Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

[Whellam74]

Hi all

i am seeking some advice please in relation to an attempted CCJ by Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) on an old defaulted Welcome Finance Car Loan.

After receiving the claim form I entered a defence on the MCOL portal on a couple of points, requesting a couple of documents, statement etc.

Mortimer have written and provided me with a copy of the original agreement (WF), list of transactions (WF) and notice of assignment and confirmation from WF of sale of debt to Cabot - although these were sent to an old address.

The original agreement was taken out on 17/8/04 and defaulted 12/4/13.

I was in dispute with WF at the time over charges and PPI but it does look as though I am owing amount which I don’t have a problem with. However, due to charges on the account the values do not correlate.

Original Credit 5698
Total Charges 4828.40
Total Payable 10,928.40

However, on the default notice I have now received it sates

Total Payable 10,967.50
Amount paid by date of notice 7364.31

The value of the Mortimer Clarke claim is 4765

The end of the Mortimer Clarke letter offers a ‘way forward’ stating that Cabot would like to settle matters with me without the need for Court proceedings and included income / expenditure form - 14 days for them to receive with offer of payment.

Im being honest here and happy to pay what is owing however I don’t agree with the value.

Based upon the above would welcome (excuse the pun) some advice please.

many thanks

[Diana M]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

Has this claim been stayed since you filed your Defence or are legal proceedings continuing?

Was your PPI dispute settled with Welcome or could that still be outstanding?

You say Mortimer Clarke have produced a copy of the original agreement but that doesn’t necessarily mean that agreement is/was compliant at the time you took out the car finance loan.

Have they also produced the Ts & Cs which they believe were present when you signed up and if there was PPI involved have they produced the separate policy/Ts & Cs for that?

How did you take out this loan such as on a car sales forecourt?

Finally is the Claimant Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd (which is unlicensed)?

Sorry for all the questions (I’m afraid I will have more ) but it helps to know the full facts before making any suggestions on your next step.

Di

[Diana M]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

After receiving the claim form I entered a defence on the MCOL portal on a couple of points, requesting a couple of documents, statement etc.

. . . . The original agreement was taken out on 17/8/04 and defaulted 12/4/13.

A couple more questions from me tonight:

When you say you requested “a couple of documents” do you mean you sent a formal s 77 CCA Request for a copy of the credit agreement together with the £1 statutory fee to Cabot? Or do you mean you sent a CPR 31.14 Request for disclosure of various documents to Mortimer Clarke Solicitors? Or both?

My second question is when would the loan have expired if it had continued to the agreed end date?

I’ll ask you about what you pleaded in your Defence tomorrow once I get an idea of any legal arguments which you may missed.

Then it may become clearer as to whether you need to file an Amended Defence with permission from the court or by consent with the Claimant’s solicitors.

Di

[Whellam74]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

Has this claim been stayed since you filed your Defence or are legal proceedings continuing?

Was your PPI dispute settled with Welcome or could that still be outstanding?

You say Mortimer Clarke have produced a copy of the original agreement but that doesn’t necessarily mean that agreement is/was compliant at the time you took out the car finance loan.

Have they also produced the Ts & Cs which they believe were present when you signed up and if there was PPI involved have they produced the separate policy/Ts & Cs for that?

How did you take out this loan such as on a car sales forecourt?

Finally is the Claimant Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd (which is unlicensed)?

Sorry for all the questions (I’m afraid I will have more ) but it helps to know the full facts before making any suggestions on your next step.

Di

Hi Di - thank you for your kind replies, greatly appreciated.

I need to call the CC in Northampton to ascertain whether the claim has been stayed. It doesn't state this in the Mortimer Clarke letter so intend on checking.

No, the PPI claim was not settled and is certainly outstanding. I was intending to use this element as part of the overall credit agreement and PPI was included and how numerous fees / capitalization charges are showing on the copy of 'transactions' since received.

Yes, a copy of part of the original agreement, reconstituted pg2 and pg 3 of 5 with no terms and conditions - either for the credit or the PPI.

Yes, the loan was taken out in a car sales forecourt. The partial agreement copy received states

"Hire Purchase Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 on trade premises"
Parties - Welcome Finance etc.....

The letter from Mortimer Clarke references that Cabot Financial (UK) Limited had been assigned the debt and agreement.

[Whellam74]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

A couple more questions from me tonight:

When you say you requested “a couple of documents” do you mean you sent a formal s 77 CCA Request for a copy of the credit agreement together with the £1 statutory fee to Cabot? Or do you mean you sent a CPR 31.14 Request for disclosure of various documents to Mortimer Clarke Solicitors? Or both?

My second question is when would the loan have expired if it had continued to the agreed end date?

I’ll ask you about what you pleaded in your Defence tomorrow once I get an idea of any legal arguments which you may missed.

Then it may become clearer as to whether you need to file an Amended Defence with permission from the court or by consent with the Claimant’s solicitors.

Di

Hi Di - again, thank you.

In my defense to Mortimer Clarke on the MCOL I purely asked for a copy of the original credit agreement for disclosure purposes.

The car loan was for 48 months effective from 17 Aug 2004 (say Mortimer Clarke) - agreement signed and dated by car sales 31 Jul 2004 - with default threat (copy received) dated 12 Apr 2013 to clear arrears by 30 Apr 13.

Copy of WF letter (dated 15 Aug 13) now provided advising my account sold to Cabot Financial (UK) Limited on 25 Jun 13 and ALL contact now to be directed to Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited

Copy of Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited letter (dated 16 Aug 13) in relation to above

The original letters for the default notice, sale of debt and cabot ownership letters were all sent to an old out of date address. WF were aware of my new address at the time but I cannot prove this.

I also requested a statement of account from original creditor - they have only provided me with a copy list of transactions - on WF headed paper with **Not official WF customer statement for transactional purposes only** on the top

[Whellam74]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

Di

Please find below my defense to which Mortimer Clarke responded too

Dear Sir / Madam

I have been in dispute on this account since 2012 having
requested from Welcome Finance a copy of the original CCA, as I
am legally entitled too. Mortimer
Clarke Solicitors also failed to provide a copy on request.
Mortimer Clarke in their correspondence received to date reference
‘Cabot Financial (UK) Limited’ as creditor.
At the point of dispute, against an original credit amount of
GBP5,698 a total of GBP7,364.31 had been re-paid. The dispute was
with regards to PPI miss-selling but due to the financial problems
of Welcome Finance no reaponse was received from Welcome Finance
on the matter and no resolution was forthcoming. Welcome Finance
had at this point had become insolvent as had their parent company
Cattles.
The amount being sought against me by Mortimer Clarke is also not
recognised as it bares no correlation to either the original value
of credit taken out nor the balance of payments received by
Welcome Finance before the dispute and no details have been made
available as to the involvement of Cabot Financial on a disputed
account.
Consequently I am disputing the entire validity of the claim being
made against me for the following reasons;

1) Non receipt of original signed CCA document between Welcome
Finance and myself
2) Account remaining in dispute with Welcome Finance
3) At point of dispute with Welcome Finance balance of payments
made already exceeded original credit (as detailed above)
4) Mortimer Clarke acting under instruction from Cabot Financial
and not Welcome Finance

As you can see, no legal experience whatsoever I'm afraid.

[Whellam74]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

[Diana M]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

[ATTACH=CONFIG]32312[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]32313[/ATTACH]

So you saved the best till last

That letter from Mortimer Clarke solicitors admits that they’ve got the Particulars of Claim wrong and now need to amend them if their claim is to be successful.

They will need permission from the court to do this.

They have asked you to consent to an amendment but I strongly suggest to seek formal legal advice on this issue before agreeing to anything. It’s important not to feel bullied at this stage.

They've drawn your attention to their error which is a good thing (for you).

Di

[Diana M]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

Hi Di - again, thank you.

In my defense to Mortimer Clarke on the MCOL I purely asked for a copy of the original credit agreement for disclosure purposes.

