*DISCONTINUED* !!! Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

[Jojo13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

I did not have an account number for Very I gave my name and address and they found the information from that. They said that this was the only order ever on the account.
I'm not sure what a redacted agreement is? The only agreement I have seen is the one sent by BWLEGAL as their evidence dated 5.12.2009.
It was a friend that gave me a buggy, I already had a newborn pram from my first child I was using and my friend remembers she did give me a buggy which was a 3 wheel black mothercare one which came with a car seat.

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

Okay that's cool Thank you xxxx Just making doubly trebly sure what we're pleading. Dunno why I thought it was from your brother - apologies. Right give me half hour xxx

Redacted is just where you've covered up your personal info on the agreement - the date got covered up as well xxx

[Jojo13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

Thanks [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION]

I have added some details so will copy in my updated copy

WITNESS STATEMENT

Of; XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claim No: C6DP16M1

Between: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd Claimant.

And: XXXXXXXX Defendant.

I XXXXXXXXX am a litigant in person in this matter.

1. On 27th May 2016 I received Claim number C6DP16M1 issued on behalf of Lowell Portfolio 1 Limited.

2. Acknowledgement of Service was made on 30th May 2016.

3. On 31st May 2016 I sent a request for a copy of the agreement relevant to the alleged debt to Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd, together with the £1.00 statutory fee as required under the provisions of CCA 1974.

4. To date the claimant has not provided the agreement and are unable to enforce the alleged debt.

5. On 31st May 2016 I sent a request to BW Legal Ltd for inspection of the documents mentioned in the claimant’s particulars of claim under provisions of the Civil Procedure Rule 31.14.

6. To date BW Legal Ltd have not provided the documents requested.

7. I have no recollection of entering into any agreement with Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd.

8. I have not received or signed for any goods or services from the original creditor.

9. Since receiving this claim I have researched the history of the alleged debt, which it seems arises from an account with Additions (later rebranded Very) a catalogue shopping company.

10. I have no recollection of any such account nor I have I purchased or received any goods from this company.

11. Having checked the history of the alleged account with the original creditor it was stated that the account was opened on 5th December 2009. An item (a pram) was ordered on 9th February 2010 and was allegedly delivered within 2 working days of the ordering date (by 12th February 2010).

12. I have no recollection of ever receiving this item.

13. The original creditor has confirmed that no payments have been made in relation to the account since its inception on 5th December 2009.

14. I now aver that the alleged debt is statute barred under the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980, no payment or written acknowledgment has been made in more than 6 years.

15. Further research has shown that debt purchase companies will argue that the relevant 6 year period starts on the date when an account is defaulted relying on BMW Finance - v - Hart, in regard to a motor finance (HP) account, this matter however arises from a simple contract and was statute barred on the date the claim was issued i.e. 17th May 2016.

The defendant respectfully asks the court to allow this statement to be submitted in my defence.

This statement has been sent to the claimant’s solicitors on date 15th November 2016.

Signed ............................................ XXXXXX Date .........................................

of: Address

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

WORK IN PROGRESS THEN - just shout if I've got anything wrong etc or you have anything to add - @Diana M; that goes for you too lol.... The NOA and DN parts aren't really my area and with a recon CCA provided I think the primary argument we have is that JoJo simply didn't have the account or the goods.

Ignore numbering it all gets cocked up on here for some bizarre reason.


( EDIT: Crossed posts with your update apologies - do you want to merge a couple bits through together ? just use mine as a bit of a suggestion how to make your case a little stronger on that you didn't have the goods )


In the xxxxxxxxxxx County Court


Claim No. XXXXX


xxxxxxxxx
Claimant


JoJo
Defendant


Dated 15^th November 2016

-------------------------------------
WITNESS STATEMENT
------------------------------------

I, JoJo, of xxxxxaddressxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx , formerly of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, am the Defendant, a litigant in person, and I make this statement in support of my defence in this case;
Background

1. I received the claim issued on 17^th May 2016 from the Northampton County Court Business Centre.

1. On receipt of the claim I was completely unaware what the alleged debt was and undertook some research so I could assess my position.
2. I wrote to the Claimant and requested further information by way of a formal request for documents under CPR 31.14 (EXHIBIT A) and a statutory request for a copy of the original credit agreement pursuant to s.78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. (EXHIBIT B)
3. On filing my defence on xxxxxxxxxxx the Claimant had failed to send any further information and had not responded to my requests.
   
