Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

[nemesis45]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Nem, the letters are like 2 posts down...



Yes, you should try and get your defence in on Friday really, although before Monday will be okay if you don't manage it.

There is an example defence http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...t-Court-Claims - if you want to do a draft and post it up xx

Just wondered if that lot had actually been sent Ame.

nem

[Robin Hoodie]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Hi, Many thanks for your kind replies.
Have not heard from Restons or Cabot yet. So will focus on filing defence for this week.
Thanks again,
Robin

[nemesis45]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Hi, Many thanks for your kind replies.
Have not heard from Restons or Cabot yet. So will focus on filing defence for this week.
Thanks again,
Robin

Good morning Robin,

If you wish please post a draft of your defence then we can go through it with you.

nem

[Robin Hoodie]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Hi, Thanks for your helpful reply. I'm looking through an old witness statement that includes references to Rix LJ, etc. I noticed this isn't mentioned in the current examples here: http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...t-Court-Claims.
Are points re: Rix LJ, etc, not of any use anymore?
Thanks again,
Robin

[Robin Hoodie]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Good morning Robin,

If you wish please post a draft of your defence then we can go through it with you.

nem

Hi Nemesis 45,
Please find draft documents below.
Any advice from anyone is truly appreciated
:bats:Best Wishes, Robin

IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT
Claim No. XXXXXX

BETWEEN:
CABOT FINANCIAL UK LTD
Claimant
- and –
Defendant
XXXXXXXXXXXXX

_________________________________

WITNESS STATEMENT OF XXXXXXX
_________________________________

I, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, 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 17 October 2015, I made a written request to the Claimant’s solicitors requesting that the Claimant provides copies of all documents mentioned in the Statement of Case. I also requested an extension of time for filing my defence to the Claim in accordance with CPR 15.5. [EXHIBIT A]

4. The Claimant bases their claim upon the Defendant’s alleged breach of contract, and therefore the contract is entirely central to the Claimant’s case.

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

7. In the Statement of Case, the Claimant has mentioned the Contract in relation to the Consumer Credit Agreement. However, despite my legal entitlement to inspect these documents, the Claimant has failed to provide this or any other documents relating to the case.

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 Claimant’s pleaded case is that I, the Defendant, entered into an agreement with Lloyds Bank under account reference XXXXXXXXXXXXX. I believe that I have previously had banking products with Lloyds, and that this may date back more than fifteen years ago – possibly several years before the year 2000. However, at this present time I am uncertain as to which account the Claimant is referring to. Therefore, in order for me to be able to accurately identify what the claim does refer to, it is clearly essential that I have sight of the agreement relied upon by the Claimant. Notwithstanding this, I am also unable to consider whether such agreement complies with the statutory provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 until such time as a copy is provided.

11. The Claimant additionally mentions a Default Notice. I am also unable to consider whether such Default Notice complies with the statutory provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 until such time as a copy is provided. The Act sets out a clear form and content requirement, which, if not complied with, renders the Claimant unable to enforce the agreement as per HHJ Chambers QC in Harrison v Link Financial Ltd [2011].

12. 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 also request that the Court order the Claimant to pay the costs of this application which could have been avoided if the Claimant had been properly prepared from the outset.
Statement of Truth

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

Signed: XXXXXXX
Dated: 30 October 2015
========================================
IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT
Claim No. XXXXXX

BETWEEN:
CABOT FINANCIAL UK LTD
Claimant
- and –
Defendant
XXXXXXXXXXX

_________________________________

ORDER
_________________________________


Before District Judge Sitting at the Northampton County Court CC BC, 4th floor, St. Katharine's House, 21-27 St. Katharine's Street, Northampton Northamptonshire, NN1 2LH, on the ............. day of .............. 2015

UPON reading the Defendant’s Application Notice dated 30 OCTOBER 2015

And

UPON the Court noting that the Claimant remains in breach of the Civil Procedure Rules Pre Action Protocol Practice Direction and CPR Rule 31.14.

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1: The Claimant shall by 4pm on .................................... 2015 (7 days from the date of this order) provide the Defendant a copies of the following documents mentioned in the Claim Form pursuant to CPR Rule 31.14.

a) The Credit Agreement
b) The Default Notice
c) The assignment

2: If the Claimant fails to comply with paragraph 1 the Claim shall stand struck out without further order.

3: Upon the Claimant complying with paragraph 1 the Defendant shall file and serve his Defence by 4pm on.................................... 2015. (21 days after compliance with para 1)

4: The Claimant do pay the Defendant’s costs in this application to be assessed if not agreed.

