Court Claim - MKDP LLP / BARCLAYCARD - 31-7-2014

[ELIZABETH1]

Received a claim? Yes
Issue Date: 31-7-2014
Amount approx: £4108.16
Claimant: MKDP LLP
Solicitor: MKDP LLP = SARAH LAMBERT
Original Credit: BARCLAYCARD

Particulars of Claim:
The claimant claims the sum of £3,923.16 being monies due from the Defendant to the claimant under the regulated agreement originally between the Defendant and Barclaycard.
The Defendant's account number was xxxxxxxx and was assigned to the Claimant on 22/08/2011, notice of this has been provided to the Defendant. The Defendant has failed to make payments in accordance with the terms of the agreement and a default notice has been served pursuant to the CCA1974.
The Claimant has complied, as far as is necessary, with the pre-action conduct practice direction.
signed SARAH LAMBERT

Stat Barred? No

Have sent: Acknowledged the Claim, Sent a CCA request, Sent a CPR 31.14 request

Other Info:
I have had no paperwork regarding the above mention CCA, CPR 31.14 requests other than a letter saying CPR 31.14 does not apply etc.. it is Small Claims Track is what they say.

[ELIZABETH1]

Re: Court Claim - MKDP LLP / BARCLAYCARD - 31-7-2014

I am trying to prepare a defence to send in reply to this claim and I see it is very similar to many claims/threads here relating to the same company = is there anything that I can add or change in the below defence? Thank you


1. The Claimants statement of case fails to adequately set out the nature of the Claim.
2. The Defendant received no communication from the Claimant until receipt of this claim and therefore it is denied that the Claimants have complied with the pre-action conduct rules.
3. Had the claim not been issued through CCBC the Claimant would have been obliged to attach copies of the documentation upon which it relies to the Particulars of Claim. The Defendant is entitled to see the documents on which the Claimant relies and which they will have to produce at trial. Inspection of disclosed documents at this stage will enable the Defendant to fully plead the case and further the Overriding Objective.
4. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation. Therefore it is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed.
5. On 30^th July 2014 the Defendant wrote to the Claimant requesting inspection of documents disclosed in its statement of case under CPR 31.14 - being the agreement, assignment and default notice.
6. On 30^th July 2014 the Defendant also wrote to the Claimant pursuant to s78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 to ascertain that the agreement, which the Claimant was demanding payment under and to obtain further information about the terms of the contract.
7. The particulars of claim state that the account was assigned to the Claimant on 22/08/2011. The Defendant has not received any notification of this assignment.
8. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974 was served upon the Defendant.
9. The Claimant has failed to disclose any documents relating to their claim to the Defendant and has admitted that they don’t have these documents and has requested them from the original lender which could take 6-8 weeks. The Defendant is surprised the Claimant has brought the claim without having had sight of the documents on which intends to rely upon in this case.
10. The Claimant have also failed to comply with a reasonable request for inspection of documents made under CPR 31.14.
11. Accordingly the Claimant has failed to comply with s78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s78 (6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.
12. Should the Claimant evidence their claim properly the Defendant reserves the right to plead further.
13. The claim that the Claimant's are entitled to payment of £xxxx - or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

[Amethyst]

Re: Court Claim - MKDP LLP / BARCLAYCARD - 31-7-2014

I would try and personalise it a little more. ie add in that the Particulars of Claim state ''The claimant claims the sum of £3,923.16 being monies due from the Defendant to the claimant under the regulated agreement originally between the Defendant and Barclaycard.'' yet you have asked for the agreement under sec 78 and under CPR 31.14 and they have failed to produce a copy. ie. relate the arguments (which are right) directly to your case and the POC entered and use the order of the POC as a guide.

[ELIZABETH1]

Re: Court Claim - MKDP LLP / BARCLAYCARD - 31-7-2014

Thank you so much for this - I'll get this done and off as my defence - It should leave some leverage if/when they come up with documents etc... to amend later as case moves onwards....