Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs slonie

Hi everyone,

i updated the original thread the other day, with two letters I had received from Cohen Cramer solicitors.

I sent the letter asking for information and as yet Lowell havent been in touch or provided the information asked for.

My defence has to be submitted via MCOL by the 24th August.

Do I send a letter to Cohen Cramer asking for an extension? Or do I go ahead and file defence, stating that while cohen cramer have been in touch to say that they have instructed their client to provide information, and that they would put the account on hold, and give me extra time (although they havent said how long) to prepare a defence, I have had nothing from Lowell, and so I dispute the claim?

Any advice, as always, is very much appreciated. Time is short on this one, and Im not sure whether I have to file the defence or not, now the solicitors have said the account is held?

Thank you

Could you post a link to your original thread please so I can have a read back while going through ur defence. To answer your question yes you should file a defence now.

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs slonie

I read on on another forum that the dates always include the day of issue so for e ample a claim issued on the 1st must be acknowledged by 19th ( you have 19 days) but I think the calculator on here would say 20th. Better to be a day early than miss the deadline.
@charitynjw @Diana M @nemesis45

For MCOL claims

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...t07/pd_part07e
5.7 The claim form will be deemed to be served on the fifth day after the claim was issued irrespective of whether that day is a business day or not. ‘Business day’ has the same meaning as in rule 6.2(b).

[slonie]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs slonie

http://legalbeagles.info/forums/show...-Ltd-vs-slonie

This is the link to my original post.

Thanks in advance

[JulieM]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs slonie

For MCOL claims

https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pr...t07/pd_part07e
5.7 The claim form will be deemed to be served on the fifth day after the claim was issued irrespective of whether that day is a business day or not. ‘Business day’ has the same meaning as in rule 6.2(b).

Makes sense to me, the confusion caused when reading multiple forums

[slonie]

Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

Hi everyone,

Ive written the defence that ideally needs to go in tonight.

Could you kindly give it a once over and let me know if its ok, or if it needs amending in any way.

Very grateful for all your help so far. You have been absolutely invaluable to me.

IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT (CCBC)


CASE NO: XXXXXXXX


BETWEEN:


LOWELL PORTFOLIO LTD
CLAIMANT
-and-


MS XXXXXX
DEFENDANT




DEFENCE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




1: I received the claim XXXXXXXX from the County Court Business Centre, Northampton County Court on 25^th July 2016.

2: Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

3: This claim appears to be for a non regulated Catalogue Account.
4: The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate information to enable me to properly assess my position with regards the claim.

5. The particulars of claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.

6. The Claimants statement of case states that the account was assigned from J D Williams (Creditor) to Lowell Portfolio Ltd (Claimant) on 20^th December 2012. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.

7. It is denied that J D Williams (Creditor) served any Default notice on the Defendant pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served upon the Defendant.

8: On the 11^th August 2016, I sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimants statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to Cohen Cramer Solicitors. I requested the Claimant provide copies of the Agreement, and Notice of Assignment.

9. Cohen Cramer Solicitorshas not sent any of these documents to me.

10. On the 11^th August 2016 I sent a formal request for a copy of the original agreement to Lowell Portfolio Ltd (Claimant) pursuant to section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1 fee.

11. The Claimant has failed to comply with s 78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s 78 (6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.

12. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation. Therefore it is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed.

13. I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case else the Claim should stand struck out.

14. In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment.

15. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.

Statement of Truth

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true.



Signed ……MS XXXXXX……………………………………

Dated ..........23^rd August 2016......................................... ....

[EXC]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

I'll give [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION] and [MENTION=55034]nemesis45[/MENTION] a shout.

For ref the other threads are http://legalbeagles.info/forums/show...-Ltd-vs-slonie and http://legalbeagles.info/forums/show...-Ltd-vs-slonie

[slonie]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

Thanks for that. Much appreciated.

[nemesis45]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

Thanks for that. Much appreciated.

Hi Slonie,

Well done that 's imo good to go!!

Good luck!

nem

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

Having a read shortly but first glance looks fine xxx have taken the invisible text bit out for u..... have to wait a little till I can get on puter rather than phone to go through properly xx

I'll merge threads then we can see back easier make sure ur defence is strong as poss... Eg. The contention the agreement is unregulated etc


Edit- should be merged and all together now xx

[slonie]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

Hi @Amethyst

Do you think I need to add anything else in to show that I am denying the claim, and that I believe it is unregulated anyway? Im not sure that it reads that way, but then im totally new to anything like this.