[nemesis45]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Hi Nemesis 45,
Please find draft documents below.
Any advice from anyone is truly appreciated
:bats:Best Wishes, Robin

IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT
Claim No. XXXXXX

BETWEEN:
CABOT FINANCIAL UK LTD
Claimant
- and –
Defendant
XXXXXXXXXXXXX

_________________________________

WITNESS STATEMENT OF XXXXXXX
_________________________________

I, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, 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 17 October 2015, I made a written request to the Claimant’s solicitors requesting that the Claimant provides copies of all documents mentioned in the Statement of Case. I also requested an extension of time for filing my defence to the Claim in accordance with CPR 15.5. [EXHIBIT A]

4. The Claimant bases their claim upon the Defendant’s alleged breach of contract, and therefore the contract is entirely central to the Claimant’s case.

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

7. In the Statement of Case, the Claimant has mentioned the Contract in relation to the Consumer Credit Agreement. However, despite my legal entitlement to inspect these documents, the Claimant has failed to provide this or any other documents relating to the case.

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 Claimant’s pleaded case is that I, the Defendant, entered into an agreement with Lloyds Bank under account reference XXXXXXXXXXXXX. I believe that I have previously had banking products with Lloyds, and that this may date back more than fifteen years ago – possibly several years before the year 2000. However, at this present time I am uncertain as to which account the Claimant is referring to. Therefore, in order for me to be able to accurately identify what the claim does refer to, it is clearly essential that I have sight of the agreement relied upon by the Claimant. Notwithstanding this, I am also unable to consider whether such agreement complies with the statutory provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 until such time as a copy is provided.

11. The Claimant additionally mentions a Default Notice. I am also unable to consider whether such Default Notice complies with the statutory provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 until such time as a copy is provided. The Act sets out a clear form and content requirement, which, if not complied with, renders the Claimant unable to enforce the agreement as per HHJ Chambers QC in Harrison v Link Financial Ltd [2011].

12. 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 also request that the Court order the Claimant to pay the costs of this application which could have been avoided if the Claimant had been properly prepared from the outset.
Statement of Truth

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

Signed: XXXXXXX
Dated: 30 October 2015
========================================
IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT
Claim No. XXXXXX

BETWEEN:
CABOT FINANCIAL UK LTD
Claimant
- and –
Defendant
XXXXXXXXXXX

_________________________________

ORDER
_________________________________


Before District Judge Sitting at the Northampton County Court CC BC, 4th floor, St. Katharine's House, 21-27 St. Katharine's Street, Northampton Northamptonshire, NN1 2LH, on the ............. day of .............. 2015

UPON reading the Defendant’s Application Notice dated 30 OCTOBER 2015

And

UPON the Court noting that the Claimant remains in breach of the Civil Procedure Rules Pre Action Protocol Practice Direction and CPR Rule 31.14.

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1: The Claimant shall by 4pm on .................................... 2015 (7 days from the date of this order) provide the Defendant a copies of the following documents mentioned in the Claim Form pursuant to CPR Rule 31.14.

a) The Credit Agreement
b) The Default Notice
c) The assignment

2: If the Claimant fails to comply with paragraph 1 the Claim shall stand struck out without further order.

3: Upon the Claimant complying with paragraph 1 the Defendant shall file and serve his Defence by 4pm on.................................... 2015. (21 days after compliance with para 1)

4: The Claimant do pay the Defendant’s costs in this application to be assessed if not agreed.

Hello Robin,

If some paralegals could draft documents like that I would be impressed!!
I can see nothing needing amendment.

Keep copies of everything and use signed for post!
Good ti go.

nem

[Robin Hoodie]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Hope all is great with you, Nem. Thanks so much for your kind help previously. Below is an update of what has happened. If you get a chance to read and make any suggestions it would be truly appreciated. The Claimant's solicitor have requested that the order be set aside, and that they should not have to pay costs, etc. The dates have been altered, though hopefully they won't be too confusing.
Best Wishes,
Robin
================================================== =====
On XX OCTOBER 2015, the court ordered the Claimant (Cabot Financial Ltd) to provide relevant documentation to the Defendant by 4.00 p.m on the XX NOVEMBER 2015, pursuant to CPR 31.14. I firmly believe the Claimant should have had all of their documentation ready for inspection before they ever brought this case to court. This could have prevented incurring unnecessary legal costs and causing unnecessary distress to me.

However, XXXXXXXXXX at the Claimant’s solicitors, has now made a further N244 application and a statement to the court dated XX NOVEMBER 2015. XXXXX begins his statement with lengthy references on how he has perused documents and records on the Case Management System (CMS) operated by XXXX Solicitors. He states that XXXX CMS includes contemporaneous records of all incoming/outgoing correspondence and telephone calls for each particular account. Mr. XXXXX also says he makes his statement from information provided by Mr. XXXXXX, a XXXXXXX at Cabot Financial Ltd.

I would like to ask both Mr. XXXXXX at Restons Solicitors, and MR. XXXXXX at Cabot Financial Ltd, about why they believe they have a right to deliberately mislead the court in an application and a statement that fails to disclose vital correspondence?