   
4. I discovered that Shop Direct Finance are a catalogue company with a number of catalogues such as Very, Additions, LaRedoute and Littlewoods in their name.

1. I have previously had an account with LaRedoute which also appears to be owned by Shop Direct. To my knowledge I have not held an account with any other Shop Direct Finance company.

1. Through further correspondence with the Claimant and their solicitors since the proceedings started I have been given further information;

1. The alleged account is with Very / Additions.
2. The alleged account was opened on 5^th December 2009.
3. An order is alleged to have been placed on 9^th February 2010.
4. The order was for a Pram at a cost of £212.50

1. I have no knowledge of opening an account with Very / Additions.

1. I have never ordered a pram to be delivered to my home. I have had prams in the past for my children, however the last pram which I owned around the same date of the alleged order was a perfectly good condition second hand pram (a three wheeler Mothercare buggy with an integral car seat) which a friend of mine passed on to me.

1. I have never received a pram at my home address from any company.

1. On receipt of this information from the Claimant I contacted the original creditor catalogue company ( Very ) directly. They looked at the account attached to my name and address and confirmed the pram was the only order ever made, and that confirmed that no payment has been made to the account since it was opened in December 2009.

1. The original creditor was unable to confirm any delivery information as they state they do not hold records for that long.
2. The creditor did not ask me any security information when checking the account. This raises a concern that an account could have been opened or an order could have been placed by a third party without my knowledge. It would appear strange that no other orders were made and no payment was made.
3. It appears strange to me that the alleged account was opened in December but no order placed until February. The nature of these kind of catalogue accounts is that an account is opened at the same time the first order is placed.

[Diana M]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

I did not have an account number for Very I gave my name and address and they found the information from that. They said that this was the only order ever on the account.

Did they ask you your date of birth or anything else to clear security/DPA?

I raised the outside chance that this may have been a case of identity theft earlier in the thread. It was an online application with a tick box signature and the only order (a pram) never arrived at your address. In your phone call no evidence was volunteered to prove a delivery date.

I'm puzzled why they would give you detailed financial information about an account without thoroughly checking you were who you said you were.

I may be barking up the wrong tree but you've got a very good memory of the buggy your friend gave you so you would probably have remembered if a pram had arrived.

My mantra is 'just because someone says something that doesn't mean it's true'. I find that happens a lot with POC and reconstituted documents

Di

[Diana M]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

Posts are crossing

Are you planning to draw attention to the fact the debt is Statute Barred due to the last activity being February 2010 regardless of who placed the order for the phantom pram?

I can't really comment on the WS content without seeing the papers but stating no recollection of being served with a DN or NOA could support your contention that you never had an account with them just like you never received that pram.

I would also think the Claimant would need to provide evidence of both of those statutory notices to secure their CCJ.

(They may turn up as evidence/exhibits with their WS if they were served but so far they haven't been disclosed.)

Di

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

Yes just making sure we have the right facts of the not ordering and not receiving bits first.

Although Statute barred wasn't included in the defence I think we can bring it in here - the defence did raise the issue of not having held an account with Shop Direct so we have expanded on that , and as a LIP I think raising the SB issue would be okay here without an amended defence - of course an amended defence could well be ordered by the Judge if the claimants don't just ditch the claim on receipt of the WS.

I think we allowed for it in the Defence costs wise

15. In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment.

Of course it would have been better done on receipt of the docs.

[Jojo13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

Is this ok?

I really could do with getting to the post office soon 😬

Dated 15th November 2016.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………......

WITNESS STATEMENT

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………......

Of; XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claim No: C6DP16M1

Between: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd Claimant.

And: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Defendant.

I XXXXXX of , Manchester am the Defendant, a litigant in person in this matter and I make this statement in support of my defence in this case.

Background

1. I received Claim number C6DP16M1 issued on behalf of Lowell Portfolio 1 Limited from the Northampton County Court Business Centre.

2. Acknowledgement of Service was made on 30th May 2016.

3. On receipt of the claim I was completely unaware what the alleged debt was and undertook some research so I could assess my position.

4. On 31st May 2016 I sent a request for a copy of the agreement relevant to the alleged debt to Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd, together with the £1.00 statutory fee as required under the provisions of CCA 1974.

5. On 31st May 2016 I sent a request to BW Legal Ltd for inspection of the documents mentioned in the claimant’s particulars of claim under provisions of the Civil Procedure Rule 31.14.

6. On filing my defence on 16th June 2016 the claimant or their representative had failed to send any further information and had not responded to my requests.