Thanks so much for all your help.

[EXC]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

Hi @Amethyst

Do you think I need to add anything else in to show that I am denying the claim

You've made that clear in paragraph 2.

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

I think it's better you believe it is regulated as unregulated means the CCA provisions don't apply xxx I'll help better in a bit just having tea xxx

[slonie]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

Hi @Amethyst

If I amend number 3 to this instead
"3: This claim appears to be for a Catalogue Account agreement regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974."

would that be enough to strengthen the defence? is there anything else you would re word.

Thanks

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

Right, sorry xxx

The POC was

Particulars of Claim: The claim is for the sum of £492.98 due by the defendant under a non-regulated JD Williams account, with an account reference of O6957732. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required under the terms of the account agreement. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 20th December 2012, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £39.44. The claimant claims the sum of £532.42

Also previously you have mentioned statute barred ? last payment you believe in 2009? IF SO then add another paragraph after 12

13) Although I am unable to identify this account due to the lack of information given, I have held catalogue accounts in the past. However I have had no contact with or made any payments to these since August 2009 following ( unemployment/illness etc) and I believe that should this claim relate to one of those accounts, the cause of action would have been over 6 years ago, and the debt be statute barred by virtue of paragraph 5 of the Limitations Act 1980.


( change italic as applicable or amend suitably)


So defence wise..........



IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT (CCBC)


CASE NO: XXXXXXXX


BETWEEN:


LOWELL PORTFOLIO LTD
CLAIMANT
-and-


MS XXXXXX
DEFENDANT




DEFENCE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




1: I received the claim XXXXXXXX from the County Court Business Centre, Northampton County Court on 25th July 2016.

2: Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

3: The Claimant contends in their statement of case that the claim is for an alleged debt arising from a "non-regulated JD Williams account". I do not recognise the reference given nor the amount being claimed.

4: I am aware that "JD Williams" is a company which provides goods, and services, on credit terms, to its customers, via a mail order and online catalogue.

5: The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate information to enable me to properly assess my position with regards the claim in that the statement of case fails to;
i) state when the alleged agreement was entered into
ii) state how the debt arose
iii) detail what, if any, breach of any agreement, has led to this claim.
iv) detail how the sum claimed has been calculated

6. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation. Therefore it is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed. I am unable to plead fully without further information. To do so would be guesswork. The Claimant did not provide any information to me prior to bringing this court claim.

7: In order to find out more information, on the 11th August 2016, I sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimants statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to the Claimant's Solicitors, Cohen Cramer. I requested the Claimant provide copies of the Agreement, and Notice of Assignment, as mentioned in their statement of case.

8. The Claimant has not sent any of these documents to me.

9. Additionally, on the 11th August 2016, I sent a formal request for a copy of the original agreement to Lowell Portfolio Ltd (Claimant) pursuant to section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1 fee. Any agreement with "JD Williams" would running credit agreement and therefore be regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

10. The Claimant has failed to comply with s 78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s 78 (6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.

11. I requested that the Claimant agree to an extension of time pursuant to CPR 15.5 to allow them further time to obtain the documents to clarify their claim, which they should have had before bringing the claim against me, however they failed to agree to any extension, or provide the documents, and therefore I am embarrassed in my pleadings.

12. The Claimants statement of case states that the account was assigned from J D Williams (Creditor) to Lowell Portfolio Ltd (Claimant) on 20th December 2012. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.

13. It is denied that J D Williams (Creditor) served any Default notice on the Defendant pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served upon the Defendant.

14. I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case else the Claim should stand struck out. This documentation should include;
i) The Agreement and all applicable terms.
ii) Notice of Assignment
iii) Default notice
iv) Statements of Account
v) List of transactions on the account

15. In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment.

16. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.

Statement of Truth

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true.



Signed ……MS XXXXXX……………………………………

Dated ..........23rd August 2016......................................... ....

[slonie]

Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd vs S Lonie - Defence ready to be submitted on 23/8/16

Thank you so much for helping to amend that defence.

Im going to submit it now, so ive got everything crossed that it will be resolved quickly.

I will update when i know anything at all.

This site has been absolutely invaluable, please keep up the good work everyone.


xxx