They claim that my "application for Strike out" was misguided because "you made no application for disclosure" (apart from the one they're referring to), and "our client is not in default of any orders in that regard" (because none were made, that's what the hearing was originally for).
2. The original agreement, reconstituted, with timestamp for signatures for both parties and IP address.
3. An updated agreement, redacted only to remove the case number at the bottom. The first page makes clear there is no personalised information, it contains no figures other than standard fees and the worked examples.
4. Another updated agreement, again with no personalised information.
5. The default notice, dated Christmas Day (what a lovely gift). Do the public holidays need to be accounted for in the deadline they give, and have they been?
6. The assignment notices from both ends, with an "account number" that does not appear to resemble either the card number or the reference that Cabot subsequently assigned to it.

Do I have anything to go on in any of these documents?