In which case you need to send Cabot a s 77-79 CCA Request together with the £1 statutory fee and also send a copy of your request to Mortimer Clarke.

You haven’t formally asked the debt owner for the credit agreement under s 77 CCA In order to protect your legal position.

Di

[Whellam74]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

So you saved the best till last

That letter from Mortimer Clarke solicitors admits that they’ve got the Particulars of Claim wrong and now need to amend them if their claim is to be successful.

They will need permission from the court to do this.

They have asked you to consent to an amendment but I strongly suggest to seek formal legal advice on this issue before agreeing to anything. It’s important not to feel bullied at this stage.

They've drawn your attention to their error which is a good thing (for you).

Di

I have sought some free advice this morning and they have suggested that I write formally to Mortimer Clark with formal requests for

1. Credit Agreement – As per received Notice of Assignment I have issued Cabot Financial (Europe) with a formal CCA request (S77-79) inclusive of full terms and conditions together with the statutory GBP 1.00 fee – please be advised the same
2. Statement - Content received refers to **Not official customer statement for transactional purposes**
Full statement of accounts of all payments under agreement as requested
3. Notice/s of Assignment - Copy provided from Welcome Finance states ‘Cabot Financial (UK) Limited’ yet copy of confirmation received of Notice of Assignment states ‘Cabot Financial (Europe) Limited’.

I have not referenced or given my consent to any amendment of the particulars of the claims.

Insofar as the alleged balance I have been also been advised to request the following;

In order that I may consider all aspects of the alleged outstanding debt please also provide basis of mathematical calculation of alleged amount including payments made under agreement, fees, and capitalization and associated APR.

[Whellam74]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

In which case you need to send Cabot a s 77-79 CCA Request together with the £1 statutory fee and also send a copy of your request to Mortimer Clarke.

You haven’t formally asked the debt owner for the credit agreement under s 77 CCA In order to protect your legal position.

Di

Thank you for your support Di - it is really greatly appreciated.

I have, as you'll see above, referenced my request in the draft response to Mortimer Clarke.

In addition, in response to their 'way forward' I spoke to the court this morning who confirmed that the Claim remains in defence by myself and they are awaiting a formal response from Mortimer Clarke. With regards to this, I have acknowledged this as follows;

I acknowledge that your client would like to settle matters without the need for further court proceedings however at the time of writing my defence remains without formal response or withdrawal following communication with the Court.

I have highlighted this albeit recognise that there are currently delays in updating documents received from both parties.

I have of course responded 'without prejudice'

[Diana M]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

My first reaction is that letter from Mortimer Clarke does not require an immediate response.

I also think your draft letter is nudging them into action.

This needs more thought (and advice) before you do anything which could harm your situation. Especially since you may need to approach them at some point to consent to you filing an Amended Defence.

Litigation is about tactics.

Di

[Whellam74]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ

My first reaction is that letter from Mortimer Clarke does not require an immediate response.

I also think your draft letter is nudging them into action.

This needs more thought (and advice) before you do anything which could harm your situation. Especially since you may need to approach them at some point to consent to you filing an Amended Defence.

Litigation is about tactics.

Di

thank you Di ��.

will do.

[Diana M]

Re: Mortimer Clarke (Cabot) and defending CCJ



thank you Di

will do.

Is there any update on this situation or have Mortimer Clarke gone quiet?

Di

[Whellam74]

Is there any update on this situation or have Mortimer Clarke gone quiet?

Di

Hi Di

It has all been quiet until a letter received from Mortimer Clark today with a couple of interesting statements;

1) We have been informed by the court that the claim has been stayed
2) Clients position remains unchanged and we have been instructed by our client to make an application to lift the stay, amend the particulars of claim (as previously explained) and proceed with the court case, if a settlement agreement cannot be reached within the next 14 days
3) Our client remains willing to agree a repayment plan with you. If you wish to enter into settlement negotiations please complete attached .......

I have checked MCOL and claim still showing as 'defence' so will call the court on Monday and check position.