Tweet
Re: HELP!!! I've just been served with a statuory demand by bwlegal/Lowell
Quote:- A rented Solicitor, thought the street corner hang arounders were called something else?
You are doing o.k. so far, keep your chin up!
Originally posted by fuzzybrain
Update time (is there a chance this could moved into the VIP section so any inquistive eyes that are not forum friends cn't read thid - I think you know what i mean.....
Firstly a massive huge thank you so to Kafka for being such an amazing support today and being there for me on the phone, your advice and support was so incredible and it really helped knowing you were at then end of the phone.
Thank you also to you all who are helping me and offering such fabulous advice - please don't stop now as things are about to get interesting and I'm going to need all the help I can.
What happened
As you know solicitor for BW/Lowells wanted an adjournment for 28 days and then a further 28 days for my response and then a hearing day a month later. I refused point blank and so off to the judge we went to battle it out.
The Judge was seriously ticked off that BW/Lowells were "not in a position to defend the application to day due to lack of paperwork" (solictors phrasing) She asked why they had not contacted the court to ask for extra time and asked me if i had been contacted prior to today to ask for extra time. I stated that I had not been advised or asked about an adjournment, that it was only brought to my attention upon my arrival at court today.
She asked me why I thought the case should be dismissed so i put forward the following arguments:
Barclarycard has had since 2009 to comply with the CCA request and have failed to do so despite numerous requests from me since January 2009 onwards. I stated that it is my belief that the documentation does not exist as it would have been presented to me by BC when I first requested it
That the Stat demand was heavy handed and unneccesary and other options should have been explored before envoking insolvency procedures. I stated i felt the stat demand should be set aside and when the Lowells obtain the required documentation they can file for CCJ and we can go head to head in a more appropriate forum than heading straight for insolvency procedures.
That I suffer from a comination of rare and complex medication conditions and the stress of the stat demand and having to apply for it to be set aside was negatively affecting and impacting upon my health and that I wanted and needed this to be resolved as quickly as possible. The judge asked me if I had any proof, so i showed her my card advising that that I have a sacaral neuromodulation stimulator wired to nerves my spine that send signals to my brain and bladder. I also informed her that i take a slow release form of morphine twice a day and extra morphine when the pain is severe. i advised the judge that since being issued with the stat demand i have become very stressed because of it and had to increase the level and dosage of morphine that I take. The judg seemed to accept this, but I think it might be worth having a word with somebody in my medical team and see if they could do a letter confirming that stress is a trigger and can cause a flare in my condition that usually results the above mentioned way or me ending up in hospital.
The judge asked me if I was denying whether I owed the money. i stated that without seeing the requested CCA information then I couldn't answer that as i am questioning the enforceability of the debt and have been since 2009. The Judge then stated that i have rasied a lot of complex issues re CCA S78 in my witness statement and stated she was not aware of some of the points being raised. The judge then asked me if I had the rulings for the Harrison and Link that evidences the points raised in my witness statement. Sadly I hadn't even thought of bringing the rulings with me (i feel really dumb about that now, but I thought the other points would have had enough strength to get the stat demand dismissed)
The judge suggested that at the next hearing i bring the following rulings with me and am able to evidence the argument i am making.
The judge agreed that the stat demand is heavy handed espcially as they don't have the papwerwork to back it up. The solicitor claimed that they only knew about the set aside application on 7 Jan 2013 and therefore had not sufficent time to gather the required information. I then informed the judge that i have a letter sent by BW legal on 12 december stating they are now aware of the dispute and had stated in the letter they had requested the required info from Lowells who may need to go back to BC for the paperwork. Solicitor said that she had not been made aware of this letter, so i kindly offered to show her the letter - that didn't go down to well with the judge either!The judge stated that she was going to allow an adjournment but not the length or amount the solicitor was requesting. The judge gave the solicitor instructions that the required paperwork needed to be filed with the court within the next 21 days. She said then she would allow me another 21 days to file a response if i so wished to, but was not obiligated to and she gave us a return hearing date of 29 March. She then warned that she would not entertain any further requests for another adjournment at the next hearing.
The judge then advised me to evidence my argument and bring to court the rulings mentioned and be able to demonstrate the part of the ruling that supported the points raised in my WS - The judge specifically mentioned Harrison and Link and also Hammond.
Then the fun started the judge mentioned costs and at first the solicitor thought it was costs in their favour, but the judge was very quick to point out the Lowells have wasted both the court and my time by not having the required paperwork ready and that they should have notified the court and myself sooner and asked for an adjournment.
The judge asked me what costs i had experienced by attending today. i stated that i had to take the day off work and that i have occured travel expense of getting to the court. I also mentioned about the time I had spent researching stat demands and set aside applications and also photocoping.
