Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

[Diana M]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

Could someone advise if this statement is true?

The striking out of a claim is automatic in the absence of an order agreeing an extension or judgment or a defence after 12 months

Can the validity of a claim be an issue after 2 years

Where did you get that 'truism' from?

Di

[MrsJ]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

Civil Procedure,

Effect of Stay,

While a stay is in operation no steps may be taken in the claim other than an application to remove the stay. However, time continues to run for the purposes of the period of validity of the claim form (Aldridge v Edwards)

[charitynjw]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

10. These proceedings were initiated when the regime of the County Court Rules was still in force, and this judgment is concerned only with the effect of those rules.

Aldridge v Edwards [2000] EWCA Civ 78 (16 March 2000)

[Diana M]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

As the court claim was addressed to Mr only he requested any information.

There's no reason why 'Mrs' can't send a CCA Request to Capquest. You don't have to be in receipt of a court claim in order to exercise your statutory right to see a document.

However in this case because the history of this debt is not fully known it may be better for 'Mrs' to keep under the radar with the claim being issued in one name only ('Mr').

I know you're itching to send a letter in reply to Drydens but I'm not in a position to tell you what it should say (I've not seen the paperwork).

If they've not replied to your Part 18 Request you may wish to send them a copy as a reminder and ask them to respond within 14 days of the date of your letter. That might help them to focus a bit.

These proceedings are stayed (unless I'm wrong) so this is not the time to rock the boat or wind them up so they take it out of stay.

Di

[MrsJ]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

Could we have your thoughts on the letter we have received today from Drydens.

The first picture is the letter I sent to Drydens on the 7th Feb.

The second is the response I have received today.

[pt2537]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

Could we have your thoughts on the letter we have received today from Drydens.

The first picture is the letter I sent to Drydens on the 7th Feb.

The second is the response I have received today.

Well that answers absolutely nothing at all, clearly they have not considered your comments especially given they dont ask for confirmation from you as to why they havent satisfied the Consumer Credit Act request.

[pt2537]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

Good god, has this been on going since 2015? and not brought to an end? Wowsers, Barton Henderson Rassen and Merit springs to mind

[Diana M]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

Could we have your thoughts on the letter we have received today from Drydens.

The first picture is the letter I sent to Drydens on the 7th Feb.

The second is the response I have received today.

Thanks for the update.

I suggested you should remind them that they have not responded to your Part 18 Request from March 2015.

This is their belated response to it (two years late).

Being lawyers they will know that you can make an Application to the court to force them to answer your Part 18 Request.

From memory your Part 18 question was when was anything last paid to the account (i.e. Halifax) not when did their client (Capquest) last receive payment.

They've sidestepped your Part 18 question and not threatened to lift the stay and go for a Summary Judgment which was what they said they would do in their previous letter.

Perhaps they've done some digging and realised that the debt is SB after all

Di

[MrsJ]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

We are of the same opinion (what the heck is this from a solicitors ?) Sorry we have no information but pay up anyway.
How can we respond to a letter like that from them.?

Should we let it lie for longer before responding to Drydens or approach the court for a strike out?

[Diana M]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

We are of the same opinion (what the heck is this from a solicitors ?) Sorry we have no information but pay up anyway.
How can we respond to a letter like that from them.?

Should we let it lie for longer before responding to Drydens or approach the court for a strike out?

Let me have a think about it

As I posted earlier on your thread it's all about tactics and strategy which can sometimes mean not doing the obvious is the right thing to do.

They've not given you a deadline to respond to that letter and they've not told you that they'll do anything nasty if you don't.

If they want to chance their arm with making an Application to lift the stay and go for a Summary Judgment then they'll have to way up the costs (literally) if their application fails. The claim will no longer be stayed and you may want to file an Amended Defence in response to their recent disclosure of documents.

At the moment they see you (your partner) as a silly little LIP so their letter was a feeble attempt to dodge answering your Part 18 questions. What they said was not a lie i.e. their client has not received any payments from you since they were instructed. So what? Your question was when was the last payment received for this debt (which you believe would have been made to the Halifax many moons ago).

Di

[Diana M]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

they did not respond to my PART 18 request for further information, I asked if any payments had been made to a loan, when was the last payment made, what was the amount, and by what method was the payment made.

^ ^ ^ Looking back through your thread I can see that your Part 18 Request asked three straightforward questions to establish that the debt is Statute Barred. Your questions gave them the opportunity to check for themselves.

If this was Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight he'd now be saying "answer my question, answer my question, answer my question" until they did.

Di

[MrsJ]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

Our thoughts exactly. Would you just send them the request again ?

[Diana M]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

Our thoughts exactly. Would you just send them the request again ?

You seem to have reached a High Noon moment with them. Who will be the first to fire their gun.

I've always said a degree in psychology could be more useful than a degree in law if you want to be a successful litigator

There's no imminent threat on the horizon (from what you say) and no deadline to respond to that letter. So the question is: should you be proactive or reactive while this claim remains stayed?

I don't have a quick answer to that but I will read back through your thread for clues.

Di

[MrsJ]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

You seem to have reached a High Noon moment with them. Who will be the first to fire their gun.

I've always said a degree in psychology could be more useful than a degree in law if you want to be a successful litigator

There's no immanent threat on the horizon (from what you say) and no deadline to respond to that letter. So the question is: should you be proactive or reactive while this claim remains stayed?

I don't have a quick answer to that but I will read back through your thread for clues.

Di

Hi Di,

Your thoughts would be well received

[pt2537]

Re: Capquest, drydens, lloyds, and me 2 (help)

Can i assist at all?