I raise this concern because I have in fact repeatedly received written correspondence from MR. XXXXX, Customer Support Consultant at the Claimant, Cabot Financial Ltd. This correspondence was sent to me after the Claimant brought this matter to court.

In a letter dated XXXX October 2015 [EXHIBIT A], MR. XXXX admitted Cabot Financial Ltd do not have any actual documents on file in relation to their claim, but that a search had begun for relevant documents including: the credit agreement, statement of account, and the original and varied terms and conditions of the original lender. MR. XXXX’S letter of XXX October stated all relevant documents would be provided to me within 40 days of her letter dated XXX October 2015. The end date for this period of 40 days was in fact 2 December 2015.

In a further letter dated XXXX NOVEMBER 2015 [EXHIBIT B], MR. XXX again confirmed that: Cabot Financial Ltd do not have any documents to prove their case; and she then added that this claim is now unenforceable; and that Cabot Financial Ltd are not permitted to obtain judgement or decree against me in court.

However, during the interim between MR. XXXX’S letters of XXX October and XXX NOVEMBER, Restons Solicitors acted contrary to Cabot Financial Ltd’s confirmation that this claim is now unenforceable, and they made a misleading request to the court for default judgement. This was refused by the court due to my application requesting to see documents relating to this matter.

Despite the court’s order that the Claimant must provide me with all relevant documentation by 4.00 p.m on 3 December 2015, the Claimant now says that both myself and the court have already been provided with enough information to prove the Claimant’s case. And yet the Claimant is now also asking for yet another 3 months to try to find any documents which may prove their case.

I believe that Cabot Financial Ltd’s failure to provide any documents to support their case, along with their shameful omission of MR. XXXX’S letters in their latest application and statement to the court dated XXX December, does indeed confirm the Claimant’s case is based solely upon questionable data rather than tangible legal documents.

I also have suspicions that it’s possible the Claimant could misuse their request for a lengthy amount of time to produce fraudulent documents to support their otherwise unsubstantiated and undocumented case. I raise this serious point about fraud, because I am extremely concerned that the Claimant’s solicitors have a policy which states it is not possible for them to find legal documents containing my signature – unless I am first willing to send them my signature.

To further illustrate the incongruence of Restons Solicitors, I wish to draw the court’s attention to the fact that Restons Solicitors own letter dated XX October 2015 requests my signature and yet it is in fact not signed at all. The copied letter I was sent was merely signed: “pp Restons” [EXHIBIT C].

The point raised by Restons Solicitors arguing they have a policy of not corresponding via email is also clearly nonsense. As a result of this, I have had to send my correspondence to the Claimant using recorded delivery post at the post office in person. This has added additional cost and time to this matter. The Claimant’s solicitors have then replied to me enclosing a copy of my own letter to them, but they said they would not acknowledge my letter to them. How can a solicitor’s firm both answer a letter and also claim not to acknowledge that letter at the very same time – all within their letter of reply to that very letter? Surely this is a nonsensical point. While I do accept I am bound by both legislation and the court’s judgment, I do not, however, accept I am obligated to be bullied into adhering to the nonsensical policy of a solicitor’s firm whom I do not know, and, who are clearly desperate to find some way to obtain money from me on behalf of their unscrupulous client.

My letter to the Claimant’s solicitors dated XXX October 2015 clearly sets out my intention to defend the case in full if the Claimant does not rightfully disclose the documentation upon which their case is based. I received none of the required documents, neither from the Claimant nor from their solicitors. Therefore, I made my N244 application via email to the court, which I understand I am fully within my rights to do. I understand that an email application is in fact now a standard legal procedure. Since the court clearly accepts legal applications via email, why can’t the Claimant’s solicitors move with the times and accept urgent legal correspondence via email? Why don’t both Cabot Financial Ltd and Restons Solicitors honour their duty to minimize unnecessary legal costs in such serious legal and financial matters? What if a defendant had a disability or some other circumstances which made it difficult for them to stand in line to post a recorded delivery letter?

The Claimant and their Solicitors now no longer want to even confirm any account number in both their N244 application form and their written statement to the court. Does this mean that the Claimant now also has doubts about the account number in their case?

I ask that the judgement made by the court on XX OCTOBER 2015 remains unchanged so that there can be some realistic end date for this matter and hopefully an avoidance of incurring unnecessary legal costs. I also respectfully ask the Claimant and their solicitors to change their nonsensical policy regarding email correspondence, and to improve their standards of behaviour towards consumers, and to prepare to hear from the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the FCA, and other authorities with whom I plan to lodge serious complaints.
================================================== =====

[nemesis45]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Well written Robin!!
One addition to last paragraph:
After " remains unchanged" and that given the constant prevarication by the claim I as that the court strikes out the claim.
Well done Robin!!

nem

[Robin Hoodie]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Great thanks for your kind help, nem.
Warmest Wishes,
Robin
:tree:

[nemesis45]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Great thanks for your kind help, nem.
Warmest Wishes,
Robin
:tree:

Thank you Robin !!
My best wishes to you, good luck!:sledge: nem

[Robin Hoodie]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Hi nem, just one quick thing...

