1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

[Amethyst]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

I've given myself plenty of time

.

pmsl, yeah I had noticed

[FlamingParrot]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

You're right, I don't deny the debt existed.... I contest how a £1000 overdraft got ramped up to £1350 with interest and charges, with no concern for the holder of the account. I then contest J&P's (1st Credit) right to claim the money.

OK, I'll file for an N244 as you suggest and go that way.

I had one letter, that I recall, from 1st Credit, but certainly not a notice saying they intended to go legal.

Could that letter be the notice of assignment, telling you 1st Crud had bought the debt?

Such letters don't say they intend to go legal, you must be referring to a letter before action, which is supposed to be sent before proceedings are issued.

If you got a NoA, you can't really dispute 1st Crud's right to the money.

[Celestine]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

It also needs to say in there somewhere:

Accordingly the Defendant reserves his position to amend this Defence with the

costs of the same paid by the Claimant if the Claimant subsequently provides the documents requested under CPR 31.14.

[Neil77]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

I really couldn't say... It was just a letter that I took a quick look at and binned. It may not have even been regarding this debt or from them and I may be mistaken.
I'm afraid it was a bad time and there was 4 things that I had issues with that I'm now sorting. I've had a few letters off the like of Weston, And Arden.... More constant phone calls.
I'm now in a better position and want to get all these things off my record as painlessly as possible and get my credit rating on the move back up.

[Kafka]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

In my recent claim by 1stC they sent me a claimed Notice of assignment in the same letters as the their introduction. both had the same date and same paper marks and they didn't even pretend that the NoA had come from the creditor. It will be interesting to see what they produce.

[Neil77]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

1.IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT

Claim No. XXXXXXXX

BETWEEN:

1^st Credit (Finance) Ltd

Claimant

- and –

Defendant

XXXXXXXXXX

_________________________________

WITNESS STATEMENT OF xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_________________________________

I XXXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXXX address XXXXXXXXXX being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

1. I make this Witness Statement in support of the application for an order that the Claimant do provide copies of documents pursuant to CPR 31.14.

2: CPR rule 31.14 states

(1) A party may inspect a document mentioned in –
(a) a statement of case;
(b) a witness statement;
(c) a witness summary; or
(d) an affidavit

The Defendant is therefore entitled to inspect copies of the Credit Agreement, the Default notice and the assignment.

3. On 12^th May 2014 I made a written request to the Claimant solicitors requesting that the Claimant provides copies of all documents mentioned in the statement of case. [EXHIBIT A]

4. The Claimants claim is based upon the Defendants alleged breach of contract and therefore the contract is entirely cental to the Claimants case.

5. CPR Rule 31.15 requires that documents are provided within 7 days from receipt of a written request. The Claimant has failed to provide any of the documents mentioned in its claim form.

6. On 19^th May 2014, I contacted the Claimants by email [EXHIBIT B] and repeated my request for copies of documents pursuant to CPR 31.14. I also sought an extension of time for filing my defence to the Claim in accordance with CPR 15.5. The claimant replied with a vague email and would not grant a timed extension in accordance with CPR15.5 when I contacted their representative by phone on 21^st May 2014


7. The Claimant has mentioned the credit Agreement, the default Notice and the assignment in its Statement of Case and yet it has provided none of these documents despite my entitlement to inspect these documents.

8. I refer to the ruling of Rix LJ in Expandable v Rubin [2008] EWCA Civ 59 (at paragraph 24)

“The general ethos of the CPR is for a more cards on the table approach to litigation. If a party thinks it worthwhile to mention a document in his pleadings, witness statements or affidavits, I do not see why, subject as I say to the question of privilege, the court should put difficulties in the way of inspection. I look upon the mention of a document in pleadings etc as a form of disclosure. The document in question has not been disclosed by list, or at any rate not yet, but it has been disclosed by mention in what, for the purposes of litigation, is another important and formal category of documents. If so, then the party deploying that document by its mention should in principle be prepared to be required to permit its inspection, and the other party should be entitled to its inspection.”

