Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

[mrroper]

Hi,

Got the Northampton Bulk Centre Claim form from the above, but I noticed on the Particulars of Claim, it states the following :-

"The claim is in the sum of *** in respect of monies owing by the defendant on a credit agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, originally taken with Three Mobile, under account number *******. The defendant failed to maintain the contractual payments in respect of the agreement and a default notice has been served upon the defendant and not complied with."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that credit agreements relating to mobile phone contracts aren't even covered by the legislation they're asserting.

Is this true, and if so, have they just shot themselves in the foot by citing legislation that doesn't even apply to the type of contract they're trying to claim for?

Also, that means if I send them a CPR 31.14 letter, then am I right in thinking that they'd need to send a copy of the credit agreement (which doesn't exist)?

Finally, on the Defence portion of the Claim Form (Section 3), would I need only state that I've submitted a CPR 31.14 request to Drydens, asking them to substantiate their claim?

Also, there's a circular Northampton (CCBC) County Court 'stamp' which looks to be photocopied on and also has no date inside of it.

Sorry - I'm new to court claim forms. Genuinely didn't expect it.

Thanks in advance for any help/advice given.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Hi,

Got the Northampton Bulk Centre Claim form from the above, but I noticed on the Particulars of Claim, it states the following :-

"The claim is in the sum of *** in respect of monies owing by the defendant on a credit agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, originally taken with Three Mobile, under account number *******. The defendant failed to maintain the contractual payments in respect of the agreement and a default notice has been served upon the defendant and not complied with."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that credit agreements relating to mobile phone contracts aren't even covered by the legislation they're asserting.

Is this true, and if so, have they just shot themselves in the foot by citing legislation that doesn't even apply to the type of contract they're trying to claim for?

Also, that means if I send them a CPR 31.14 letter, then am I right in thinking that they'd need to send a copy of the credit agreement (which doesn't exist)?
Finally, on the Defence portion of the Claim Form (Section 3), would I need only state that I've submitted a CPR 31.14 request to Drydens, asking them to substantiate their claim?

Also, there's a circular Northampton (CCBC) County Court 'stamp' which looks to be photocopied on and also has no date inside of it.

Sorry - I'm new to court claim forms. Genuinely didn't expect it.

Thanks in advance for any help/advice given.

Mobile phone contracts are service contracts not credit agreements, they do not fall under the Consumer Credit Act. What are you hoping to obtain with a request under CPR 31.14? I would suggest PMing PT2537 with a link to this thread, he is a specialist consumer lawyer :first: and would be your best bet to advise you with regards to the legal technicality noted above. How much is the claim for?

[bluebottle]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

I am a retired policeman. If the court stamp has, indeed, been cut and pasted, then that is serious. It is a criminal offence to fabricate an official document or any document under a number of statutes. PM PT2537 as FP recommends.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Hi Flamingparrot,

Thanks for your input - I've followed your advice, but I just thought it peculiar why they'd actually state on a Particulars of Claim that it's a credit agreement when it's not, or why they'd state it's regulated under the Consumer Credit Act when it's not.

Seems a bit iffy putting it on a Particulars of Claim when it has no bearing on what kind of contract it's supposed to be or what act of legislation is supposed to govern it.

With the CPR31.14, I was hoping to see what they'd come up with in respect to any agreement or documentation - how would one know what terms a service contract would come under if there's no paperwork relating to it?

Where would someone stand in respect to service contracts and what procedures should I follow?

The claim is for between £800-£900 - I don't want to give an exact figure, since I know DCAs do trawl forum boards.

Many thanks in advance.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Hi bluebottle,

Claim appears to exist online, so it appears to be legit. Would it help if I were to post the paperwork I got up onto this thread (minus any identifying or personal details, of course)?

[bluebottle]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Hi bluebottle,

Claim appears to exist online, so it appears to be legit. Would it help if I were to post the paperwork I got up onto this thread (minus any identifying or personal details, of course)?

Yes. That would help. If Lowells/Drydens have no right in law to collect, the claim may well be fraudulent or malicious, in which case, both Lowells and Drydens could be in trouble.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

How would you go about posting PDFs on this site? The image won't paste in directly.

[MissFM]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

How would you go about posting PDFs on this site? The image won't paste in directly.

Try "Go advanced" and then you'll get a screen that let's you load from your computer (browse, upload).

[MissFM]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

sorry - missed out "manage attachments"

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Hi MissFM,

Thanks for that - seems OK from my end.

[MissFM]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

:okay:it did - well done!

