!! Won !! Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

[humanbean]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Not quite HB,

If the account/agreement is not regulated then the CCA request will be rejected. CPR 31 . 14 is only relevant until the claim is allocated to the small claims track so they may say they are not going to comply and say check your own records.
What we need to find out is IF the CCA request is valid here or not.

nem

I will find out first thing tomorrow and report back

thanks
humanbean

[humanbean]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

To he best of my knowledge Shop Direct /Catalogue accounts are regulated under CCA 1974, which is why it was suggested you check with SD on Monday,.

It leaves the claimant without obligation to provide an agreement and s it's probable that they will argue that CPR 31.14 wont apply as the claim will be allocated to the SCT getting information is more difficult.

nem

hi nemesis,

phoned 'SHOP DIRECT' and got given the run around today ..
(they weren't very helpful)

However, now I finally have a number for their 'Debt Sale' Team, where my account details reside. I've been assured they will be able to answer the question of whether my account/ agreement was regulated.
Unfortunately as they are now closed will have to ring back tomorrow
I will phone them early tom and report back.

(wish I could have got through to them today, I know the clock is ticking .. )
thank you
humanbean

[nemesis45]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

hi nemesis,

phoned 'SHOP DIRECT' and got given the run around today ..
(they weren't very helpful)

However, now I finally have a number for their 'Debt Sale' Team, where my account details reside. I've been assured they will be able to answer the question of whether my account/ agreement was regulated.
Unfortunately as they are now closed will have to ring back tomorrow
I will phone them early tom and report back.

(wish I could have got through to them today, I know the clock is ticking .. )
thank you
humanbean

Let's hope the answer is worth waiting for!!

nem

[humanbean]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Hi,

I see that the POC state " non regulated agreement" If I were you humanbean I 'd be on the phone to Shop Direct enquiring if their account s are regulated or not.

There has been some other claims issued by Lowell/ Lowell solicitors with the same detail in the POC not seen any outcome on those personally, this and other faulty POC's are becoming familiar with Lowell.

nem

Hi nemesis (and ALL),

I've just got off the phone to a very helpful gentleman in the 'SHOP DIRECT DEBT SALE' Team. I asked if the account was regulated and was put on hold while he consulted their 'Legal Team' on the phone. A minute later he got back to me saying, 'Yes, the accounts are regulated under CCA 1974'.

So it seems the particulars of Lowell's claim against me are wrong
(IT STATES IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM, 'The claim is for the sum of £2200ish due by the Defendant under a non-regulated Shop Direct account ..' )
ON THE UPSIDE, I GUESS ITS BETTER THAT LOWELL ARE INACCURATE IN THEIR 'POC' THAN IF THE SHOP DIRECT ACCOUNT REALLY WASNT 'REGULATED UNDER 'CCA 1974'

I'm hoping this means they will respond to CCA & CPR Requests.

I posted the CCA Request and my 'Acknowledgement of Service' on the 20th April and the CPR 31.14 on the 23rd April (all using 1st class Royal Mail 'Signed For' delivery).
I know it isn't long, but was thinking of emailing the court to check my 'Acknowledgement' has arrived. Also thinking it may be a good idea to ring/ email Lowells & Cohen Cramer tomorrow to enquire if CCA/ CPR 31.14 have arrived, and further request the CCA/ CPR Documents again.

What do you think?
Lowell's 'bad poc' sounds a little ominous

humanbean lane:


(also I gave Lowells a quick ring just now and I do have the name right. Its 'Lowell Portfolio 1 LTD'. So that means my CCA request was sent to the correct name for their company and it wont have to be done yet again!):bounce:

[nemesis45]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Hi nemesis (and ALL),

I've just got off the phone to a very helpful gentleman in the 'SHOP DIRECT DEBT SALE' Team. I asked if the account was regulated and was put on hold while he consulted their 'Legal Team' on the phone. A minute later he got back to me saying, 'Yes, the accounts are regulated under CCA 1974'.

So it seems the particulars of Lowell's claim against me are wrong
(IT STATES IN THE PARTICULARS OF CLAIM, 'The claim is for the sum of £2200ish due by the Defendant under a non-regulated Shop Direct account ..' )

I'm hoping this means they will respond to CCA & CPR Requests.

I posted the CCA Request and my 'Acknowledgement of Service' on the 20th April and the CPR 31.14 on the 23rd April (all using 1st class Royal Mail 'Signed For' delivery).
I know it isn't long, but was thinking of emailing the court to check my 'Acknowledgement' has arrived. Also thinking it may be a good idea to ring/ email Lowells & Cohen Cramer tomorrow to enquire if CCA/ CPR 31.14 have arrived, and further request the CCA/ CPR Documents again.

What do you think?
Lowell's 'bad poc' sounds a little ominous

humanbean lane:


(also I gave Lowells a quick ring just now and I do have the name right. Its 'Lowell Portfolio 1 LTD'. So that means my CCA request was sent to the correct name for their company and it wont have to be done yet again!):bounce:

.