7. I have no recollection of entering into any agreement with Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd.

8. I have not received or signed for any goods or services from the original creditor.

9. Since receiving this claim I have researched the history of the alleged debt, which it seems arises from an account with Additions (later rebranded Very) a catalogue shopping company. I discovered that Shop Direct are a catalogue company with a number of catalogues such as Very, Additions, LaRedoute and Littlewoods in their name.

10. I have previously held an account with LaRedoute which also appears to be owned by Shop Direct. To my knowledge I have not held an account with any other Shop Direct Finance company.

11. Having checked the history of the alleged account with the original creditor I was given further information.

12. The alleged account is with Very/Additions.

13. The alleged account was opened on 5th December 2009.

14. An order is alleged to have been placed on 9th February 2010.

15. The alleged order was for a pram at a cost of £212.50.

16. I have no knowledge of opening an account with Very/Additions.

17. I have never ordered a pram to be delivered to my home. I have had prams in the past for my children, however the last pram which I owned around the same date of the alleged order was a perfectly good condition second hand pram (a three wheeler Mothercare buggy with an integral car seat) which a friend of mine passed on to me,

18. I have never received a pram at my home address from any company.

19. On receipt of this information I contacted the original creditor catalogue company (Very) directly. They looked at the account attached to my name and address and confirmed that the pram was the only order ever made and they confirmed that no payments has been made to the account since it was opened on 5th December 2009.

20. The original creditor was unable to confirm any delivery information as they state that they do not hold records for that long.

21. It appears strange to me that the alleged account was opened in December 2009 but no order placed until February 2010. The nature of these kind of catalogue accounts is that an account is opened at the same time the first order is placed.

22. I now aver that the alleged debt is statute barred under the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980, no payment or written acknowledgment has been made in more than 6 years.

23. Further research has shown that debt purchase companies will argue that the relevant 6 year period starts on the date when an account is defaulted relying on BMW Finance - v - Hart, in regard to a motor finance (HP) account, this matter however arises from a simple contract and was statute barred on the date the claim was issued i.e. 17th May 2016.

The defendant respectfully asks the court to allow this statement to be submitted in my defence.

This statement has been sent to the claimant’s solicitors on date 15th November 2016.

Signed ............................................ XXXX Date .........................................

of: Manchester

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

Better I think it makes your case stronger if you detail why you know you didn't buy a pram, rather than just saying you didn't... if you know what I mean.

I'd leave 23 out and let them bring that up if they chose to. Not point pre-empting them on that one.

Possibly expand 22 a bit.... and add another para before.

21. It is denied that any account existed between myself and the original creditor and it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the sum as claimed, or any sum.

22. In the alternative, if it is the courts decision that an agreement existed between the original creditor and myself, which is denied, then that debt would be statute barred under the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980 in that no payment or written acknowledgment has been made in more than 6 years. No payment has been made since inception of the alleged account on 5th December 2009, nor since the alleged order or delivery of Goods in February 2010. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the sum as claimed, or any sum.


Also earlier maybe amend 5....

5. On 31st May 2016 I sent a request to BW Legal Ltd for inspection of the documents mentioned in the claimant’s particulars of claim under provisions of the Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 being the agreement, the notice of assignment and the default notice. At the date of this Witness Statement the Claimant has not sent me a copy of any notice of assignment or default notice. I have never received either document from either the claimant or the original creditor.


I don't think you need more in there because you have made the legal arguments in your defence.

[Jojo13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

Thanks [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION] I'm going to the post office now

Really grateful for your help, thank you xx

[Jojo13]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

[MENTION=55034]nemesis45[/MENTION] [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION]

My partner just called to say I've had a letter from BWLEGAL today to say they are discontinuing their claim against me!!

Does this mean I don't have to do anything further, there was also a copy letter they were sending to the court saying the same thing?

[micro]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

Congrats

[nemesis45]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

@nemesis45 @Amethyst

My partner just called to say I've had a letter from BWLEGAL today to say they are discontinuing their claim against me!!

Does this mean I don't have to do anything further, there was also a copy letter they were sending to the court saying the same thing?

Hello Jojo,

1 Yes you will get the letter from the court 5-10 days seems to be par for the course. You can check with the court on this.

2. Well Done So pleased for you did they acknowledge your witness statement? Look like the claim was dropped as soon as they read it.

:clap2::yo::rockon: Congratulations.

nem

[charitynjw]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

Nice one Jojo!

[MIKE770]

Re: Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Jojo13

well done