9. I also refer to the ruling of the Court of Appeal in Mitchell v News Group Newspaper [2013] EWCA Civ 1537 where the court set down clear guidance that the rules must be complied with (see para 41). This application could have been avoided had the Claimant complied with its duties under the CPR.

10. The Claimants pleaded case is that the Defendant entered into an agreement with Bank Of Scotland PLC under account reference 8888888888888. I am uncertain as to which account this refers to. It is accepted that I have had banking products with Halifax PLC in the past however the account number given does not relate to any information I have, therefore it is essential that I have sight of the agreement relied upon by the Claimant to be able to accurately identify to what the claim refers.

11. I therefore ask that the Court grants an extension of time to file my Defence and orders the Claimant to provide copies of the documents mentioned in its statement of case. I would also ask the Court to order the Claimants pay the costs of this application which could have been avoided had the Claimants had their house in order from the outset.


Statement of Truth

I, XXXXXX, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true.


Signed: ________________________________

Dated:

[Neil77]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

HI,

I've posted the witness statement above, as I remember you saying you wanted to add something in there Amethyst?

Also, do I just post all this recorded delivery? Do I pay now, or will that go on costs?

Sorry to sound blonde, but the MCOL website is playing up again and I cant go on for instructions.

Thanks Neil

[Neil77]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

Shame.

We have had some judges say that defences must be entered before the application (which would mean CPR 31 doesn't apply as per CPR 27.2b) but we firmly believe they are incorrect and just being narky anti debtor, but it is a possibility they will try and argue that to stave off the order and ask the judge to make you defend. So I think possibly we should add an extra paragraph to the witness statement on CPRs.

Hi Amethyst,

I need to get my unless order filed over the next day or two as I'm away on business. You mentioned wanting to add an extra paragraph to my witness statement of CPR's.... Could you have a look and I'll get it filed ASAP.

Thanks Neil

[Amethyst]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

1.IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT

Claim No. XXXXXXXX

BETWEEN:

1^st Credit (Finance) Ltd

Claimant

- and –

Defendant

XXXXXXXXXX

_________________________________

WITNESS STATEMENT OF xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
_________________________________

I XXXXXXXXXX of XXXXXXXXXX address XXXXXXXXXX being the Defendant in this case will state as follows;

1. I make this Witness Statement in support of the application for an order that the Claimant do provide copies of documents pursuant to CPR 31.14.

2: CPR rule 31.14 states

(1) A party may inspect a document mentioned in –
(a) a statement of case;
(b) a witness statement;
(c) a witness summary; or
(d) an affidavit

The Defendant is therefore entitled to inspect copies of the Credit Agreement, the Default notice and the assignment as the Claimants mentions these documents in their statement of case.

3. On 12^th May 2014 I made a written request to the Claimant solicitors requesting that the Claimant provides copies of all documents mentioned in the statement of case. [EXHIBIT A]

4. The Claimants claim is based upon the Defendants alleged breach of contract and therefore the contract is entirely cental to the Claimants case.

5. The Claimants pleaded case is that the Defendant entered into an agreement with Bank Of Scotland PLC under account reference 8888888888888. I am uncertain as to which account this refers to. It is accepted that I have had banking products with Halifax PLC in the past however the account number given does not relate to any information I have, therefore it is essential that I have sight of the agreement relied upon by the Claimant to be able to accurately identify to what the claim refers.

6. CPR Rule 31.15 requires that documents are provided within 7 days from receipt of a written request. The Claimant has failed to provide any of the documents mentioned in its claim form.

7. On 19^th May 2014, I contacted the Claimants by email [EXHIBIT B] and repeated my request for copies of documents pursuant to CPR 31.14. I also sought an extension of time for filing my defence to the Claim in accordance with CPR 15.5. The claimant replied with a vague email and would not grant a timed extension in accordance with CPR15.5 when I contacted their representative by phone on 21^st May 2014


8. The Claimant has mentioned the credit Agreement, the default Notice and the assignment in its Statement of Case and yet it has provided none of these documents despite my entitlement to inspect these documents.