The judge stated that the most she could allow was a witness fee of £90 per day and my travel expenses - which resulted in a costs awarded order against Lowell of £102. She said the other costs could be claimed at the next hearing (I'm trying not to read too much into that remark, but i can't help but think the judge is expected Lowells to fail to produce the required info - if they do then i'll stick a costs order in anyhow!!!)
The solicitor was really narked at this and stated to mention that I had ignored all Lowells letters and a cost order against Lowells/BW was unfair and unjust. the jugde squashed thiis one befire i time to speak out by saying they had started the ball rolling with issuing a stat demand and that i was obligated to defend such an action. They weren't ready and have wasted my time and the court's time today so it was only fair i was recompensated for these costs occured.
I then addressed the judge and voiced my concerns that the required and requested paperworkdid not exist as BC would have sent it to me in 2009 when i was repeatedly requesting the information. I stated that if Lowells now have ownership of the debt so wouldn't all the paperwork have been given to them then and ths if they hadn't got it then it didn't exist!! The judge stated that I have a very vaild point and would able to argue this at the next hearing if we were in the same position as today.
Solicitor then piped uo with hiw unfair a costs order was but te judge was really getting ticked off at this point and told the solicitor to inform Lowells that they had ti pay the cost order to me by 15 February and they need to file the required info by the 21 February.
The judge then indicated that the hearing was now adjourned and for both parties to follow the courts instructions given.
I spoke with the solicitor afterwards and said that neother of us got what we wanted and how much longer were BW/Lowells going to drag out this out for as the paperwork doesn't exisit as if it did it would have been produced by now. I asked why didn't they just withdrawn the applciatioon and go down a CCJ route, which was far more and appropriate course of action. I warned the solicitor that if BW/Lowells intend to keep pushing further forwards with this stat demand then i would go for their throats and i would hit lowells for every single penny i possibly could and that the judge seemed sympathic ti my cause and very obliging to award costs in my favour. Solicitor repied that she was a rented solicitior and that the decision lies with Lowell/BW and i should speak with Lowells/BW about getting a conclusion sorted. I declined and said I'll wait to see what happens next and keep logging the hours and every expense down no matter how small.
So that's pretty much it. Costs were a big bonus and i think its sent a warning sign to Lowells that this is going to cost them if they want to keep going. Personally i think they will enter a withdrawal of stat demand at te last possible moment but they will make me sweat first.
Ok - i'm open to all suggestions/advice/support and sharing of knowledge and experience
Firstly a massive huge thank you so to Kafka for being such an amazing support today and being there for me on the phone, your advice and support was so incredible and it really helped knowing you were at then end of the phone.
Thank you also to you all who are helping me and offering such fabulous advice - please don't stop now as things are about to get interesting and I'm going to need all the help I can.
What happened
As you know solicitor for BW/Lowells wanted an adjournment for 28 days and then a further 28 days for my response and then a hearing day a month later. I refused point blank and so off to the judge we went to battle it out.
The Judge was seriously ticked off that BW/Lowells were "not in a position to defend the application to day due to lack of paperwork" (solictors phrasing) She asked why they had not contacted the court to ask for extra time and asked me if i had been contacted prior to today to ask for extra time. I stated that I had not been advised or asked about an adjournment, that it was only brought to my attention upon my arrival at court today.
She asked me why I thought the case should be dismissed so i put forward the following arguments:
Barclarycard has had since 2009 to comply with the CCA request and have failed to do so despite numerous requests from me since January 2009 onwards. I stated that it is my belief that the documentation does not exist as it would have been presented to me by BC when I first requested it
That the Stat demand was heavy handed and unneccesary and other options should have been explored before envoking insolvency procedures. I stated i felt the stat demand should be set aside and when the Lowells obtain the required documentation they can file for CCJ and we can go head to head in a more appropriate forum than heading straight for insolvency procedures.
That I suffer from a comination of rare and complex medication conditions and the stress of the stat demand and having to apply for it to be set aside was negatively affecting and impacting upon my health and that I wanted and needed this to be resolved as quickly as possible. The judge asked me if I had any proof, so i showed her my card advising that that I have a sacaral neuromodulation stimulator wired to nerves my spine that send signals to my brain and bladder. I also informed her that i take a slow release form of morphine twice a day and extra morphine when the pain is severe. i advised the judge that since being issued with the stat demand i have become very stressed because of it and had to increase the level and dosage of morphine that I take. The judg seemed to accept this, but I think it might be worth having a word with somebody in my medical team and see if they could do a letter confirming that stress is a trigger and can cause a flare in my condition that usually results the above mentioned way or me ending up in hospital.
