Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

[nemesis45]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Here it is.

Thanks for the quick replies!

@nemesis45

Thank you Darmah,

Something is wrong here Cabot issuing a claim via one company, then claim
another company is the claimant and returning the PO.

I have some digging to do off line I'll get to the defence properly in the morning.

nem

[darmah900]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Thanks again....... am I right in thinking I must submit my defence tomorrow at the latest?

Best regards.

@nemesis45

[darmah900]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Thanks again....... am I right in thinking I must submit my defence tomorrow at the latest?

Best regards.

@nemesis45

I've made a final draft (getting a bit panicky now! How does it look?

Claim No: B6CY5M1G

Between:

Claimant: Hilleseden Securities Ltd T/A DLC

and

Defendant: Mr XXXXXX
Of: XXXXXXX

Defence:

1. I received the claim on 15th December 2015 from the Northampton
County Court Business Centre.

2. All statements in the claimant’s statement of claim are denied,
unless specifically admitted below.

3. The claimant’s statement is vague and is not fully
particularised and does not allow me to fully enter my defence.

4. The claim appears to be in regard to an account with Black
Horse Finance Ltd.

5. The defendant admits to entering into an agreement with Black
Horse Finance, but holds no documents in regard to it.

6. On 21st December 2015 I sent a request under the provisions of
the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a copy of the contract mentioned
in the statement of the claim to Hillesden Securities Ltd T/A DLC
(the claimant) together with the £1.00 statutory fee. This was
delivered and signed for on 22nd December 2015.

7. The above request and the £1.00 statutory fee was returned to
me on 24th December 2015 by Cabot Financial UK Ltd with a letter
stating that they are the creditor and that my payment could not
be cashed as it was made payable to Hillesden Securities Ltd T/A
DLC.

8. On 21st December 2015 I sent a request made under the
provisions of Civil Procedure Rule 31. 14 for inspection of the
documents mentioned in the claimant’s statement of claim to
Restons Solicitors Ltd. This was delivered and signed for on 23rd
December 2015.

9. Restons Solicitors Ltd have not responded to this request.

10. On 29th December 2015 I sent a second request under the
provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a copy of the
contract mentioned in the statement of the claim to Hillesden
Securities Ltd T/A DLC (the claimant) together with the £1.00
statutory fee. This was delivered and signed for on 30th December
2015.

11. The above second request and the £1.00 statutory fee was again
returned to me on 12th January 2016 by Cabot Financial UK Ltd
with a letter stating that they are the creditor and that my
payment could not be cashed as it was payable to Hillesden
Securities Ltd T/A DLC.

12. Hillesden Securities Ltd T/A DLC have not responded to either
of my requests under the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act
1974 for a copy of the contract mentioned in the statement of the
claim.

13. The defendant avers that the alleged debt which is the subject
of this claim was statute barred under the provisions of the
Limitation Act 1980 when this claim was issued, no payment or
acknowledgment having been made in more than 6 years.

14. The claimant is to be to strict proof that the alleged debt
was not statute barred on the relevant date.

15. It is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief
claimed or any relief at all.

Statement of truth:

The defendant believes the statements made above are the truth to
the best of his knowledge and belief.


Signed: xxxxxxxx (Defendant)

Date: 13th January 2016




@nemesis45

[Celestine]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Hi Darmah

Thanks for your PM. I did a little tidy up and took out first person references as there was a mix of 1st and 3rd person. Provided a bit more emphasis on the confusing situation.

Between:

Claimant: Hilleseden Securities Ltd T/A DLC

and

Defendant: Mr XXXXXX
Of: XXXXXXX

-DEFENCE-


1. The defendant received the claim on 15th December 2015 from the Northampton County Court Business Centre.

2. All statements in the claimant’s statement of claim are denied,
unless specifically admitted below.

3. The claimant’s statement is vague and is not fully
particularised and does not enable the defendant to properly assess and defend the claim as there is substantial dispute over the identity of the disputed account.

4. The sparse particulars of claim state this case is in regard to an account with Black Horse Finance Ltd.

5. The defendant does not dispute that he once had a contract with Black Horse Finance Ltd but does not hold any paperwork as the account dates from 2005 and was terminated in 2009.

6. Following receipt of the claim, on 21st December 2015 the defendant sent a statutory request under s.77-79 the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a copy of the contract mentioned in the particulars of claim to Hillesden Securities Ltd T/A DLC (the claimant) together with the £1.00 statutory fee. This was delivered and signed for on 22nd December 2015.

7. The above request and the £1.00 statutory fee was returned to
the defendant on 24th December 2015 by a company called ‘Cabot Financial UK Ltd’ with a letter stating that they are the creditor and that payment could not be cashed as it was made payable to Hillesden Securities Ltd T/A DLC. This letter also referenced an entirely different original creditor, a different amount owed and different account number.

