Discontinued case looms again.

[Pumpytums]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Hi everyone,
ok to keep everyone up-to-date.

I have requested a strike out of the Claimants case as I believe it to be an abuse of process under CPR 38.7 as they have not sought permission.

I have also requested documents under a CPR 31.14 the Claimants representative has supplied the NOA and deed. Both these documents are fake. The NOA has never been served on me, the deed is pathetic. I can prove both are so.

If the Claimant wishes to submit these as evidence what should I do? Do I make the court aware that the Claimant is trying to bolster their case by producing manufactured evidence. Do I simply request notice to prove documents at trial using N268. The documents the Claimants rep supplied are in response to my CPR 31.14 request.

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/c.../n268_0499.pdf

Do I send copies to the claimant and the court?


Notice to admit or produce documents

32.19
(1)A party shall be deemed to admit the authenticity of a document disclosed to him under Part 31 (disclosure and inspection of documents) unless he serves notice that he wishes the document to be proved at trial.

(2)A notice to prove a document must be served –

(a)by the latest date for serving witness statements; or

(b)within 7 days of disclosure of the document, whichever is later.

On the bright side as they have produced documents they claim to be the NOA/deed I can ask the courts permission to submit a counter claim should my order fail.

Help would be appreciated.

Thanks

Pumpytums

[CleverClogs]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

How can you prove that the documents are fake?

[MIKE770]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

How can you prove that the documents are fake?

Made in Taiwan?

[Pumpytums]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Made in Taiwan?

Close, the point is when I submit my N268 the Claimant will have to prove their documents at trial. If they claim they are 100% authentic/true copy in a witness statement they could be done for contempt of court.

I have copies of certain correspondence prior to action that invalidates certain claims.

Pumpytums

[CleverClogs]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Close, the point is when I submit my N268 the Claimant will have to prove their documents at trial. If they claim they are 100% authentic/true copy in a witness statement they could be done for contempt of court.

I have copies of certain correspondence prior to action that invalidates certain claims.

Could they not claim that the author(s) of the letters had been mistaken?

Can the authorship of those letters even be established as any living person or persons?

[Pumpytums]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

The info contained ties in with other facts plus they are signed by a person (in fact persons).

[Pumpytums]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Hi everyone,
thought I would complete this thread.

I submitted my N244 Application to have the Claimants case struck out as they had nor adhered to CPR 38.7. The application was sent to the Claimant. On the day of my application the Claimant decided not to turn up, the Deputy judge said I was exactly correct with my request the Claimant needed permission. Result Claimants case struck out.

Now you would have thought that would have been the end of it but nope. The Claimant decided that as the strike out notice was silent as to why it was struck out they requested my strike out to be set aside. On the face of it this seems OK unfortunately the Claimant never bothered to show up for my application or submit anything at all. They stated that they were a different company to the original Claimant and thus CPR 38.7 did not apply. So basically they were saying that indefinite claims can be issued from different parties providing you use assignment as an excuse for exactly the same case. What a crock.

OK so I turn up in court again this time they have actually appointed a solicitor (nice chap actually). The judge states he is at a loss to this application, why did the Claimant not bother in attending the Defendants application? The solicitor could offer no excuse. The judge basically said your set aside is therefore denied. The solicitor requested to speak to his client. The judge asked me if I would allow this, I said no they have had 3 months to discuss why they didn't show up. The strike out still stands. The solicitor actually asked the judge how he could proceed the judge said he was impartial and could offer no advise.

They can lodge an appeal but they are way outside the 21 days so they would need a very good excuse plus a time extension not a "we couldn't be bothered to attend" type of excuse.

Pumpytums

[Gorang]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

That is exellent news pumpy as that is now going to send out the correct message to all these muppets that think they can please themselves with the law and the courts


Well done for sticking in there

exellent result WELL DONE

[WendyB]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Well done, I told you 38.7 would do the trick, didn't I? And well done for sticking to your guns and standing up to them. Great result-

[SpringerSpaniel]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Well done, good result

[Pumpytums]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Well done, I told you 38.7 would do the trick, didn't I? And well done for sticking to your guns and standing up to them. Great result-

Thanks everyone for your support and help. Hopefully this thread will help others.

I have to say that Claimants representatives blatantly lie (distort the truth), even if they make themselves out to be solicitors. I had one such company try and give me legal advice, I requested no such assistance. I only called to request where my documents were under a CPR 31.14 they were rude and very condescending. I know you shouldn't do it but I just laughed at them they don't like that which made it even funnier.

So always take anything the Claimants representative sends to you with a pinch of salt, it very often their interpretation. Never be scared even if they are solicitors, or pseudo legal threat monkeys .

Thanks

Pumpytums

[Pumpytums]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Hi everyone,
right it looks like I might be off to court again in the near future the account has now been flogged to another low life debt buying company.

No contact as yet but its only a matter of time.

Could this now be construed as harassment if they litigate again because it certainly feels like it. This will be the third time if it gets that far.

Quick summary

1. OC flogs account to debt buying company A.
2. Debt buying company A who make my life a misery for months calls letter etc
3. Debt buying company file a claim and discontinue for financial reasons (I filed a defence)
4. OC buys it back.
5. As OC decided to break our agreement and didn't issue a DN to make things better they decided they would continue to charge interest, PPI and charges for 6 months. They admitted the lack of the DN in writing after they bought it back.
6. OC decides to litigate
7. I file a defence that their claim is an abuse of process (CPR38.7)
8. I file for a strike out OC doesn't turn up I win
9. OC tries to get strike out set aside they lose.
10. OC flogs it to another company debt buying company B.

The OC and their so called solicitors behaved despicable during the whole process and blatantly lied at every turn.

What's stopping them doing this again and again until its statute barred?

I have never claimed costs this is very likely to change the next time.

Would I right in thinking that I can't sue the new owner for the OC's breach of contract/ unfair behaviour?

Should I just go after the OC using BCOBS?

Thanks

Pumpytums

[gravytrain]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

I don't think the BCOB's are appropriate on a credit agreement.

Surely the action is still prohibited under the CPR

[gravytrain]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Hmm

They are still going to run into problems, as if the account was not correctly terminated only the OC can commence proceedings.

[Pumpytums]

Re: Discontinued case looms again.

Thanks

The thing that really, really annoys is the PPI element. They refunded it to the account but the 6 months of interest they added "to put me back into the position I was prior to sale" swallowed that up.

You are correct about BCOBS looks like its s140A of the CCA 1974 I wonder if I could drag the OC into this?

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/...-relationships


interesting.

Thanks

PT