Lowell VS Richisup

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowell VS Richisup

As this is a utility bill issue, the Consumer Credit Act doesn't apply, apart from some very limited instances.

[richisup]

Re: Lowell VS Richisup

Amended


IN THE COUNTY COURT BUSSINESS CENTRE

CASE No: ####

BETWEEN:

Lowell Portfolio Ltd
CLAIMANT
-and-

#####
DEFENDANT

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




Preliminary Matters

1. The Claimants claim form fails to adequately set out the nature of the Claim.

2. The Defendant avers that the Claimants pleadings are an abuse of process. The Claimants pleadings are lacking detail, there are no details as to when the alleged default occurred, the degree of default, despite requests for information from the Defendant, the Claimant has not provided any details as to how the sums claimed have accrued. Accordingly the Defendants contend that the pleadings are wholly inadequate for a contested matter and that the Claimant should be required to plead its case coherently and accurately as required by the CPR 16 and PD 16. The Defendants reserve the right to replead their defence should the Claimant replead its claim adequately

3. The Defendant accepts the claim was issued in the Northampton County Court Bulk Centre and that there are restrictions on pleading. However the bulk centre rules clearly state that if you cannot plead in the allowed number of characters then you should not use the Bulk Centre or in the alternative the Claimant was at liberty to issue and set out that particulars were to follow.

The Claim

4. The Claimant states the claim relates to an agreement with O2 (UK) Ltd under account reference ##### but without further details the Defendant is unable to identify such an account within his own records.

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

6. The Claimant has failed to produce and has not disclosed any documents relating to their claim to the Defendant.

7. No date of inception of the account has been given

8. No default notice has been received by the Defendant

9. The Defendant does not recognise the debt from the details given and is unable to ascertain whether there is any amount owing to the original creditor or the claimant

10. The particulars of claim state that the account was assigned/purchased by Lowell Portfolio Ltd on ##/02/2012 and notice given to the Defendant. The Defendant has no knowledge of receiving notice of this assignment.

11. The Defendant has contacted O2 requesting further information the using details given by the claimant however they have no record of such debt or notice.

12. Upon the Claimant clarifying matters set out above the Defendant reserves her position to amend this Defence further. The Defendant shall seek the costs of the amendments from the Claimant due to the Claimants failure to plead its case adequately.

13. The Defendant has also sent a request for inspection of documents on the ##/09/2016 to Lowell Portfolio mentioned in their statement of case as allowed under CPR 31.14. The Claimant has not provided these documents.

14. For the avoidance of doubt the Defendant requires the Claimant to plead effectively and disclose the legible documents upon which the Claim is based. In the event the Claimant fails to replead, then the Defendant reserves the right to apply for whatever orders it deems fit including an order striking the Claim out.

15. 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.

16. Should the Claimants adequately evidence the debt the Defendant reserves the right to amend his defence.


Default Notice

17. Due to the Claimants failure to allow the Defendant to inspect the Default notice alluded to within the Claim form the Defendant is prejudiced.

18. Accordingly the Defendant reserves his position to amend this Defence with the costs of the same paid by the Claimant if the Claimant provides a copy of the Default Notice.

Conclusion

The Defendant avers that

19. The Claimant has failed to plead properly in this matter and has failed to provide any information relating to this debt.

20. The Claimants attempts at claiming post judgement interest are an attempt at unjust enrichment. The Defendant refers to s74 County Courts Act 1984 and section 2 of the County Courts (Interest on Judgement Debts) Order 1991 as a statutory bar on the Claimants claim to interest. Furthermore no contract entitling the Claimant to post judgement interest has been adduced in evidence and accordingly there is no entitlement to post judgement interest. Interest being owed as claimed is denied.

21. Therefore, the Claimants Claim should be dismissed and the Claimant should pay the Defendants costs.



Statement of Truth

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



Signed …………………………………………

Dated .................................................. ....


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[richisup]

Re: Lowell VS Richisup

Just to update this thread with good news, the attached letter is what I have received from Lowell, it explains they will not be pursuing the claim any further.

This only two weeks before we were due in court so it seems they were just trying it on right to the last minute!

All I need to do now is look into removing any credit marks left behind (if any).

Really can't thank you all enough

[MIKE770]

Re: Lowell VS Richisup

nice one well done