8. On 21st December 2015 the defendant sent a request under the
provisions of Civil Procedure Rule 31. 14 for inspection of the
documents mentioned in the claimant’s particulars of claim to
Restons Solicitors Ltd. This was delivered and signed for on 23rd
December 2015.

9. Restons Solicitors Ltd have not responded at all to this request.

10. On 29th December 2015 the defendant sent a further request under the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a copy of the
‘contract’ mentioned in the statement of claim to Hillesden
Securities Ltd T/A DLC (the claimant) together with the £1.00
statutory fee. This was delivered and signed for on 30th December
2015.

11. The above second request and the £1.00 statutory fee was again
returned to the defendant on 12th January 2016 by Cabot Financial UK Ltd with a letter stating that they are the creditor and that
payment could not be cashed as it was payable to Hillesden
Securities Ltd T/A DLC.

12. Hillesden Securities Ltd T/A DLC have not responded to either
request under the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act
1974 for a copy of the contract mentioned in the particulars of
claim.

13. The defendant avers that the alleged debt which is the subject
of this claim was already time barred under the provisions of the
Limitation Act 1980 when this claim was issued. No payment or
acknowledgment having been made in more than 6 years and no documentation has been provided by the claimant or their solicitors in response to statutory requests for information.

14. If the claimant is able to provide such proof during these proceedings, the defence will require amendment, the costs of which should be met by the claimant.

15. The claimant is put to strict proof that the alleged debt
was not time barred on the date of issue of this claim.

16. It is denied that the claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief at all.

Statement of truth:

The defendant believes the statements made above are the truth to
the best of his knowledge and belief.


Signed: xxxxxxxx (Defendant)

Date: 13th January 2016

[darmah900]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Thank you so much Celestine :-) ....... that reads quite beautifully!
I shall submit it now and update when i get a response.
With thanks to Nemesis and everyone else!

[Celestine]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Not quite... take out the red 'disputed' in para 3!


"3. The claimant’s statement is vague and is not fully
particularised and does not enable the defendant to properly assess and defend the claim as there is substantial dispute over the identity of the disputed account"

[darmah900]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

:-O wooh! Well spotted....... thanks.

[nemesis45]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

:-O wooh! Well spotted....... thanks.

Good morning Darmah,

Responding to your PM

Apologies for not getting back to you earlier. I was called way on a urgent family problem.

Defence is looking great!

Thanks to [MENTION=2]Celestine[/MENTION]

nem

[darmah900]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

With thanks again to [MENTION=55034]nemesis45[/MENTION] and [MENTION=2]Celestine[/MENTION] for your help thus far. As promised, I have signed on as a VIP and here is the latest instalment (to keep anyone who is interested up-to-date).
Having submitted my defence on-line, I received an acknowledgement from the court by post (dated 14th Jan) stating that a copy was being served on the claimant.
On the 5th Feb, I received the attached letters from Restons......
Number 1 appears to be their standard reply to a CPR request (having read similar ones on here), but what to make of number 2?
I certainly didn't request anything other than the documents mentioned on the original claim form (i.e. the "Contract" and "Assignment"), but do I need to respond to them with copies of my twice-returned CCA request and remind them of their need to comply with a valid CPR request..... and is it possible to have one's defence struck out??
As to the "default date" they mention...... I know that the last dealings I had with BH (or whoever it was at the time) were in 2009..........
They obviously don't want to make anything straightforward, but I am amazed that they can simply ignore what is a legal request for information!
Where do I go with this now?

Many thanks.

[nemesis45]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

With thanks again to @nemesis45 and @Celestine for your help thus far. As promised, I have signed on as a VIP and here is the latest instalment (to keep anyone who is interested up-to-date).
Having submitted my defence on-line, I received an acknowledgement from the court by post (dated 14th Jan) stating that a copy was being served on the claimant.
On the 5th Feb, I received the attached letters from Restons......
Number 1 appears to be their standard reply to a CPR request (having read similar ones on here), but what to make of number 2?
I certainly didn't request anything other than the documents mentioned on the original claim form (i.e. the "Contract" and "Assignment"), but do I need to respond to them with copies of my twice-returned CCA request and remind them of their need to comply with a valid CPR request..... and is it possible to have one's defence struck out??
As to the "default date" they mention...... I know that the last dealings I had with BH (or whoever it was at the time) were in 2009..........
They obviously don't want to make anything straightforward, but I am amazed that they can simply ignore what is a legal request for information!
Where do I go with this now?

Many thanks.

Good morning Darma CPR 31.14 is specifically for the documents mention in the Statement of Claim nothing else can be requested.
Also this rule only applies until the claim is allocated to the Small Claims Track.

