PRA Group VS Slee

[MintyUK]

Receiveda claim? Yes
Issue Date: 14-12-2016
Amount approx: 3546.69
Claimant: PRA Group (UK) Ltd.
Solicitor: Surgit Gida (claiments legalrepresentitive)
Original Credit: EGG Credit Card


Particulars of Claim:
The claimant claims the sum of 3746.04 for debt and interest. On 21/06/07the defendant entered into an agreement with Barclays Bank Plc for a creditcard under reference xxxxxxxx. On 6/05/10 the defendant defaulted on theagreement with an outstanding balance of 3889.71. On 17/8/2015 the debt of3889.71 assigned to PRA Group (UK) Ltd. Notices of Assignment were sent to thedefendant in accordance with s136 Law of Property Act 1925. AND THE CLAIMANTCLAIMS
1. The sum of 3389.71
2. Statutory Interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at arate of 8.00% per annum from 17/08/15 to 9/12/16 356.33 and thereafter at adaily rate of 0.74 until judgment or sooner payment.

Stat Barred? No

Have sent: Acknowledged the Claim, Sent a CCA request, Sent a CPR 18 request

Other Info:

This relates to an Egg Credit Card takenout on 14/06/2007. The alleged debt of £4930.71 was then passed onto Barclaycardon 04/04/2013. Payments of £50 per month were then paid to Barclaycard up until23/07/2015. On 17/08/2015 the PRA Group purchased the alleged outstandingbalance of £3839.71. From 23/09/2015 to 23/09/2016, 9 Payments of £50 per monthwas paid to the PRA Group with a then alleged outstanding balance of £3389.71.On 23/09/2016 I received a statement letter from PRA Group asking for furtherpayment as I had cancelled the direct debit. On 03/10/2016 I then sent them a CCA responseto this letter. I asked for the certified copy of the CCA, a signed deed ofassignment, asked how much the debt was purchased for and the name of the dulyauthorised person who is claiming I owe the PRA Group money. On the 24/10/2016I received a letter from PRA Group threatening litigation. I replied backstating they had not produced documents as requested. They then put this on “hold”. On the 15/11/2016 they sent me a copy ofthe CCA agreement from Egg. This is the only thing they sent me. It was aphotocopy of the Egg CCA from 2007. I replied stating that this was an old EggCard agreement and nothing to do with Barclaycard. They replied stating Egg wasa sub – client of Barclaycard. I then received the court summons on the14/12/2016. I have acknowledged theclaim and sent a CPR 18 Request to PRA Group (UK) Ltd on 28/12/2016. They havereplied today 12/01/2017 (letter dated 10^th) stating they haverequested the documentation from the original creditor and the matter has beenplaced on hold until they have it.

I have until 16/01/2017 to submit mydefence.

Grateful for any assistance as I need to put it together next. I have attached the Egg CCA and can also attach anything else required. Thanks

[charitynjw]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

Hi MintyUK & welcome to LB.

Is the posted documentation in response to the CCA request?
If so, & no additional T&C's sent (ie at termination of account), it is not compliant with a CCA s78 request, & unenforceable until they do comply.

[MintyUK]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

Hi Charity and thanks for your reply and welcome.

Yes this is the only documentation they sent in response. Here is what I sent them, my concern is I didn't state the 1974 act when requesting the documents:



Good afternoon
I am responding to your letter dated 23 September 2016 with regards to a notice I have received.
I am confused as to why I received this letter, as I have no contract with you or Barclaycard. Due to this I stopped these payments as I didn’t know what or who they were for.
If you have a lawful claim on any alleged moneys I will look to address the matter. Before I can do so though, please can you provide me with a copy of each of the following:
1. The certified copy of the consumer credit agreement
2. A signed deed of assignment
3. How much this alleged debt was purchased for?
4. The name of the duly authorised person who is claiming that I owe the PRA Group money

As I don’t believe this to be a valid, lawful claim I will not be making anymore payments until you can prove that it is. Also any monies returned to me if this is proven not to be valid

Regards

[samuwell]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

Maybe someone has a defence template. A recent one went something like this but you have to build your own defence in there, listing the things the claimant has done wrong. Check all the dates of supposed assignments as they make them up!
They are not good either at Court Procedure Rules, make sure you stick to the time limits if it gets that far.
(If you signed a credit agreement before 6 April 2008, it could only be a regulated agreement if it was for credit under a certain amount)
Good luck,
Sam.

Defendant

CASE SUMMARY

1. I am the Defendant in this case.

2. On DATE the Claimant wrote to the Defendant requesting repayment of an alleged debt, they had been assigned by ......... marked CL1 [short for Claimant's Letter 1]

3. On DATE I wrote to the Claimant requesting Verification of the alleged debt and of their alleged assignment, marked DL1 [short for Defendant's Letter 1]

4. On Date the Claimant responded to the Defendant's letter [state briefly whatever was in their letter], marked CL2.

5. On DATE I wrote to the Claimant restating my case to see the requested documents for Verification of the alleged debt and alleged assignment, marked DL2.

[samuwell]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

You can download the pdf, A Handbook for Litigants in Person which helps to explain the court procedure just in case you need it.
Don't wait for them to send further promised documents, write back with formal complaints of anything they do wrong, like marking your credit file without a previous default notice, without your knowledge, notification, or consent.
Good luck,
Sam

[charitynjw]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

[MENTION=76223]samuwell[/MENTION]
There's a defence template at the top of this thread.