How should I send this statement to the court in response to the new N244 application they've made?

Should I email it as a statement, with all of the case info, but without any application, etc?

Any thoughts greatly appreciated,

Robin :carolers:

[nemesis45]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Hi nem, just one quick thing...

How should I send this statement to the court in response to the new N244 application they've made?

Should I email it as a statement, with all of the case info, but without any application, etc?

Any thoughts greatly appreciated,

Robin :carolers:

Good morning Robin, responding to your PM.
Yes e-mail ( request acknowledgment ) and send hardcopy by signed for post.

nem~

[Robin Hoodie]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Good morning Robin, responding to your PM.
Yes e-mail ( request acknowledgment ) and send hardcopy by signed for post.

nem~

Hi nem, A quick update with some good news and some not so good news...

I was granted judgement to have the case struck out and my costs paid if the Claimant did not provide the requested documents last month. However, the Claimant's Solicitors then made an application to the court arguing that I had asked for documents in my application that were not specified in their POC. They asked for the judgement to be set aside, and they also disputed having to pay my costs, etc.

I immediately emailed the court with a detailed statement... I accused the Claimant and their Solicitors of deliberately misleading the court, because the Claimant's Solicitors applied for default judgement without telling the court that the Claimant had repeatedly written to me to confirm that their claim was unenforceable because they could not comply with my CCA request. I supplied the court with copies of the Claimant's letters to me, which they deliberately omitted to mention in their detailed statement to the court, and I asked that the judgement to strike the case out should be upheld...

The current situation now is that there is a CC hearing due extremely soon...

I tried to speak to the Claimant on the phone about their misconduct, and they were extremely evasive. They wrote to me stating that are they are try to obtain documents from the original lender within 30 days. I don't know if have asked for an adjournment yet, or if they will be granted an adjournment at all...

They have, however, repeatedly asked the court and myself for several months to provide proof of their claim...

Any thoughts or suggestions about what I could perhaps do would be truly appreciated!

Thanks,

Robin lane:lane:lane:lane:lane:

[nemesis45]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

Hi nem, A quick update with some good news and some not so good news...

I was granted judgement to have the case struck out and my costs paid if the Claimant did not provide the requested documents last month. However, the Claimant's Solicitors then made an application to the court arguing that I had asked for documents in my application that were not specified in their POC. They asked for the judgement to be set aside, and they also disputed having to pay my costs, etc.

I immediately emailed the court with a detailed statement... I accused the Claimant and their Solicitors of deliberately misleading the court, because the Claimant's Solicitors applied for default judgement without telling the court that the Claimant had repeatedly written to me to confirm that their claim was unenforceable because they could not comply with my CCA request. I supplied the court with copies of the Claimant's letters to me, which they deliberately omitted to mention in their detailed statement to the court, and I asked that the judgement to strike the case out should be upheld...

The current situation now is that there is a CC hearing due extremely soon...

I tried to speak to the Claimant on the phone about their misconduct, and they were extremely evasive. They wrote to me stating that are they are try to obtain documents from the original lender within 30 days. I don't know if have asked for an adjournment yet, or if they will be granted an adjournment at all...

They have, however, repeatedly asked the court and myself for several months to provide proof of their claim...

Any thoughts or suggestions about what I could perhaps do would be truly appreciated!

Thanks,

Robin lane:lane:lane:lane:lane:

hello Robin, Happy New Year. (responding to your PM)

Quite a shambles Robin,

The claimant having stated that they have approached the OC and want 30 days to do so
is unreasonable as they have had more than ample time to produce them and should have
had the documents in their hands from the start.
I would make that point robustly.


Do you have the hearing date yet?

nem

[Robin Hoodie]

Re: Court Claim - Cabot / Lloyds - 28-9-2015

hello Robin, Happy New Year. (responding to your PM)

Quite a shambles Robin,

The claimant having stated that they have approached the OC and want 30 days to do so
is unreasonable as they have had more than ample time to produce them and should have
had the documents in their hands from the start.
I would make that point robustly.


Do you have the hearing date yet?

nem

Thanks for your kind help, nem. The date is 2 days from now. My dilemma has been that if I ask the Claimant or their Solicitors what they have done/what they are going to do - they are so disorganised that I don't want to trust them.

Am wondering if there's some way I can try to insist on the hearing going ahead and try to get it struck out that way - again?

Any thoughts would be appreciated.

:bolt::bolt: