Cabot CCJ Issue

[echat11]

Thanks again echat11 if you could possibly have a quick look over the attached word document at a rough layout of the new witness statement.

Remove attachment without personal details.

[teddyben55]

Apologies echat11 see attached

[teddyben55]

Hi echat11 Shall I strip back 1 to 17 and concentrate on what happened in the hearing?
Many thanks

[echat11]

Hi echat11 Shall I strip back 1 to 17 and concentrate on what happened in the hearing?
Many thanks

You've got the Heading 'Background', I thing you need to place the following, directly after 'Background'.
So that is points16 to 27. Then everything comes after that.

[teddyben55]

Hi echat11 please could you have a quick look over the attached word document.
I appreciate any feedback

Thanks again for all your help

[echat11]

Hi echat11 please could you have a quick look over the attached word document.
I appreciate any feedback

Thanks again for all your help

Concentrate on the 'unfairness' of the Delay in requesting the lifting of the stay, not the 'unfairness' of the Hearing itself.

Witness Statement of ############

Claim No: ########
In the County Court at: Leeds County Court
Between:
########## – Claimant
and

#############– Defendant



Witness Statement of

I, ########### of ################ being the Defendant in this claim, make this statement in support of my position in these proceedings. The matters set out below are within my own knowledge, unless otherwise stated, and are true to the best of my knowledge and belief.



Background

1. On or around the 14^th August 2025, I received a Notice to 'Lift the Stay'. This was then followed by a Notice of Hearing at the Leeds County Court on the 5^th November 2025

**On or around the 14^th August 2025, I received an Application Notice to ‘Lift the Stay’. This was then followed by a Notice of Hearing at Leeds County Court on 5^th November 2025.**

1. In the application notice, it shows that this document was completed by the claimant's solicitors, Mortimer Clarke, on the 27th of June 2025, some 2 years 10 months after the claim form was first received from the Court back in August 2022.

**In the Application Notice, it shows that this document was completed by the Claimant’s solicitor, Mortimer Clarke, on 27^th June 2025, some 2 years 10 months after the claim form was first received from the Court in August 2022. **



Lifting the Stay Hearing

1. On the 5^th of November 2025 hearing took place to challenge lifting the stay.
   The first 20 minutes was a list of mistakes that Mortimer Clarke had made.

**The first 20 minutes of the Hearing on 5^th November 2025 to dispute the ‘lifting of the stay’, was spent by the Court listing a catalogue of mistakes made by the Creditors solicitors.**

1. During the Hearing, the Court indicated to the Claimant’s solicitors that: a. The application notice (Form N244) seeking to ‘lift the stay’ had not been submitted within the required timeframe; b. Documents subsequently filed by the Claimant were not properly lodged because the data file size exceeded the Court’s electronic filing limits; and c. Part of the application process relating to the transfer or assignment of the debt from the original creditor, Cabot Financial, was incorrect.
2. Despite these procedural defects, the Claimant was permitted to rely on the application and supporting material. Following this, and after the procedural errors had been identified, District Judge Hill allowed the Claimant’s solicitor to make a verbal application. The hearing was adjourned for approximately five minutes to facilitate this.
3. I sought to explain that these failures formed part of a wider pattern of delay and non‑compliance by the Claimant, including the prolonged failure to comply with my Subject Access Request, my request under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, and my request pursuant to Civil Procedure Rule 31.14, request for documents.
4. Total days from claim being stayed (06/10/2022) to date of Claimants N244 application (14/08/2025) is 1043 days (2 years, 10 months, 8 days)
   This is well over the 6 months’ as stated Civil Procedure Rule (CPR) 15.11
   
   
   
   **We’ve had discussion about days before, 8 days doesn’t matter when your talking about 2 years and 10 months**
5. The Claimant has still not provided a good reason for waiting 2 years 10 months 8 days to make an application notice to 'lift the stay'.

**As above**

1. The following test of "appropriateness" should have been applied.

**The Court should have applied the following test of "appropriateness" during the Hearing on the 5^th November 2025.**

In applying this test Chief Master Marsh considered Football Association Premier league LTD v O'Donovan (2017) EWHC 152 (Ch). : (See “Neglected Proceedings lifting the stay”.pdf or print out)

1. Despite these procedural defects, the Claimant was permitted to rely on the application and supporting material, I sought to rely on the ‘test of appropriateness’ when considering whether a stay should be lifted, given the Claimant’s conduct and delay, but this submission was not substantively addressed.

Procedural Concerns ****change this to 'Unfairness to Defendant****

1. I respectfully believe the hearing was procedurally unfair for the following reasons: a. Delay and non‑compliance: The claimant took almost three years to provide documents requested pursuant to a Subject Access Request and a request under Section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. This delay occurred while the claim remained stayed.
   b. Failure to consider delay: At the hearing, insufficient weight was given to the claimant’s prolonged non‑compliance and the prejudice caused to me by the delay.
   c. Right to be heard: I was not afforded a proper opportunity to explain why the claimant’s delay was relevant to whether the stay should be lifted.
   d. Equality of treatment: The claimant’s failures were treated as administrative or excusable, whereas my objections were curtailed or dismissed.
2. The claimant’s delay was a material issue, as the stay arose in circumstances where key documentation had not been provided. Lifting the stay without properly addressing this issue placed me at a procedural disadvantage.

**The thing is you are setting out the ‘unfairness’ during the Hearing. You need to set out the ‘unfairness’ of the delay as in your previous Witness Statement i.e. the ‘appropriateness test’ i.e. the Claimant hasn’t provided a reason for the delay etc.

So your repeating the effect it has had on you etc.**

Delay in Lifting

On or around the XX/XX/XX, I received a Notice to 'Lift the Stay'. This was then followed by a Notice of Hearing at the County Court XXXXXXXX, received on or around the XX of January 2025.

In the application notice, it shows that this document was completed by the claimant's solicitors, Mortimer Clarke, on the XX of XXXXXX XXXX, some XX years XX months after the claim form was first received from the Court.

The Claimant has not provided a good reason for waiting 20 months to make an application notice to 'lift the stay'.

To lift a stay the following test of "appropriateness" should be applied.

In applying this test Chief Master Marsh considered Football Association Premier league LTD v O'Donovan (2017) EWHC 152 (Ch). :

1. Whether the claimant had an adequate explanation for the delay

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

2. Whether the claimant's claim has (at least) a real prospect of success

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx

3. The defendant's behaviour and whether any of the delay was caused by the defendant

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

4. The nature and extent of any prejudice the defendant would suffer in the event that the stay is lifted

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

5. Whether any attempts were made by the claimant in the 6 months to revive the claim

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Personal Circumstances (See [Exhibit E pages 8 and 9])

1. I wish to inform the Court that I am the full‑time parent of two young children, aged 7 and 4, who have been in my sole, full‑time care since 16 August 2025. These responsibilities significantly limit the time and resources available to me to respond to proceedings, particularly where matters have been prolonged or procedurally irregular.
2. Earlier this year, my mother suffered a mini stroke and is now on prescribed medication as part of her recovery. I have a copy of her prescription available as evidence if required by the Court.
3. As a result, I have been providing her with additional support while also caring for my children full-time. These responsibilities have understandably placed additional emotional, financial and practical pressures on me.
4. Despite these challenges, I have continued to engage with this matter in good faith and have made every effort to comply with court procedures and correspondence.
5. I respectfully ask the Court to take these personal circumstances into account when considering my position and any directions or orders made in this case.

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

Steps Taken After the Hearing (this has been moved)

1. The court issued an order, point 6 stated “The claimant shall serve a sealed copy of the application for summary judgement by 4pm on 12 November 2025.
   A pack did come on the 12 November however it the envelope containing the required information was in very poor condition (see Exhibit A, Page 1)
2. On 18^th December 2025 I requested a digital version of the “summary of judgment” from Mortimer Clarke to which I have had no response.

Conclusion

1. The Claimant failed to pursue the claim diligently, provided no adequate explanation for the 2 years 10 months delay, and only disclosed essential documents after the claim had already been stayed.
2. I respectfully request that the Court considers whether the Claimant’s conduct has been so unreasonable as to warrant striking out the claim.

6. The documents reveal further issues with the quality of the Consumer Credit Agreement.



Statement of Truth

I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.

Signed:
Name: ############
Dated: 22^nd December 2025

[teddyben55]

Thank you ever so much echat11 this is really helpful. Not sure if you'll get time to review this before i submit it tomorrow see attached.
If not thanks again for all your help. I hope you have a fantastic Christmas and New Year

All the best

[teddyben55]

apologies echat11 use this one

[echat11]

apologies echat11 use this one

Just change the following -'Lifting the Stay Hearing' to The Hearing - Lifting the Stay.

There is still a lot about the 'unfairness' of the Hearing itself, the really important bit is the Delay,
The Test, the effect the Delay has had on you and that's unfair, the Claimant has had ample opportunity, but
chose to do nothing for 2 years and 10 months.

[teddyben55]

Hi echat11 i have removed the first paragraph of "unfairness to the defendant" and got straight into the main points of no good reason and the test itself

[echat11]

Hi echat11 i have removed the first paragraph of "unfairness to the defendant" and got straight into the main points of no good reason and the test itself

That's great, you know what to concentrate on.

Update with a summary of what the Claimant send you.

Remember to send / email a copy to the Claimants solicitors. Subject line - Claim No. XXXXXXXX - Defendants Witness Statement - XXXXXXXX v XXXXXXXX

[teddyben55]

Thanks again for all your help echat11 . I'll let you know what I receive on the run up to the 16th January.
All the best