The judge asked me if I was denying whether I owed the money. i stated that without seeing the requested CCA information then I couldn't answer that as i am questioning the enforceability of the debt and have been since 2009. The Judge then stated that i have rasied a lot of complex issues re CCA S78 in my witness statement and stated she was not aware of some of the points being raised. The judge then asked me if I had the rulings for the Harrison and Link that evidences the points raised in my witness statement. Sadly I hadn't even thought of bringing the rulings with me (i feel really dumb about that now, but I thought the other points would have had enough strength to get the stat demand dismissed)
The judge suggested that at the next hearing i bring the following rulings with me and am able to evidence the argument i am making.
The judge agreed that the stat demand is heavy handed espcially as they don't have the papwerwork to back it up. The solicitor claimed that they only knew about the set aside application on 7 Jan 2013 and therefore had not sufficent time to gather the required information. I then informed the judge that i have a letter sent by BW legal on 12 december stating they are now aware of the dispute and had stated in the letter they had requested the required info from Lowells who may need to go back to BC for the paperwork. Solicitor said that she had not been made aware of this letter, so i kindly offered to show her the letter - that didn't go down to well with the judge either!The judge stated that she was going to allow an adjournment but not the length or amount the solicitor was requesting. The judge gave the solicitor instructions that the required paperwork needed to be filed with the court within the next 21 days. She said then she would allow me another 21 days to file a response if i so wished to, but was not obiligated to and she gave us a return hearing date of 29 March. She then warned that she would not entertain any further requests for another adjournment at the next hearing.
The judge then advised me to evidence my argument and bring to court the rulings mentioned and be able to demonstrate the part of the ruling that supported the points raised in my WS - The judge specifically mentioned Harrison and Link and also Hammond.
Then the fun started the judge mentioned costs and at first the solicitor thought it was costs in their favour, but the judge was very quick to point out the Lowells have wasted both the court and my time by not having the required paperwork ready and that they should have notified the court and myself sooner and asked for an adjournment.
The judge asked me what costs i had experienced by attending today. i stated that i had to take the day off work and that i have occured travel expense of getting to the court. I also mentioned about the time I had spent researching stat demands and set aside applications and also photocoping.
The judge stated that the most she could allow was a witness fee of £90 per day and my travel expenses - which resulted in a costs awarded order against Lowell of £102. She said the other costs could be claimed at the next hearing (I'm trying not to read too much into that remark, but i can't help but think the judge is expected Lowells to fail to produce the required info - if they do then i'll stick a costs order in anyhow!!!)
The solicitor was really narked at this and stated to mention that I had ignored all Lowells letters and a cost order against Lowells/BW was unfair and unjust. the jugde squashed thiis one befire i time to speak out by saying they had started the ball rolling with issuing a stat demand and that i was obligated to defend such an action. They weren't ready and have wasted my time and the court's time today so it was only fair i was recompensated for these costs occured.
I then addressed the judge and voiced my concerns that the required and requested paperworkdid not exist as BC would have sent it to me in 2009 when i was repeatedly requesting the information. I stated that if Lowells now have ownership of the debt so wouldn't all the paperwork have been given to them then and ths if they hadn't got it then it didn't exist!! The judge stated that I have a very vaild point and would able to argue this at the next hearing if we were in the same position as today.
Solicitor then piped uo with hiw unfair a costs order was but te judge was really getting ticked off at this point and told the solicitor to inform Lowells that they had ti pay the cost order to me by 15 February and they need to file the required info by the 21 February.
The judge then indicated that the hearing was now adjourned and for both parties to follow the courts instructions given.
I spoke with the solicitor afterwards and said that neother of us got what we wanted and how much longer were BW/Lowells going to drag out this out for as the paperwork doesn't exisit as if it did it would have been produced by now. I asked why didn't they just withdrawn the applciatioon and go down a CCJ route, which was far more and appropriate course of action. I warned the solicitor that if BW/Lowells intend to keep pushing further forwards with this stat demand then i would go for their throats and i would hit lowells for every single penny i possibly could and that the judge seemed sympathic ti my cause and very obliging to award costs in my favour. Solicitor repied that she was a rented solicitior and that the decision lies with Lowell/BW and i should speak with Lowells/BW about getting a conclusion sorted. I declined and said I'll wait to see what happens next and keep logging the hours and every expense down no matter how small.
So that's pretty much it. Costs were a big bonus and i think its sent a warning sign to Lowells that this is going to cost them if they want to keep going. Personally i think they will enter a withdrawal of stat demand at te last possible moment but they will make me sweat first.
Ok - i'm open to all suggestions/advice/support and sharing of knowledge and experience
Quote:- A rented Solicitor, thought the street corner hang arounders were called something else?
You are doing o.k. so far, keep your chin up!
Comment