Arrow Global Court Claim

[The Debt Star]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

I assume they have absolute assignment as they are bringing the claim.

that must be the case, yes. request a copy of the notice of assignment. is it a Part 18 request he needs to submit?? isn't there a template letter for a part 18 request for info? or is it too late that?

Shooeys are mainstream so not a dodgy lowlife cowboy firm of so-called sols. they will play by the book.

[Maintopman]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

Thanks very much, both of you. I shall ring Shoosmiths. Or, I do have their e-mail address; perhaps I should keep it in writing.

The agreement they mentioned in the claim refers, I think, to the original one between me and Barclaycard.

Ah – well, I thought they WERE claiming to be the creditor since Shoosmiths wrote that "…our client Arrow Global has purchased the above debt from your original lender Barclays plc…" But perhaps they kind of only purchased an assignment, leaving Barclays still as the legal creditor. Is this likely?

[The Debt Star]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

I shouldsay that barcrap are the legal owner of the debt and Arrow are their agents instructing Shoosmiths. ie Barcrap are the ones that are trying to sue you.

[Maintopman]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

Arrow are the claimant. If they are not in fact the creditor, should the claimant not have been Barclaycard? Also, they are supposed to have "purchased the above debt from my original lender Barclays". I am getting confused as to who is what now!

[Nibbler]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

I shouldsay that barcrap are the legal owner of the debt and Arrow are their agents instructing Shoosmiths. ie Barcrap are the ones that are trying to sue you.

If the debt was still owned by Barclaycard or it was an equitable assignment, then Barclays would need to be named jointly as creditor/claimant on the POC as far as I remember?

They don't seem to be?

And as Shoosmiths state that: "…our client Arrow Global has purchased the above debt from your original lender Barclays plc…"

I can only assume that it is a full legal assignment.

[Maintopman]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

I certainly thought exactly that, though as quoted above, Arrow themselves now say in a letter "We do not accept that we are the creditor as envisaged by the above statute". And Amethyst agrees with that too: "They are indeed not the creditor and I assume they have absolute assignment as they are bringing the claim".

I sure am no solicitor!

[Nibbler]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

I HATE all the lack of clarity that goes with assignment of debt.

Not sure, but maybe there is some confusion as to who is legally considered the creditor with regards to:

(1) action under the court claim:

(2) duties to supply information under the CCA request.

On (1), I can only see that Arrow can now be the legal 'creditor'. If they were not, Barclaycard would need to be named as a joint party to the action surely?

But on (2), the definitions of who is the creditor when it comes to supplying info on the CCA request is not so straight forward.

From the OFT recently:

"For there to be a valid request, it must be made to the 'creditor' or the
'owner', and it is on the 'creditor' or the 'owner' that the duty to comply
with the request lies. The definition of these terms is to be found in
section 189(1) of the Act. It clearly includes the creditor or owner who
enters into the agreement and also anyone to whom the rights and
duties under that agreement have passed by operation of law. In the
OFT's view, where there has been a novation (that is, the debtor or hirer
has agreed that a new party will be substituted as creditor or owner for
all purposes under the agreement) the new party is the creditor or the
owner. It is further the OFT's view that, giving the definition of the
terms a purposive construction and one which is most likely to assist the
consumer, the 'creditor' or 'owner' includes an assignee of only the rights
under the contract. Thus, the OFT considers that the 'creditor' in
sections 77 and 78 and the 'owner' in section 79 includes a person who
has merely bought the debts under the agreement."

[Maintopman]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

Thanks very much for that, Nibbler.

I shall phone their solicitors to arrange for an extension of the defence and also write a 31.14 request.

[Maintopman]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

No, I talked to Shoosmiths and they won't play ball with an extension for defence filing. I shall just have to send something in.

[pt2537]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

Ok

if they will not agree an extension of time , then you need to apply to the court on an N244. If it is simply because you need disclosure and the Claimant is failing in their duty, then the application should be made for

1) an order compelling disclosure

2) an order setting the time frame for filing the defence.

That would be the way forward
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE be careful

Part 18 template letters that float around on the CAG arent worth a toss

I did a thread over there on part 18 and how to use it properly

If a part 18 request is not valid it cannot be enforced in court and is as much use as a chocolate fire gaurd

[Amethyst]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

Ok, well done for speaking to them.

So at the moment you are unable to effectivly defend as 1) you have no copy of the credit agreement 2) you have no evidence that arrow global are entitled to claim the debt 3) you have asked them for both and they havent supplied either 4) they;ve refused an extension under CPR 15.5


However you recognise the account number for the barclaycard and you acknowledge you have a debt outstanding, you just want to make sure the debt is repaid to the right people and the right amount, which you are currently unable to ascertain.