9. I refer to the ruling of Rix LJ in Expandable v Rubin [2008] EWCA Civ 59 (at paragraph 24)

“The general ethos of the CPR is for a more cards on the table approach to litigation. If a party thinks it worthwhile to mention a document in his pleadings, witness statements or affidavits, I do not see why, subject as I say to the question of privilege, the court should put difficulties in the way of inspection. I look upon the mention of a document in pleadings etc as a form of disclosure. The document in question has not been disclosed by list, or at any rate not yet, but it has been disclosed by mention in what, for the purposes of litigation, is another important and formal category of documents. If so, then the party deploying that document by its mention should in principle be prepared to be required to permit its inspection, and the other party should be entitled to its inspection.”

10. I also refer to the ruling of the Court of Appeal in Mitchell v News Group Newspaper [2013] EWCA Civ 1537 where the court set down clear guidance that the rules must be complied with (see para 41). This application could have been avoided had the Claimant complied with its duties under the CPR.

11. The provisions of CPR part 27 do not apply as the claim is not allocated until such time as the Defendant enters his defence. Without inspection of the disclosed the documents I am unable to form any defence, admission or counterclaim.

12. In addition, the provisions of CPR 27.4(3)(a)(i) which states that documents upon which you intend to rely shall be filed and served at least 14 days before the date fixed for the final hearing are of no assisstance to the Defendant when deciding whether to enter a defence, counterclaim or admission on the claim, and in the interest of saving costs the Claimants should be required to provide documents for inspection as mentioned in their statement of case.

13. Should the court require the Defendant to file a defence before inspection of the basic documents on which the Claimant relies in bringing the claim, this witness statement can be treated as such, as any defence entered without having full knowledge of the claim brought against me will necessarily request inspection of the same documents.

14. I therefore ask that the Court grants an extension of time to file my Defence and orders the Claimant to provide copies of the documents mentioned in its statement of case. I would also ask the Court to order the Claimants pay the costs of this application which could have been avoided had the Claimants had their house in order from the outset.

15. Should the Claimant be unable to produce documents mentioned in his statement of case, and therefore has disclosed documents he has not had sight of, then the claim bought amounts to an abuse of process and should be struck out.


Statement of Truth

I, XXXXXX, the Defendant, believe the facts stated within this Witness Statement to be true.


Signed: ________________________________

Dated:

I think that covers their arguments against - obviously check through and make sure everything is correct xx

[Amethyst]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

Neil, Not sure if you have submitted this, but have a read of PinkCat's thread ( http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...urrent-account ), more news from court application hearing so we might need to submit a defence as well. SO frustrating. Sharon xx

[Neil77]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

Hi Amethyst,

I've literally just paid my £50 and sent all my documents over to Northampton in the last hour.

Will your phrase "if required to submit a defence, please take this statement as the same" cover this?

Wow!! Just read that and it's really surprised me. I'm guessing this is one of the judges with $ invested in the banking sector?

I suppose all we can do it wait and see what comes back over the next couple of weeks and go from there.

Thanks for the heads up though Sharon.

Thanks
Neil

[Neil77]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

13. Should the court require the Defendant to file a defence before inspection of the basic documents on which the Claimant relies in bringing the claim, this witness statement can be treated as such, as any defence entered without having full knowledge of the claim brought against me will necessarily request inspection of the same documents.

[Amethyst]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

I'm hoping so.

[Neil77]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

Why do you feel they've taken that stance?
It seems to make the whole system seem fickle and accommodating towards the DCA's. Surely they'd had more than enough time already.
No wonder people lose faith in the system. :tinysmile_hmm_t2:

[Amethyst]

Re: 1st Credit (Judge & Priestley) RBS OVERDRAFT Summons

Some of the Judge's are still suffering with pre conceptions of the 'debt avoider' litigant in person. They don't seem to comprehend that DCA's have f*ck all information on the debts they buy and do zero checks on them to ensure they are valid and owing before sticking a court claim in willy nilly in the hope the majority of debtors just pay up on receipt of the N1.