Sounds tome that Cohen Cramer are as clueless as Carter was badly trained trainees out of their depth

Did you send the CCA request signed for if so check online for delivery date and signature and print it off and keep safe.

If this is a case of careless drafting of claims one a can certainly query the efficacy of the principal supervising this.

However should this now fairly frequent occurrence prove to be a " ploy " in order to avoid the obligation to supply an agreement then it's a matter for the FCA it will be interesting to see what Cohen Cramer

has to say.

ben

[Henti]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Hi All

I spotted this thread and thought I would join and inquire. Does anyone know why SD should say that the agreements on shopping accounts are unregulated,
I understood that all commercial credit agreements had to be made under the CCA unless; over the financial limit, a small agreement(under £50) or exempt ?

[nemesis45]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Hi All

I spotted this thread and thought I would join and inquire. Does anyone know why SD should say that the agreements on shopping accounts are unregulated,
I understood that all commercial credit agreements had to be made under the CCA unless; over the financial limit, a small agreement(under £50) or exempt ?

Shop Direct misleadhas verbally confirmed that their agreements are regulated by CCA'74.

In my opinion the " unregulated" statement made by some solicitors is either due to ill trained " legal assistants" or is intended deliberately to mislead defendants into not making CCA requests.

nem

[Henti]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Shop Direct misleadhas verbally confirmed that their agreements are regulated by CCA'74.

In my opinion the " unregulated" statement made by some solicitors is either due to ill trained " legal assistants" or is intended deliberately to mislead defendants into not making CCA requests.

nem

It is very odd. I have done a little work with the CCA in the past and wondered what had changed from this:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1974/39/section/8



Consumer credit agreements.

(1)

A [F1consumer] credit agreement is an agreement between an individual ( “the debtor ”) and any other person ( “the creditor ”) by which the creditor provides the debtor with credit of any amount.

(2)

F2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

(3)

A consumer credit agreement is a regulated agreement within the meaning of this Act if it is not an agreement (an “exempt agreement ”) specified in or under section 16 [F3, 16A [F4, 16B or 16C]] .

It is very naughty of them and may be actionable IMO. SD seem to be la law unto themselves on may fronts.

[humanbean]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

.


Sounds tome that Cohen Cramer are as clueless as Carter was badly trained trainees out of their depth

Did you send the CCA request signed for if so check online for delivery date and signature and print it off and keep safe.

If this is a case of careless drafting of claims one a can certainly query the efficacy of the principal supervising this.

However should this now fairly frequent occurrence prove to be a " ploy " in order to avoid the obligation to supply an agreement then it's a matter for the FCA it will be interesting to see what Cohen Cramer

has to say.

ben

Hi ben,

Yes, the CCA R

I've checked online and

[charitynjw]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Hi ben,

Yes, the CCA R

I've checked online and

Hi humanbean

You appear to have gone offline, or bean cut off in your prime!

[humanbean]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

.


Sounds tome that Cohen Cramer are as clueless as Carter was badly trained trainees out of their depth

Did you send the CCA request signed for if so check online for delivery date and signature and print it off and keep safe.

If this is a case of careless drafting of claims one a can certainly query the efficacy of the principal supervising this.

However should this now fairly frequent occurrence prove to be a " ploy " in order to avoid the obligation to supply an agreement then it's a matter for the FCA it will be interesting to see what Cohen Cramer

has to say.

ben

.


Sounds tome that Cohen Cramer are as clueless as Carter was badly trained trainees out of their depth

Did you send the CCA request signed for if so check online for delivery date and signature and print it off and keep safe.

If this is a case of careless drafting of claims one a can certainly query the efficacy of the principal supervising this.

However should this now fairly frequent occurrence prove to be a " ploy " in order to avoid the obligation to supply an agreement then it's a matter for the FCA it will be interesting to see what Cohen Cramer

has to say.

ben

Hi nemesis & all at Legal Beagals (excuse the long post! ) :help:

I received a letter today from COHEN CRAMER SOLICITORS acknowledging my CPR paperwork
(I have copied it below)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Human Bean

27th April 2016

RE: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd -v- Mr Human Bean
Our Client: Lowell Portfolio 1 LTD Account Number: 12345678
Claim Number: 3947#### Amount Due: £2,500ish

We write in relation to the above matter.

We have received your letter in relation to your request for documents and we have notified our client Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd of this request.

Please note that our client has given us a minimum period of time of 45 days from the date of your request, to send the documents it is obliged to provide pursuant to CPR. We have notified the Court of this agreed extension of time which will provide you with enough time to prepare a defence should you require this.

As such we confirm we will allow an extension of time to end 14 days after we have supplied the documents. In the meantime we will take no action and hold your account until you have had a reasonable amount of time to inspect the documents and consider your position.

If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to get in touch with us.

Kind Regards
Anisa Ahmed / Legal Assistant

Cohen Cramer Solicitors
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(So Cohen Cramer solicitors sent this letter saying they received my CPR Request and passed it on to Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd. The length of time of the extension they have granted me isn't very clear. Their extension sounds very open-ended??
I was expecting it to be the initial 33 days (5+ 28) plus another 28 days?
I think I should ring them tomorrow, find out .. and get them to be more specific, in writing.
Then I can inform the court of the extension (just to be sure).

In response to your question about PROOF OF DELIVERY:

Yes, all my documents have been sent Royal Mail 1st class 'SIGNED FOR'.
I have checked with Royal Mail online and all were delivered.

The CCA Request to LOWELL PORTFOLIO 1 LTD was delivered and signed for on 25th April.
The CPR 31.14 Request to COHEN CRAMER SOLICITORS was delivered and signed for on 26th April.
The 'ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SERVICE' was delivered and signed for on 25th April.

(will print off the proof of delivery signatures tomorrow at my sisters (my printer isn't working-pesky inkjets)

BAD 'POC'
As regards the bad 'poc', it does sound as you say. They have acknowledged my CPR Request, so either a 'mistake' or a ploy ..
do you think an email asking for an explanation to COHEN CRAMER SOLICITORS is worth my while and/ or a complaint to the FINANCIAL CONDUCT AUTHORITY?
(or am I getting ahead of myself/ causing unnecessary work .. )


No word from Lowell re: my CCA request
No word from the court to say they have my 'Acknowledgment of Service', but I do have the PROOF OF DELIVERY.

Thank you for your guidance
Very much appreciated !! :thumb:

humanbean

[humanbean]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Hi humanbean

You appear to have gone offline, or bean cut off in your prime!

Ah yes Charitynjw,

(bean cut off in my prime .. hehe :tea:

I must have caught a button on my keyboard by mistake, then it crashed when I was trying to 'edit' it. I've finally just finished typing out my 'UPDATE'.

Thanks for keeping an eye on my efforts ! :thumb:

humanbean

[humanbean]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Hi All, :help: Help needed please !

(Just to Re-cap)
I received my County Court CLAIM FORM dated 14th April
I have PROOF OF DELIVERY of my 'ACKNOWLEDGEMENT' to Court saying I want to 'DEFEND IN FULL'

(giving me 33 days from 14th April, which would take me up to a 17th May DEFENCE DEADLINE).

I have PROOF OF DELIVERY of CPR 31.14 to Cohen Cramer for 26th April.

On 28th April I received this letter from Cohen Cramer solicitors (COPIED BELOW) saying they had received my CPR Request and passed it on to Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd.

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

Mr Human Bean

27th April 2016

RE: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd -v- Mr Human Bean
Our Client: Lowell Portfolio 1 LTD Account Number: 12345678
Claim Number: 3947#### Amount Due: £2,500ish

We write in relation to the above matter.

We have received your letter in relation to your request for documents and we have notified our client Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd of this request.

Please note that our client has given us a minimum period of time of 45 days from the date of your request, to send the documents it is obliged to provide pursuant to CPR. We have notified the Court of this agreed extension of time which will provide you with enough time to prepare a defence should you require this.

As such we confirm we will allow an extension of time to end 14 days after we have supplied the documents. In the meantime we will take no action and hold your account until you have had a reasonable amount of time to inspect the documents and consider your position.

If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to get in touch with us.

Kind Regards
Anisa Ahmed / Legal Assistant

Cohen Cramer Solicitors
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MY QUESTIONS

According to the letter the length of time of the extension they have granted me doesn't seem very clear?
Their extension sounds very open-ended.

I am assuming I have been already granted the initial 33 days by returning my 'Acknowledgement of Service' form and saying 'I WANT TO DEFEND IN FULL'. (5+ 28 days = 33 days, taking me up to a 17th May DEFENCE DEADLINE)

IS THE LETTER THEY SENT ME OFFERING ME AN ADDITIONAL EXTENSION PAST THE 17TH MAY OR WHAT? (I cant make sense of it).

ANY SUGGESTIONS TO CLARIFY THE EXACT SITUATION RE: MY DEADLINE?
(IS IT A NORMAL RESPONSE LETTER, ARE THEY ALLOWED TO GIVE THEMSELVES AN OPEN-ENDED EXTENSION?)

SHOULD I JUST RING THEM ON MONDAY AND ASK?
Could anyone make any sense of this please?
Thank you in advance
bean

[Kati]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

I'm sure the maximum (extra) extension you can get is 28 days ( [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION] will be able to tell you for certain ) xx

[Amethyst]

Re: Notice of impending Legal Action: 5 year old Catologue Debt

Courts
Procedure rules
Civil
Rules & Practice Directions
PART 15 - DEFENCE AND REPLY
PRACTICE DIRECTION 15 – DEFENCE AND REPLY

Agreement extending the period for filing a defence

15.5

(1) The defendant and the claimant may agree that the period for filing a defence specified in rule 15.4 shall be extended by up to 28 days.

(2) Where the defendant and the claimant agree to extend the period for filing a defence, the defendant must notify the court in writing.