Skeleton Argument

[Besieged]

I am engaged in a battle with a notorious Debt Collection Agency whose name for now will remain undisclosed. A judgment was recently registered against me. I was a litigant in person and the main reason I lost was that I badly needed legal advice in the courtroom. However, it was a close run thing and I could have so easily have won as the claimant had no real evidence whatsoever. Even crucial parts of the redacted credit card agreement were illegible. Quite frankly I was amazed how a judgment could be made against me when the Claimant was clearly guilty of an abuse of process regarding non-compliance.

I have already submitted my Appellant's notice but I now need to submit my Skeleton Argument in order to get the judgement set aside. Therefore, I would be most grateful if anyone can provide me with examples of Case Law in support of my Appeal.

The Claimant was guilty of non-compliance and failed to abide by Consumer protection Rules and Court Directions concerning the following points of law:

1. Failure to respond or comply with my CPR 31.14 request.

2. Failure to send me a Default Notice.

3. Failure to send me a Notice of Assignment.

4. Failure to send me a Notice Before Action.

5. Failure to provide a "True Copy" of the agreement as parts of this
redacted document are illegible.

6. Parts of the Terms and Conditions are also illegible.

7. Failure to provide any of the documents that I requested under
Standard Disclosure.

8. Failure to disclose the contents of the trial bundle with the Defence until we were all gathered together in the court just as the judge was about to enter the courtroom.

9. Failure of the judge for not questioning the credibility of the illegible documents, including the so-called "True Copy," of the redacted agreement provided by the claimant.

[mystery1]

Re: Skeleton Argument

1. Failure to respond or comply with my CPR 31.14 request.

If you entered a defence and/or made no application this means nothing.

2. Failure to send me a Default Notice.
3. Failure to send me a Notice of Assignment.

At any time or for trial ?

4. Failure to send me a Notice Before Action.

Only penalty is in costs.

5. Failure to provide a "True Copy" of the agreement as parts of this
redacted document are illegible.

6. Parts of the Terms and Conditions are also illegible.

It comes down to evidence. Did the judge disagree with you ? http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?26536-Phoenix-Recoveries-v-Kotecha-Jan-2011 http://legalbeagles.info/hillesden-s...bt-collection/


7. Failure to provide any of the documents that I requested under Standard Disclosure.

8. Failure to disclose the contents of the trial bundle with the Defence until we were all gathered together in the court just as the judge was about to enter the courtroom.

What did the judge say/do about it ? Did you mention this ?

9. Failure of the judge for not questioning the credibility of the illegible documents, including the so-called "True Copy," of the redacted agreement provided by the claimant.

That's the job of the defendant.

M1

[dan_1207]

Re: Skeleton Argument

Why are you appealing, rather than making a standard application to have it set aside?

[mystery1]

Re: Skeleton Argument

Why are you appealing, rather than making a standard application to have it set aside?

He lost in court.

M1

[Besieged]

Re: Skeleton Argument

Thank you for your reply, mystery1,

In answer to your questions:

1. I entered a defence that I disputed the alleged debt right from the beginning of the legal process which began with Northampton Bulk Centre in 2013. Faced with the alleged debt I then put them to strict proof to prove their claim under CPR 31.14. However, they failed to respond.

2 & 3. My point here being that had I been made aware of the alleged debt or default prior to commencing legal action, this matter could have been resolved with the original lender and should never have gone to court. Legal action should have been used as a last resort, not a first line of attack. (once again abuse of Consumer Protection Rules)

5 & 6. I told the judge that the Claimant has been unable to provide any credible proof or evidence linking me to the alleged debt other than the in parts illegible "True Copy" of the original credit agreement of 2001. It was up to the Claimant to prove their claim which it had failed to do. The Claimants council was now under pressure. Had the judge
then properly scrutinized the in parts illegible "True Copy" of the agreement he would have recognized that it violated Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act (1974).

7. When I mentioned the Claimant's failure to provide documents requested under Standard Disclosure the judge looked concerned, hesitated, then allowed Claimant's council to make make its excuse which was that the Claimant didn't have any other documents other than the purchased copy of the in parts illegible agreement of 2001.

