Cabot - Mortimer Clarke

[Gruffolo]

Hi All,

Received a Claim Form on 23rd February for a Credit Card debt from early 2017.

I acknowledged the claim on the 24th February.

I duly sent off the CCA and CPR requests on 24th February; I have received reply's from both Cabot and Mortimer Clarke for the requests.

What is interesting is Cabot's reply refers to a completely different account, original creditor and amount owed - I would really appreciate some expert feedback on this if someone can help please?

I have 8 days remaining before my defense needs submitting.

To help, I would like to upload the following edited documents including a draft of my defense.

Claim Form
CCA request
CPR request
CCA Reply
CPR Reply
Draft Defense

Many thanks,

[Gruffolo]

Edited documents supporting my original post

[echat11]

a) Answer the following questions, copy and paste back on to this thread (leave out any personal details, i.e. ref numbers) -

Received a claim? Yes/No:
Issue Date:
Have you Acknowledged the Claim?:
Total Amount Claimed : ( approximately please do NOT use EXACT figure given on the claim form, round up to next £100 or £1000)
Claimant’s Name:
Solicitors Firm:
Original Creditor:
Original Debt (eg. Credit card/Loan/Overdraft) :
Particulars of Claim: ( Please type out in full excluding names/account numbers/exact amounts ):
Is the debt Statute Barred (have you had any contact with the creditor or claimant over the last 6 years?):
List any letters you have sent (eg: CCA/ CPR ):
Any Other Information or Background Details:

b) The following is an example defence, you should have some of the info,
have a go at doing your defence, leave out bits that don't apply. Any questions just ask.

[Gruffolo]

Hi ECHAT11,

All the details of the claim are contained in the attachments; the attached also include letters sent and received.

The debt is not quite statute barred, 5 years and 8 months, no contact with creditor or claimant in that time.... Cabot playing the game with months to go

Background, took card out weeks before a messy relationship breakdown started, this caused a lot of financial problems and mental health issues for me and resulted with me moving address

I could do with some advice on Cabot's reply to the CCA request which refers to a completely different account, original creditor and amount owed (reply attached in earlier post).

I would also like help with my draft defense which has 8 days to go before deadline.

Thanks

[echat11]

Cabot's response, clearly they have got you confused with somebody else, they haven't complied with your CCA request. When you file your defence, that will be reflected in your defence. It's probably an administration error.

[Gruffolo]

Thanks ECHAT11, that's what I concluded. Apart from the CCA non compliance will their error have any other influence/affect? Can I emphasize this in anyway in my defence submission?

Can someone please take a look at my attached draft defence and comment?

Thank you.

[echat11]

a) I would remove (4), replace it with what it says in the template. It's taken that any allegation you have defended, the Claimant has to prove.

b) I would remove (5), what you say in the first sentence is 'yes', you had an account, but then you are saying 'no' you didn't.

c) I would remove (7), I would replace it with what it says in the template.

d) I would remove (14) completely. You stated the haven't complied with the CCA request, leave at that.

e) I would remove (18), I would replace it with what it says in the template.

You don't need to highlight their error, just that they haven't complied.

The important bit is the documentation they send you i.e CCA request.

I suppose you could lodge a complaint regarding the error with Cabot and Mortimer, but wait to see what they send.

[Gruffolo]

Hi ECHAT11, thank you for guiding me with the amendments needed for my defense. Attached is a draft copy with the amendments. Can you let me know if this is okay please. I'm looking at submitting at the end of this week. Thanks

[echat11]

Look at (7) again, the first draft doesn't say anything about it being 'statute barred', it's not statute barred is it?

7 should read as follows.

7. The Claimant’s Particulars of Claim states the agreement was entered into on or around xx/xx/xxxx.

[Gruffolo]

ECHAT11, thank you for pointing out the mistake; amended as suggested,