Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

[Cheekyflip]

Good evening all.

I am currently in an on going battle regarding an alledged debt with a company (Arrow Global) which seems to be close to an end point. It is currently with the Courts and I have today received a letter (General Form of Judgement or Order) and I am confused by it. I was wondering if someone could clear it up for me.

"It is ordered that

1. The claim is stayed because the claimant's statement of case discloses insufficient details or inadequate particulars of claim. The claimant shall supply the defendant with the details of the account which is the subject of the claim. Unless by 4pm 10 September the claimant files with the court and serves the defendant with a further statement of case that sets out full and adequate particulars of the claim, the claim will be automatically struck out.

2. The defence is struck out because, as written, it does not disclose a real prospect of success. Unless by 4pm on 24 September the defendant files with the court and serves the claimant with a further defence that discloses a defence to the claim, the claimant may apply to enter judgement by lodgement of n205 (where a specific sum is claimed) or by application for judgement."


I am assuming that, unless arrow (claimant) prove the alledged debt by the 10th September, then the claim cannot be taken further. And if they DO provide suitable docs, I would have to provide a defence against them by the 24th September. WOuld my understanding be correct?
HELP!

[ploddertom]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

Yes!

[Celestine]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

Yep, you got it! So you will have 14 days to get your defence together but only IF they radically improve their POC and provide you with accurate details of the account.

How did you achieve this exactly? Or was both the claim AND the defence so woeful that the court acted on its own initiative??

[Cheekyflip]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

Essentially, the entire time this has been going on, all I have ever responded was along the lines of "This is an alleged debt and I have never received any documentation to support the debt."

So, essentially, I have no defence because there has never been any proof of the debt. TBH I am disgusted that it has even been able to get this far!

[PlanB]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

"The claim is stayed because the claimant's statement of case discloses insufficient details or inadequate particulars of claim. The claimant shall supply the defendant with the details of the account which is the subject of the claim. Unless by 4pm 10 September the claimant files with the court and serves the defendant with a further statement of case that sets out full and adequate particulars of the claim, the claim will be automatically struck out."

I'm not surprised to see Arrow chance their arm in court because they do it all the time in the hope that the Defendant won't respond and they'll get a Default Judgement

Be prepared for Arrow to send you "details of the account" and also file "adequate" POC this time around. You will then need to file your Defence and we may be able to help you with that. But if the new POC refers to any particular documents, such as a credit agreement, Default Notice or Notice of Assignment, then you will have the right under CPR to request to see those documents which they intend to rely upon in court, otherwise how can you submit your Defence :doh: I expect you may be able to agree to an extension of time to file your Defence while Arrow respond to your CPR request. If they won't agree you can make an application to the court for more time and ask the court to order costs against them

Can you tell us a little more about the claim or better still post the current Particulars of Claim on here having removed your personal details (don't deface the original). Arrow do tend to go to the wire so it's too early for you to celebrate that possible strike-out.

How much is the claim for and who are the solicitors acting for Arrow?

[Cheekyflip]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

UPDATE 11/9/13:

As if by magic, just as I thought the case would be over, I received another letter from Arrow, on the last date before it gets kicked out (10/9/13).

As per Plan B's request, I have posted the only PoC I have recieved, as well as their evidence. This "evidence" (Page 3) has been received for the first time, rather than what the claimant is suggesting in their information.

I have two weeks to act/submit a defence and I am completely clueless on what to do. Any help would be super appreciated!

Arrow also keep asking me to phone them to talk about settlement. I am assuming I shouldn't call them?


If you need me to answer any questions or you would need more information from me in order to help me, please let me know!

Thanks

[Nibbler]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

So their only proof is a "recreated" notice of assignment? Nothing from the original creditor to prove the debt existed at all?

[Cheekyflip]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

So their only proof is a "recreated" notice of assignment? Nothing from the original creditor to prove the debt existed at all?

Exactly.
What you see in those three pages is what I have received and is their response to the initial request by the court for better proof.

My gut reaction would've been to write to the court again, advising them that the burden of proof is not sufficient, however as this was my initial defence and the court struck it out, I am clueless on how to move forward.

[littlebert8]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

The documents are very hard to read because its a very low-res scan. Its best to scan at 150dpi or above for clear text.

From what I can see, they are saying that you entered into a loan agreement with "Britannica Recoveries Sarl", but they sound like a debt buyer rather than an original creditor. They may not even have a consumer credit licence.

They mention an agreement, so they are in breach of Practice Direction 16 para 7.3 by not attaching it to their revised PoC

They say you defaulted and the agreement was terminated, but they make no mention of the default notice which must have been served.

It might help if you posted up the original PoC and your defence.

[Nibbler]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

pt2537 and/or Celestine are probably best equipped to advise on what to do now re a defence. I would drop them a PM.

[Cheekyflip]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

It might help if you posted up the original PoC and your defence.

The original PoC was made to Northampton CCBC and was as follows

"1. The claim is for the sum of 2015.41 in respect of monies owing by the defendant on a credit agreement held by the defendant with Britannica Recoveries S. r.l Atlas under account number xxxxxxxxxx upon which the defendant failed to maintain payments.

2. A default notice was served upon the defendant and has not been complied with.

3. By virtue of a sale agreement between Britannia Recoveries S. r.l Atlas and the claimant, the claim vested in the claimant who has genuine commercial interest. The defendant has been notified of the assignment by letter."

My defence to this original claim was that I felt that no burden of proof had been established.


Looking through the many letters that have gone back and forth, I note no reference to said default notice. I also note that every time I ask them for Burden of Proof (which is every time the send me a letter it appears) all they come back with is the amount and the Brittania company.

[Celestine]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

I'll have a proper look when I get into the office.....and have had the required 2 cups of strong coffee

[Inca]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

I'll have a proper look when I get into the office.....and have had the required 2 cups of strong coffee

Only 2 Cel?? I can't compute anything until at least 3 large cappafrappacinos with extra shots of expresso hit my brain cells....and only then I can open BOTH eyes

[littlebert8]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

The original PoC was made to Northampton CCBC and was as follows

"1. The claim is for the sum of 2015.41 in respect of monies owing by the defendant on a credit agreement held by the defendant with Britannica Recoveries S. r.l Atlas under account number xxxxxxxxxx upon which the defendant failed to maintain payments.

2. A default notice was served upon the defendant and has not been complied with.

3. By virtue of a sale agreement between Britannia Recoveries S. r.l Atlas and the claimant, the claim vested in the claimant who has genuine commercial interest. The defendant has been notified of the assignment by letter."

My defence to this original claim was that I felt that no burden of proof had been established.


Looking through the many letters that have gone back and forth, I note no reference to said default notice. I also note that every time I ask them for Burden of Proof (which is every time the send me a letter it appears) all they come back with is the amount and the Brittania company.

Could this perhaps relate to a former Egg loan? I've looked into this and it seems that Citigroup sold the closed Egg loan book to Britannica Recoveries S.a.r.l. in 2011. These were to be serviced by either Arrow Global or Moorgate as Britannica do not have a UK consumer credit licence. In turn, Britannica seem to have sold some of the accounts to Arrow Global - probably the defaulted ones.

[Cheekyflip]

Re: Help! Confused with letter from Court Re: Debt

I have never had an Egg loan (that I am aware of!) so I don't think that can be it.