So basically that would be your defence for the moment to hold the case and get an order for disclosure.

Don;t be too technical with it, if you have a go, then we can help you from there.

A defence should respond to the POC. If you read the bits of the CPR relating to defences it gves a good guide.

Just be aware that if disclosure is ordered and the assignment and agreement turn out to be kosher it may add an additional amount of costs to the amount you have to repay under the CCJ, as opposed to admitting the debt and offering a repayment straight off which would probably result in an installment order and CCJ to the amount currently claimed.

What to do is entirely your choice as obviously I do not know the complete back ground to the debt or your other circumstances to be able to say which is the best route, and only you know if you are simply picking on slim technicalities or have actual legitimate concerns over arrows entitlement to collect that amount of money from you. xx


(edit crossed posts with PT - listen to him over me, gives you a further optionin formally applying for the extension via an N244 application - so have a ponder and a read and we'll help which ever way you decide (and yep realise you are constrained some by time! )

[Nibbler]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

Ok

if they will not agree an extension of time , then you need to apply to the court on an N244. If it is simply because you need disclosure and the Claimant is failing in their duty, then the application should be made for

1) an order compelling disclosure

2) an order setting the time frame for filing the defence.

That would be the way forward
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE be careful

Part 18 template letters that float around on the CAG arent worth a toss

I did a thread over there on part 18 and how to use it properly

If a part 18 request is not valid it cannot be enforced in court and is as much use as a chocolate fire gaurd

Do you have a link handy for that?

[Maintopman]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

Thanks, both pt and Amethyst.

Can you direct me to that Part 18 thread, pt? I'm not sure what that is... nor how to use it properly.

I downloaded form N244. Is that what I should use instead of sending in a defence under the limited amount of information available to me right now, or as well as? Should this, then, ask for both an order compelling disclosure and an order setting the time frame for filing the defence? And transfer from Northampton to my local court? And, should I advise the Court of my trip away, arranged long in advance? Is it worth a call to the Northampton Court on procedure, or can we get all the info we need here?

I had asked Arrow for copies of signed original agreement (that’s the letter to which they replied "We do not accept that we are the creditor as envisaged by the above statute" but had not sent a 31.14 request similar to what I have seen on other templates (which look quite heavy and confrontational); should I do that as well, now? To the solicitors?

I can now communicate with Shoosmiths's relevant solicitor by attachments (preferably .pdfs) to e-mails and him with me.

They may well be able to provide the documentation, but clearly themselves would need more time to do that too. However, they refuse an extension and seem to think the lack of documentation to be a flimsy defence - or so they say - not that I discussed that or anything else with them on the phone except the extension; they offered that info themselves and started to try to get onto settlement terms – but such a course was firmly resisted by me; I stuck to the single point and request.

I can send the form(s) off to the Court early next week instead, but from another EU country, not the UK. If not, I must get them in the mail from here by tomorrow morning.

Thanks for everything, folks.

[Amethyst]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

The best thing is to make yourself familiar with the CPRs as, although people seem often to ignore them or consider them too complicated, they are the best guide there is to court procedure.

CPR 18 and PD 18.
PRACTICE DIRECTION 18 FURTHER INFORMATION - Ministry of Justice

CPR 31.14.


As I said before forget templates. Just look at your own case and what YOU need.

The CPR 31.14 can only ask for things mentioned in the POC that they intend to rely on - so assignment, agreement ....

The Part 18 can ask questions and for information you need.

[Maintopman]

Re: Arrow Global Court Claim

Shooeys are mainstream so not a dodgy lowlife cowboy firm of so-called sols. they will play by the book.

Debtstar, having now talked to Shoosmiths, I do think they certainly are specialised in debt-collecting work or have a solicitor or two there who does that - they were very insistent I had to talk to a certain man who, when contacted, refused point-blank to consider an extension of the period for filing a defence, quite pointedly tried to question me on what my defence would be (I resisted all that, giving out no further information), intimated that I had not a leg to stand on in an (unsuccessful) attempt to get me intimidated and tried (again, with no success) to turn the conversation around to what repayment plan I was going to propose - all this without them yet having supplied the documents they rely on which needed for proper disclosure.

I must say, he did talk and behave rather like one of the usual telephone debt-collectors, even if perhaps a slightly more intelligent one than the low-life ones which seem to abound in discussions on this forum.