What is more important is the CCA request sent to the claimant, Has this been complied with?

nem

[darmah900]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Hi [MENTION=55034]nemesis45[/MENTION]
Thanks for the response. As per my previous posts (see #13), both my CCA requests were returned....... I've posted up a copy of my CCA request to Hillesden (and the covering letter I sent with the second one) and a copy of the CPR I sent to Restons. The original N1 is in post #15.

Should I send the returned CCA requests to Restons?

Any thoughts?

Thanks again!

J

[nemesis45]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Hi @nemesis45
Thanks for the response. As per my previous posts (see #13), both my CCA requests were returned....... I've posted up a copy of my CCA request to Hillesden (and the covering letter I sent with the second one) and a copy of the CPR I sent to Restons. The original N1 is in post #15.

Should I send the returned CCA requests to Restons?

Any thoughts?

Thanks again!

J

This is plain stupidity what are they playing at??

Hillesden Securities T/A DLC are named as the claimant on the
N1 they should produce the agreement.

Yes let's try Restons with this

For the personal attention of
Mr Nigel Petrie Coe
Restons Solicitors..

Date: Ref: CC Claim No.....................................

Dear Mr Petrie Coe,

I have been in frequent contact with your clients Cabot Financial and Hillesden Securities Ltd T/A DLC,
in regard to requests made under the provisions of Sections 77/78/79 of CCA 1974.

My request have been returned ( please find copies of responses for information ) as you may be already
aware your clients responses are entirely spurious and are intended to block my defence of this claim.

I am enclosing herewith a further formal request for a copy of the agreement relating to the alleged debt
which is the subject of the claim. I have included the required statutory fee of £1.00.

I suggest that you advise your client that if the agreement is not provided immediately I will make
application to the court to have this claim struck out citing your clients conduct.

I am preparing a report to the FCA on the conduct of your client in this matter.

Yours etc,

use signed for post and check delivery date.

nem

[darmah900]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

This is plain stupidity what are they playing at??

Hillesden Securities T/A DLC are named as the claimant on the
N1 they should produce the agreement.

Yes let's try Restons with this

For the personal attention of
Mr Nigel Petrie Coe
Restons Solicitors..

Date: Ref: CC Claim No.....................................

Dear Mr Petrie Coe,

I have been in frequent contact with your clients Cabot Financial and Hillesden Securities Ltd T/A DLC,
in regard to requests made under the provisions of Sections 77/78/79 of CCA 1974.

My request have been returned ( please find copies of responses for information ) as you may be already
aware your clients responses are entirely spurious and are intended to block my defence of this claim.

I am enclosing herewith a further formal request for a copy of the agreement relating to the alleged debt
which is the subject of the claim. I have included the required statutory fee of £1.00.

I suggest that you advise your client that if the agreement is not provided immediately I will make
application to the court to have this claim struck out citing your clients conduct.

I am preparing a report to the FCA on the conduct of your client in this matter.

Yours etc,

use signed for post and check delivery date.

nem

Thanks Nem,
I shall get this off first thing in the morning. Shall I remind them of my (valid, as far as I can see!) CPR request too?

(I have the proofs of delivery for everything, btw)

Regards,

J

[darmah900]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Dear Nemesis

Well, here we go again! Another thrilling instalment!

This is the response from Restons (I had enclosed both original CCA requests to Hillesdens, copies of their responses, a copy of the letter from Restons which threatened striking out my defence and a fresh CCA request for them to supply to their client!)

Restons ARE supposed to be representing their client..... aren't they?

What next? Your thoughts would be appreciated!
[MENTION=55034]nemesis45[/MENTION]

[nemesis45]

Re: Hillesden Securities vs darmah900

Dear Nemesis

Well, here we go again! Another thrilling instalment!

This is the response from Restons (I had enclosed both original CCA requests to Hillesdens, copies of their responses, a copy of the letter from Restons which threatened striking out my defence and a fresh CCA request for them to supply to their client!)

Restons ARE supposed to be representing their client..... aren't they?

What next? Your thoughts would be appreciated!
@nemesis45

Cabot are really pulling some fast ones here with CCA Request.

I suggest a letter to Mr Nigel Petrie - Coe at Restons.

Restons Solicitors
.
.
For the Personal Attention of

Nigel Petrie Coe.


Date...

CC Claim Number..............................:

Your Client Hillesden Securities T/A DLC

Dear Mr Petrie Coe,

I am most concern about the conduct of this claim by Restons, Hillesdon Securities Ltd T/ A DLC and
Cabot.

I require a full explanation as to why a request for an agreement made under the provision of CCA 1974
addressed and delivered to the Claimant as clearly named as Hillesden Securities Ltd T/A DLC with the appropriate
statutory fee has been rejected and found it's way into the hands of Cabot which demands that payment should be
made to Cabot I believe this is unreasonable and is designed to forestall compliance with a lawful request for information.

I expect and require a full explanation for such conduct which is also being reported for information purposes to the FCA.

Send by signed for post and send a copy to Hillesden as well.