[bluebottle]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Although the N1 looks genuine, I have doubts as to whether Lowells have a legitimate right in law to collect. See what PT2547 says. If Lowells/Drydens have no right to collect, as previously stated, they could both be in trouble.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Hi Bluebottle,

Out of interest, what doubts do you have? If you'd rather not say on this thread, then by all means PM me.

[mrroper]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

Sorry to keep bumping this, but just when you think that you've posted everything you need to post, something else crops up.

As the Dryden's claim is in, is it too late to ask for a Subject Access Request and if not, would it be a good idea to add this request onto a CPR letter, such as the one below, or should separate correspondence be used?

I know - I probably should have asked for all this before now.

But, how should I ask for all, and where does the request need to go?

Since Dryden's are filing the claim, I'm assuming it would need to go there.

I hope no-one minds, but I'm asking for advice on several forums - just it doesn't hurt to get second and third opinions.






Dear Sir,

CPR 31.14 Request

On *** March 2013, I received the Claim Form in this case issued by you out of the Northampton (CCBC) county court .

I confirm having returned my acknowledgement of service to the court, in which I indicate my intention to contest all of your claim.

Please treat this letter as my request, made under CPR 31.14, for the disclosure and the production of a verified and legible copy of each of the following :-

1) The Agreement. You will appreciate that in an ordinary case, and by reason of the provisions of CPR PD 16 para 7.3, where a claim is based upon a written agreement, a copy of the contract or documents constituting the agreement should be attached to or served with the particulars of claim and the original(s) should be available at the hearing.

Further, that any general conditions incorporated in the contract should also be attached.

I understand that my right under the Consumer Credit Act 1974, which is the act of legislation you assert regulates the agreement in your Claim Particulars, is that a copy of the aforementioned agreement should be made available upon request.

2) The Assignment

3) The Default Notice

4) The Termination Notice

Although your claim is for a sum which is not more than £5,000.00, and will in all likelihood be allocated to the small claims track for determination upon my delivering a defence, at this moment in time I have not delivered my defence and the case has not been allocated to a track.

In consequence, the provisions of CPR 27(2) are of no effect, and you should not seek to avoid compliance with your CPR 31 duties by claiming otherwise.

You should ensure compliance with your CPR 31 duties, and ensure that the document(s) I have requested are copied to and received by me, within 7 days of receiving this letter.

Your CPR 31 duties extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for the originals of the documents I have requested.

This will be all the better for you to be able to verify the document's authenticity, and to provide me with a legible copy.

Further, where I have requested a copy of a document, the original of which is now in the possession of another person, you will have a right to possession of that document if you have mentioned it in your case.

You must take immediate steps to recover and preserve it for the purpose of this case.

Where I have mentioned a document and there is in your possession more than one version of that same document owing to a modification, obliteration or other marking or feature, each version will be a separate document and you must provide a copy of each version of it to me.

Your obligations extend to making a reasonable and proportionate search for any version(s) to include an obligation to recover and preserve such version(s), which are now in the possession of a third party.

In accordance with CPR 31.15(c), I undertake to be responsible for your reasonable copying costs incurred in complying with this CPR 31.14 request.

If you require more time in which to comply with this request, you must tell me in writing.

You must tell me before the time for compliance with this request has expired.

In telling me you require more time, you must tell me what steps you have taken, and propose to take in order to comply with this request, and also state a date by when you will comply with this request.

In addition, your statement must be accompanied with a statement that you agree to an extension of the time for me to file my defence.

Your extension of time must be not less than 14 days from the date when you say you will have complied with my request, and you must state the new date for filing my defence.

If you are unable to comply with this request, and believe that you will never be able to comply with this request, you must tell me in writing.

Please note that if you should fail to comply with this request, fail to request more time or fail to agree to an extension of time for the filing of my defence, I will make an application to the court for an order that the proceedings be struck out, or stayed for non-compliance and a summary costs order.

I do hope this will not be necessary and look forward to hearing from you.



Yours faithfully

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Lowell/Three Mobile/Drydens - possibly phony court claim

I am not a lawyer (hence my suggestion to ask one) but it looks like they didn't engage their brain while they were typing, as they are saying a 3 Mobile contract is an agreement regulated by the CCA and we all know that's not the case. Rather strange for a firm of solicitors to make such a mistake on an official document, perhaps they got a work experience kid to do the form!

With regards to paperwork, did you ever receive a NoA as stated on the claim? The terms should be the ones on the contract you signed with 3 Mobile. Is that balance for actual usage (calls, data, roaming, etc.), or is it mostly charges added to your account?

I would wait for PT's input before firing off the letter, it could well be that they have shot themselves in the foot by describing a mobile contract as a regulated credit agreement.

With a SAR, they would have 40 days to respond. A SAR is a request under the Data Protection Act and totally separate from a request under the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).