Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Hi charity,

I requested NOA, default notice and credit agreement but did not specifically ask for the deed of assignment. Can I do this now?

Sorry - if I want to request the deed of assignment even at this late stage can someone let me know what I should put in the letter? I will get it sent out recorded delivery today if I know what to put.

Thanks again all.

I suspect that it is a bit late to try & do this for your hearing. (Mon 5th?)

[dasher13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Hi charity - yeah I saw that but his linkedin profile page states he left Cap1 in Feb 2014. Desperately trying to find other sources.

- - - Updated - - -

Hi charity - sorry missed your other post. Hearing is on the 19th Dec. I have emailed the Chief Operating Officer at Cap1 and sent out a letter recorded delivery with a SAR request and postal order. It may be in vain but thought I had to try.

[dasher13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

found these too:

https://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/d...chael-woodburn

http://www.checkdirector.co.uk/direc...hael-woodburn/

- - - Updated - - -

Also if you google his name and Cap 1 there are lots of press releases or references to him for 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013 but nothing beyond that.

[R0b]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Sorry [MENTION=5553]charitynjw[/MENTION] must have missed those posts, I think I came across that too but it doesn't seem very credible, or is it? I would have thought LinkedIn provides a more accurate presentation given that its effectively an online CV and would have added more weight than the Bloomberg one.

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Sorry @charitynjw must have missed those posts, I think I came across that too but it doesn't seem very credible, or is it? I would have thought LinkedIn provides a more accurate presentation given that its effectively an online CV and would have added more weight than the Bloomberg one.

Phone Cap1 Holdings?
Tel no. on link.

[dasher13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Hi again,

I have attached my new version of my Witness Statement after R0b very kindly advised me of some comprehensive changes to make it right.

R0b are you able to take a look at this version please? I need to get it sent off tomorrow morning or I will miss my deadline as you know.

I have included in my exhibit every page of the letters I sent to Lowell plus receipts that prove recorded delivery and the print outs from the tracking service to show they were signed for and received. I hope that is the right thing to do?

Charity - took your advice and contacted Cap 1 re Michael Woodburn and when he left the company and waiting for a response now to see if he did leave the company back in 2014 - two years before he apparently signed a notice of assignment to me saying Lowell owned this account (and which Lowell have submitted to the court).

Also noted from looking online that a true NOA would not only be on proper letter-headed paper with registered office details on etc as R0b pointed out - but also should have a balance on it, Cap 1's reference, a barcode and contact details for who the account was assigned to.

All of this is absent from the NOA Lowell have submitted to the court - it is just on white paper with none of those details listed above on. Are there any legal rules on NOA's that I can point to in my WS to again show this NOA from Lowell is a fake?

Thanks again to you all. Beginning to panic now but I would have completely fallen apart without all of you.

[R0b]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Hello,

Made a few changes, though you might need to update your exhibits in the right places but other than that I think its looking much better.

Just out of curiosity, why so many exhibits in page 5?

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

[MENTION=89617]dasher13[/MENTION] & [MENTION=71570]R0b[/MENTION]

Also noted from looking online that a true NOA would not only be on proper letter-headed paper with registered office details on etc as R0b pointed out - but also should have a balance on it, Cap 1's reference, a barcode and contact details for who the account was assigned to.

All of this is absent from the NOA Lowell have submitted to the court - it is just on white paper with none of those details listed above on. Are there any legal rules on NOA's that I can point to in my WS to again show this NOA from Lowell is a fake?

I guess that Lowells will try to pass this off as a file copy, which isn't usually on headed paper.
But without proof, it could be typed by anyone at any time.
Does their WS cover this?

[dasher13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Hi R0b - brilliant thank you for looking over it again. I'll double check everything re the exhibits and then send it tomorrow. I think page 5 has so many as I have included copies of the receipts and copies of the print outs from the tracking to show it was signed for so definitely received.

Hi Charity - yes you are probably right I guess that's what they will try. In their WS they just say 'the claimant has provided evidence by the way of the NOA sent to the defendant on 16/7/15.' I know this is an absolute lie.

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Hi R0b - brilliant thank you for looking over it again. I'll double check everything re the exhibits and then send it tomorrow. I think page 5 has so many as I have included copies of the receipts and copies of the print outs from the tracking to show it was signed for so definitely received.

Hi Charity - yes you are probably right I guess that's what they will try. In their WS they just say 'the claimant has provided evidence by the way of the NOA sent to the defendant on 16/7/15.' I know this is an absolute lie.

Yep
I've just read back & taken a look at their WS.
They are very careful in not mentioning how or when the alleged copy of the NoA was obtained.
Just 'this is it & we use the submitted copy as proof', sort of thing.

[dasher13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Is the burden not on them to prove it is authentic given that I have highlighted all the flaws in it and the fact that they have provided a very dodgy credit agreement with a different date to the one stated in their WS and a completely different account number on it?

[R0b]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

YOu can raise the authenticity of the documents, file copy or not you would still expect them to be verified by Cap One saying they are a true copy, but the account number is different too so there is clearly an inconsistency. Again, if this Michael Woodburn no longer worked there and left before the assignment took place, it can cast further doubt on the crditibility of the document.

Either way, if their WS is clearly non compliant and all paragraphs containign legal argument and opinion should be struck out, which if leaves very little they won't have a case to argue and summary judgment may be available if you make the request at the beginning of trial.

As per Justice Cooke again, they ought to have provided all of this at the prior to the issue of proceeding but they have continuuosly ignored it. Not to mention the fact that the SAR request shows that they weren't in possession at the time. Waiting for documents to turn up after issuing proceedings is a clear abuse of process.

[dasher13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Thanks R0b for the continued help and advice. I guess that I need to get all of this straight for the trial. I will go back and re-read everything that people have so helpfully posted and start working on what I will say on the day quickly. If you can help with process so I don't forget to ask for most of their WS to be ateck out at the start and why that would be brilliant. I'm not sure how I can reciprocate all of this help.

[dasher13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Hi R0b,

Just to confirm am I not now putting in section titles like 'background' etc? Just a list of paragraphs up until the conclusion which is marked as 'conclusion'?

dasher

[dasher13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd v dasher13

Sorry all one more thing - in Lowell's WS they state that the account was subject to a legal assignment on 28/08/2014 but then they have provided a NOA which is dated 15/07/15. The go on to state that this is when it was served. So is the document they reference for 28/08/14 the deed of assignment?? If so, and this exists, whey was it not in the bundle with the SAR documents they sent to me??