**SORTED** Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

[mystique]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

Hi
All letters sent, copies taken, sent by recorded delivery.
I've started a file putting in all info gathered so far
I've also looked at the templates for writing a defence - wow, it looks like a foreign language to me.
While I was perusing other threads I saw this -
The debt is time barred under the Limitation Act 1980 section 5 in that the last payment or acknowledgement of this debt was made over 6yrs ago and no further acknowledgement has been made since that time. this claim is denied.
Is this enough or appropriate to put online in the defence section?

[Diana M]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

All letters sent, copies taken, sent by recorded delivery.
I've started a file putting in all info gathered so far
I've also looked at the templates for writing a defence - wow, it looks like a foreign language to me.
While I was perusing other threads I saw this -
The debt is time barred under the Limitation Act 1980 section 5 in that the last payment or acknowledgement of this debt was made over 6yrs ago and no further acknowledgement has been made since that time. this claim is denied.
Is this enough or appropriate to put online in the defence section?

Good to see you're in a positive frame of mind.

Your Defence deadline is 33 days following the claim Issue Date which was 10/01/17 according to your first post.

Have you been able to Track and Trace the CCA Request and CPR 31.14 Request letters which you sent last month to see if they have been received. And/or have you had any acknowledgement of them from either Hoist or Howard Cohen yet?

Di

[mystique]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

Have only just posted letters but will keep a track on when they've been signed for. Any other info I Can be putting on file that might be relevant?
Regards
Mystique

[mystique]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

Hi
The letters to Barclaycard and cohen were received and signed for yesterday morning. The letter to Hoist is still winging its way to Jersey.

[mystique]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

Hi
I've prepared a draft defence with a couple of questions which I've added as I went along
I would be very grateful for any comments please


1: I received the claim ******** from the Northampton County Court on 12^th January 2017.

2: Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.

3: This claim is for a Credit Card agreement regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

4. The particulars of claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.

5. The Claimants statement of case states that the account was assigned from Barclaycard to Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd but does not indicate a date. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.

6. It is denied that Barclaycard served any Default notice on the Defendant pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served upon the Defendant. I honestly can’t remember whether this occurred – should I leave it in?

7: On the 7^th February 2017 I sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimant’s statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to Howard Cohen & Co. I requested the Claimant provide copies of the Agreement, Default Notice and Notice of Assignment.

8. On the 7^th February 2017 I sent a formal request for a copy of the original agreement to Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd pursuant to section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1 fee.

9. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation. Therefore, It is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed.

10. I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case else the Claim should stand struck out.

11. 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.

12. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.

13. The debt is time barred under the Limitation Act 1980 section 5 in that the last payment or acknowledgement of this debt was made over 6 years ago and no further acknowledgement has been made since that time. Should I put this in?

Statement of Truth

The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true.



Signed …………………………………………

Dated .................................................. ....

Thank your kind help so far
Regards. Mystique

[charitynjw]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

Hi mystique

If it were me, I'd put both para #'s 6 & 13 in as you have them.
They will then have to rebut your defence.
It would be good if you could supply evidence to back up your SB statement, even though the onus will be on them to prove that it's not SB.
The SAR may do that for you, but you should be able to obtain info from your bank for the relative period (2010/11) for a modest fee.

[arklst1976]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

You wanna take the Claim number out?
On this forum I mean

[mystique]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

Arkist1976 - many thanks

[mystique]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

Charitynjw - thank you.
Btw I Have all bank statements to show payments and when they stopped (feb 2010)
Do you think what I've put is ok to send?
Kind regards
Mystique

[charitynjw]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

8: On the [Date] I sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimants statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to [Claimant's Solicitor]. I requested the Claimant provide copies of the [Agreement, Default Notice and Notice of Assignment] .

9. [Claimant's Solicitor] has not sent any of these documents to me.

10. On the [Date] I sent a formal request for a copy of the original agreement to [Claimant] pursuant to section [77 or 78] of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1 fee.

11. The Claimant has failed to comply with [s77 (1) / s 78 (1)] Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of [s77 (4) / s 78 (6)] Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.

Good re your historic documentation.
Personally, if the above in red is applicable I'd put them in. (Tweaked to suit).

[mystique]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

I wasn't sure about putting those in as the letters were only sent on 7th and they have not run out of time to respond

[charitynjw]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

No worries, just change the wording from 'not received' to 'awaiting a reply'.

[mystique]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

Sorry to be a pain but what does #11 mean?

[charitynjw]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

This?

The Claimant has failed to comply with [s77 (1) / s 78 (1)] Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of [s77 (4) / s 78 (6)] Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement.

[mystique]

Re: Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd v Mystique

Yes, that's the one