@MintyUK
To be on the safe side resend a kosher CCA request c/w the £1 fee. (See example, top of thread).
Address the request to the Claimant (per court claim details), & either send it to the solicitors with a covering letter to sols asking them to forward it to their client, (enclose £1 fee)
or
Send directly to Claimant (with £1 fee), & send a copy to the solicitors (no fee with this copy) with a covering letter stating 'for information purposes only - copy of CCA request sent to your client PRA on (date).
We usually suggest a £1 postal order made payable to the Claimant, endorsed 'For statutory purposes only'
& cross refer both p.o. & CCA request with their reference & court claim number.
Keep copies of all & get proof of posting.
Amend the defence example to "....sent CCA ss77-79 request to (Claimant/solicitor) on (date) & am awaiting a reply.

[Diana M]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

you have to build your own defence in there, listing the things the claimant has done wrong.

My personal view is that (generally speaking) a Defence does not list the things the Claimant has done wrong because that only gives them the heads up on how to remedy the situation.

A Defence pretty much denies everything in the POC (unless they are factually correct) and puts the Claimant on strict proof to prove otherwise.

It's also an opportunity to raise legal arguments which have not been raised or even hinted at by the Claimant (e.g Statute Barred where appropriate and PPI etc) in their POC.

Di

[samuwell]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

My personal view is that (generally speaking) a Defence does not list the things the Claimant has done wrong because that only gives them the heads up on how to remedy the situation.

A Defence pretty much denies everything in the POC (unless they are factually correct) and puts the Claimant on strict proof to prove otherwise.

It's also an opportunity to raise legal arguments which have not been raised or even hinted at by the Claimant (e.g Statute Barred where appropriate and PPI etc) in their POC.

Di

A Defence pretty much denies everything in the POC (unless they are factually correct and will already have been requested or disputed in correspondence.) and puts the Claimant on strict proof to prove otherwise.
Of course, sorry, I should have made that point clear.
Sam

[Diana M]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

I agree with a Charity that you need to send a CCA Request with the £1 fee since it appears you may not have made a request in line with the necessary statutory requirements.

You've made a Part 18 Request. What did you ask?

You've not sent a CPR 31.14 Request.

I think your demand that PRA should return any money you've already paid them if the debt is not valid is a tad audacious

There's a difference in a debt being invalid and a debt being unenforceable in a court of law due to various breaches of the Consumer Credit Act.

I cant think of any reason why the Claimant should have to tell you how much they paid for your debt. Why did you ask that question?

It's a pity you told them the account originated as Egg not Barclaycard because that enables them to come up with a recon.

On the plus side they've pleaded it was Barclaycard in the POC.

Di

[Diana M]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

Don't wait for them to send further promised documents, write back with formal complaints of anything they do wrong, like marking your credit file without a previous default notice, without your knowledge, notification, or consent

Once legal proceedings have started letters of complaint can muddy the waters especially if you give away too much information in them.

Your example of telling them that they marked your credit file without a previous Default Notice is an example. Why not let them produce a recon DN which you can then prove is a forgery if you have the Transaction Log from the original creditor which confirms no DN was ever sent or sent on a different date to the one on the recon etc etc.

Don't litigate through correspondence.

Di

[samuwell]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

Good points, but they do now have to show each valid assignment, which they can't if they didn't even know of the debt origin. They buy in blocks of debtors, it isn't personal, they just want money.

[Diana M]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

which they can't if they didn't even know of the debt origin.

In this case they now know the debt origin because the OP has told them.

Hence my point that 'less is more' with debt purchasers and especially Claimants.

Di

[samuwell]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

Once legal proceedings have started letters of complaint can muddy the waters especially if you give away too much information in them.

Your example of telling them that they marked your credit file without a previous Default Notice is an example. Why not let them produce a recon DN which you can then prove is a forgery if you have the Transaction Log from the original creditor which confirms no DN was ever sent or sent on a different date to the one on the recon etc etc.

Don't litigate through correspondence.

Di

I do agree with your caution, however, not to confuse the situation I'll explain why I say this.
Formal complaints must be logged and addressed.
A recent PRA claim was withdrawn by them when they were called on the phone prior to exchange (by date) of documents to ask if they were ready to exchange because they had not previously stuck to CPRs. They were not ready to exchange.
They then agreed to drop all claims and remove the entry from the CR file if all complaints were dropped which was agreed to. They did, and so did the claimant. Case was closed.
All cases are different, there was also a complaint in this case which addressed data protection and which was reported to the ICO.
Just hope this might be helpful and do not wish to confuse the situation.

Bless all for their good work.

[samuwell]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

Sorry , should have said withdrew the claim, not dropped.

[Diana M]

Re: PRA Group VS Slee

Sorry , should have said withdrew the claim, not dropped.

It probably should have said 'discontinued' the claim.

Was the claim you mentioned your claim?

Of course it's helpful to share experiences on a forum, but it's a risk to tell a Defendant to do something in their case where the situation may be completely different. No two claims are the same.

The Defence example you posted seems to be a combination of a Defence and a Witness Statement with Exhibits. I was simply concerned that the OP may have filed that (template) at court.

All general views are always welcome

Di