Tweet
Re: Lowell Portfolio Ltd v Studly
Okie dokies, with just a few days to go before the REAL deadline at 1600 on Tue 18th April (bloody Bank Holidays eh?!?) I've tweaked the defence a little bit, primarily so it reads better I hope.
Please feel free to submit any critical analysis!!!
----------------------------------------------------------
1. I received the claim ######## issued by the Northampton County
Court on ## Mar 2017.
2. Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case
is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.
3. The statement of case states that the amount claimed is due
under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a
JD Williams account, reference #######.
4. The statement of case fails to state when the agreement was
entered into.
5. I am of the belief that the alleged debt will be statute
barred under the provisions of The Limitation Act 1980. The
Claimant is put to providing unequivocal proof that the alleged
debt is not statute barred else the claim should be struck out.
6. The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate
information to enable me to properly assess my position with
regards to the claim.
7. The Claimants statement of case states that a Default Notice,
pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act was served. I do
not recall receiving this Default Notice. The Claimant is required
to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served.
8. The Claimants statement of case states that the account was
assigned from JD Williams to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd on ## Dec
2012. I do not recall receiving notice of this assignment.
9. On the ## Mar 2017 a formal request was sent to Cohen Cramer
Solicitors for inspection of the following documents mentioned in
the statement of case under CPR 31.14; (a) Agreement (b) Default
Notice (c) Notice of Assignment (d) Deed of Assignment.
10. Cohen Cramer Solicitors have not provided me with any of
these documents.
11. On the ## Mar 2017 a further letter was sent to Cohen Cramer
Solicitors, requesting an agreement in writing to a 28 day
extension (as allowed under CPR 15.5) to the time period allowed
for the filing of my defence, pending receipt of the documents
requested, detailed at point 9 above.
12. The response received in a letter dated ## Mar 2017 denied
this extension request, by virtue of the absence of any written
agreement contained within.
13. On the ## Mar 2017 a formal request for a copy of the
original agreement was sent to the Claimant, pursuant to s.78 of
the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1.00 fee
payment by Postal Order.
14. The Claimant has failed to comply with s.78(1) Consumer
Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s.78(6) of the Consumer Credit
Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.
15. Under CPR 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. I request that the court orders the Claimant to provide the
documentation requested so that I may fully plead my case else the
Claim should be struck out.
17. In the event that the documents are received, I will then be
in a position to amend my defence and would ask that the court
orders the Claimant to bear the cost of this.
18. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as
claimed or at all.
Okie dokies, with just a few days to go before the REAL deadline at 1600 on Tue 18th April (bloody Bank Holidays eh?!?) I've tweaked the defence a little bit, primarily so it reads better I hope.
Please feel free to submit any critical analysis!!!
----------------------------------------------------------
1. I received the claim ######## issued by the Northampton County
Court on ## Mar 2017.
2. Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case
is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.
3. The statement of case states that the amount claimed is due
under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a
JD Williams account, reference #######.
4. The statement of case fails to state when the agreement was
entered into.
5. I am of the belief that the alleged debt will be statute
barred under the provisions of The Limitation Act 1980. The
Claimant is put to providing unequivocal proof that the alleged
debt is not statute barred else the claim should be struck out.
6. The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate
information to enable me to properly assess my position with
regards to the claim.
7. The Claimants statement of case states that a Default Notice,
pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act was served. I do
not recall receiving this Default Notice. The Claimant is required
to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served.
8. The Claimants statement of case states that the account was
assigned from JD Williams to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd on ## Dec
2012. I do not recall receiving notice of this assignment.
9. On the ## Mar 2017 a formal request was sent to Cohen Cramer
Solicitors for inspection of the following documents mentioned in
the statement of case under CPR 31.14; (a) Agreement (b) Default
Notice (c) Notice of Assignment (d) Deed of Assignment.
10. Cohen Cramer Solicitors have not provided me with any of
these documents.
11. On the ## Mar 2017 a further letter was sent to Cohen Cramer
Solicitors, requesting an agreement in writing to a 28 day
extension (as allowed under CPR 15.5) to the time period allowed
for the filing of my defence, pending receipt of the documents
requested, detailed at point 9 above.
12. The response received in a letter dated ## Mar 2017 denied
this extension request, by virtue of the absence of any written
agreement contained within.
13. On the ## Mar 2017 a formal request for a copy of the
original agreement was sent to the Claimant, pursuant to s.78 of
the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1.00 fee
payment by Postal Order.
14. The Claimant has failed to comply with s.78(1) Consumer
Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s.78(6) of the Consumer Credit
Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.
15. Under CPR 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. I request that the court orders the Claimant to provide the
documentation requested so that I may fully plead my case else the
Claim should be struck out.
17. In the event that the documents are received, I will then be
in a position to amend my defence and would ask that the court
orders the Claimant to bear the cost of this.
18. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as
claimed or at all.
Comment