What evidence is required/provided?

[stevemLS]

Re: What evidence is required/provided?

1 File a defence... in my case disputing the claim on the grounds that it's legally unenforceable because the Claimant hasn't thus far provided any evidence and failed to comply with legal obligations... etc. (And possibly also that 'although I recall having such a credit card, I can't with certainty be sure and/or these amounts are right and legally enforceable.)

No, you don't need to file a defence until you have received the documents you have requested under CPR31.

I don't agree that the civil standard of proof favours the claimant, the still have to show that it is "more likely than not".

Do you owe the money being claimed?

[Hheyes]

Re: What evidence is required/provided?

No, you don't need to file a defence until you have received the documents you have requested under CPR31.

Presumably then, the usual route is to request an extension to allow the claimant additional time to comply with the legal requirements to provide info?

What though if, because you think they don't/won't ever provide it, instead of requesting an extension you file a defence anyway... of 'although I recall having such a credit card, I can't with certainty be sure and/or that these amounts are correct - moreover I consider the debt is not legally enforceable because the claimant has failed to follow required procedure'?

Do you owe the money being claimed?

I don't know. Although when this first arose I thought I probably did, I can't be certain the amount claimed is right - so I may owe some, but cannot determine how much. The basis of any defence though will include whether the debt is legally enforceable, because the claimant hasn't complied with procedural reqirements.

[stevemLS]

Re: What evidence is required/provided?

Presumably then, the usual route is to request an extension to allow the claimant additional time to comply with the legal requirements to provide info?

What though if, because you think they don't/won't ever provide it, instead of requesting an extension you file a defence anyway... of 'although I recall having such a credit card, I can't with certainty be sure and/or that these amounts are correct - moreover I consider the debt is not legally enforceable because the claimant has failed to follow required procedure'?

The solicitors for the claimant would normally request that you agree a 28 day extension of time, you then write to the court saying you have agreed it. The court takes a dim view of litigants who act unreasonably and it would regard this extension as a reasonable request.

I don't know. Although when this first arose I thought I probably did, I can't be certain the amount claimed is right - so I may owe some, but cannot determine how much. The basis of any defence though will include whether the debt is legally enforceable, because the claimant hasn't complied with procedural reqirements.

When it gets to the stage of preparing a defence you can "Neither admit nor deny" the claimed sum and put the claimant to "strict proof" as to the amount.

There is also nothing to prevent you writing to the solicitors for the claimant asking for a full breakdown now - if you do write such a letter, make sure you say in the body of it that you are not yet in a position to admit or deny the claim and that you need such a breakdown to consider your position. Head the letter "Without Prejudice".

[Hheyes]

Re: What evidence is required/provided?

The solicitors for the claimant would normally request that you agree a 28 day extension of time, you then write to the court saying you have agreed it. The court takes a dim view of litigants who act unreasonably and it would regard this extension as a reasonable request.

When it gets to the stage of preparing a defence you can "Neither admit nor deny" the claimed sum and put the claimant to "strict proof" as to the amount.

There is also nothing to prevent you writing to the solicitors for the claimant asking for a full breakdown now - if you do write such a letter, make sure you say in the body of it that you are not yet in a position to admit or deny the claim and that you need such a breakdown to consider your position. Head the letter "Without Prejudice".

Thanks - very much appreciated. :-)

And, for anyone else who's reading and may have similar issues, Amethyst has a relevant post in another thread, with a draft defence.

[enquirer]

Re: What evidence is required/provided?

Could you imagine, in the criminal justice system, the CPS being able to rock up to the court with nothing more than a name, address and details of an offence and assume that when the summons goes out the alleged perpetrator will buckle and say “it’s afair cop gov; I confess”.

Unfortunately, it is now quite common for the police to arrest someone on the basis of an unsupported allegation, then smash their house to pieces looking for they know-not-what. In the meantime, they put them under extreme pressure to confess.

To ensure that there is no chance of a fair trial, the press will be tipped off beforehand. The persons family will be terrorised by reporters and probably pursued by a media inspired lynch-mob, thus increasing the pressure to confess still further.

Needless to say, if the case has political overtones, the likelihood that the police will misbehave increases dramatically.

[Hheyes]

Re: What evidence is required/provided?

Without wishing to labour this issue, I'm trying to get clear on some theoretical/practical aspects.

I'm wondering about the scenario where someone receives a claim and believes that they've never had an agreement of the type mentioned in the PoC and so doesn't owe the money.

If they're unfamiliar with CCA/CPR requests/extensions etcetera, wouldn't they just file a defence of '...never had an agreement, the money isn't owed'?

And on receiving such a defence, would the claimant then have to provide the defendant with the evidence they intend to present at court and no later than 14 days before a hearing date? Can the claimant ask the defendant for extra time to do this? And if they do, presumably the defendant has to agree or risk being considered to have been acting unreasonably?

And, in the eventual absence of such evidence, if the claimant doesn't notify the court they wish to withdraw, would the claim be dismissed or would the claimant likely be granted extra time to produce such evidence? And if so, at some/what point does the case simply get dismissed without the defendant having to file a paid application?

And can a dismissed case be reopened, or does a new claim have to be filed? (I'm thinking of a situation where the defendant was wrong, and actually did have an agreement, for which the supporting paperwork did eventually surface.)

[righty]

Re: What evidence is required/provided?

Blimey! So they really can submit a claim with a very thing PoC and no supporting documents, and then win it on default? Sheesh.

Not only that some DCA's will pretend to not know where you currently live (even if you've been in contact) & send it to your previous known address and the courts will disgracefully accept that as 'good service' The 1st thing you know about it is when the bailiffs arrive to snatch your goods OR they apply for a charge on your home