8. The judge once again looked concerned regarding the Claimant's inability to agree to the contents of the trial bundle before the day of the hearing but failed to act against the Claimant. It appeared to me that the Claimant had paid its fee and so the Claimant was given the benefit of the doubt, even when that doubt was dubious indeed.

Many thanks for the case law. Your input much appreciated.

[mystery1]

Re: Skeleton Argument

1. I entered a defence that I disputed the alleged debt right from the beginning of the legal process which began with Northampton Bulk Centre in 2013. Faced with the alleged debt I then put them to strict proof to prove their claim under CPR 31.14. However, they failed to respond.

The time to raise that as an issue was when in front of the judge. It's pretty much a dead duck unless your appeal is based on an unfair trial which is a hard hard route to take.

2 & 3. My point here being that had I been made aware of the alleged debt or default prior to commencing legal action, this matter could have been resolved with the original lender and should never have gone to court. Legal action should have been used as a last resort, not a first line of attack. (once again abuse of Consumer Protection Rules)

Correct but how does this help you after judgement ?

5 & 6. I told the judge that the Claimant has been unable to provide any credible proof or evidence linking me to the alleged debt other than the in parts illegible "True Copy" of the original credit agreement of 2001. It was up to the Claimant to prove their claim which it had failed to do. The Claimants council was now under pressure. Had the judge
then properly scrutinized the in parts illegible "True Copy" of the agreement he would have recognized that it violated Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act (1974).

It is not the judges job to make your case for you. If you made that case then it is indeed an appeal point if the judge erred in fact or law.

7. When I mentioned the Claimant's failure to provide documents requested under Standard Disclosure the judge looked concerned, hesitated, then allowed Claimant's council to make make its excuse which was that the Claimant didn't have any other documents other than the purchased copy of the in parts illegible agreement of 2001.


8. The judge once again looked concerned regarding the Claimant's inability to agree to the contents of the trial bundle before the day of the hearing but failed to act against the Claimant. It appeared to me that the Claimant had paid its fee and so the Claimant was given the benefit of the doubt, even when that doubt was dubious indeed.

A judge can make such decisions and a stronger argument from you may have met with a different response.



Is this small claims or fast track ?

M1

[stevemLS]

Re: Skeleton Argument

Have to say, agree with M1 - each and all of these arguments are ones which should have been raised or raised more strongly at trial.

I have seen nothing that indicates that there are any grounds of appeal.

To suggest that a judge would be influenced by the fact that the claimant had paid the hearing fee is, in my view, frankly ludicrous.

[Besieged]

Re: Skeleton Argument

Thank you, M1.

The answer is Fast Track.



Thank you stevenLS.

That was my impression having been present in court on that particular day. That does not make it a fact. The scales of justice were skewed in favour of the Claimant, despite such scant, and often illegible evidence provided by said Claimant.

I am not a member of the legal profession. I have no legal training. However, I do expect to be treated fairly.

[wales01man]

Re: Skeleton Argument

Sorry to say you suffered the same fate as many others its a big boys game the law for a few the rest of us will nearly always lose

[mystery1]

Re: Skeleton Argument

Thank you, M1.

The answer is Fast Track.



Thank you stevenLS.

That was my impression having been present in court on that particular day. That does not make it a fact. The scales of justice were skewed in favour of the Claimant, despite such scant, and often illegible evidence provided by said Claimant.

I am not a member of the legal profession. I have no legal training. However, I do expect to be treated fairly.

I suggest you contact http://www.qualitysolicitors.com/how...le/paul-tilley as we are talking a hefty amount here. The scant details do suggest a sniff of a case but it's hard to know for sure. Make sure you have as much detail to hand as possible.

https://consumercreditlitigationandd...eral-pointers/

M1

[Besieged]

Re: Skeleton Argument

M1, Thank you for your invaluable contribution. I will do as you suggest.

wales01man, Thank you for your input.

Thank you also to everyone else who has contributed to this thread.