Legal question

[mrroper]

I thought it may be worth asking this on a separate thread (I have another one going) - if a company issues a Particulars of Claim, but fails to specify any dates on it, are there any repercussions for the company that filed the claim?

[labman]

Re: Legal question

Have you read this? Section 4 is of particular relevance I think:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct

[mrroper]

Re: Legal question

Have you read this? Section 4 is of particular relevance I think:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/pd_pre-action_conduct

Thanks for your prompt reply - that does contain some very handy information indeed.

However, I am still curious about the lack of any dates issue - I'd have thought that if a company tries to take someone to court on the basis of an account default, then they'd need to state on the PoC when the account allegedly originated, or when the alleged debt originated.

[labman]

Re: Legal question

Would this bit cover that?

4.4

The court may decide that there has been a failure of compliance by a party because, for example, that party has –
(1) not provided sufficient information to enable the other party to understand the issues;



Sections 4.5 and 4.6 set out clearly potential sanctions which could be imposed.

There are others on the site far more qualified than me to answer this question though, so I would await their input.

[enquirer]

Re: Legal question

It could go either way - it might provide grounds for the action to be struck out, or the court might allow it to continue, but require them to supply further information. Minor deficiencies are unlikely to be seen as an issue.

Did they attach any documents showing that the debt existed? Or did they simply make an assertion that it was so?

[mrroper]

Re: Legal question

It could go either way - it might provide grounds for the action to be struck out, or the court might allow it to continue, but require them to supply further information. Minor deficiencies are unlikely to be seen as an issue.

Did they attach any documents showing that the debt existed? Or did they simply make an assertion that it was so?

No, they didn't. It's all been assertion so far - I submitted a CPR 31.14 some time ago, which I've got nothing from as yet (chase-up letter for that is in transit).

[mrroper]

Re: Legal question

Is it right that I need to send copies of my witness statements and all other docs (emails/letters) to the claimant, before the court hearing takes place?

[Amethyst]

Re: Legal question

Yes, usually 7 days before the hearing, also copies to the court.

[PlanB]

Re: Legal question

Is it right that I need to send copies of my witness statements and all other docs (emails/letters) to the claimant, before the court hearing takes place?

Under CPR 27 and 28 it's 14 days before the hearing at the latest. Once your case has been allocated to the appropriate track you will usually be served with Standard Directions by the court. This sets out the timetable of events for filing or exchanging documents for both parties including things like Disclosure of documents, exchange of Witness Statements (which must be simultaneous), Listing Questionnaire and so on. The whole process from start to finish is 30 weeks.

If it's a complicated case then the court may order a Case Management hearing where both parties can discuss with the DJ the best way forward. The DJ can then order Special Directions.

Everything you've exchanged in the run up to the hearing will then be incorporated into the Trial Bundle prepared by the Claimant and agreed by the Defendant which must be sent to the court.

Skeleton Arguments are usually filed three days before the final hearing.

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pro.../pd_part28#7.1

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pro...es/part27#27.4

[PlanB]

Re: Legal question

Is it right that I need to send copies of my witness statements . . . . . before the court hearing takes place?

You've not said whether your case is in the Small claims court or Fast Track. But if it's the latter then Witness Statements must be served 10 weeks after allocation which is twenty weeks before the hearing. Assuming no adjournments along the line.

Here is the timetable:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pro.../pd_part28#7.1

*sorry I seem to be having trouble with that link so here's a C & P job instead


3.11 Where the court is proposing on its own initiative to make an order under rule 35.15 (which gives the court power to appoint an assessor), the court must, unless the parties have consented in writing to the order, list a directions hearing.
3.12 The table set out below contains a typical timetable the court may give for the preparation of the case.

Disclosure	4 weeks
Exchange of witness statements	10 weeks
Exchange of experts’ reports	14 weeks
Sending of pre-trial check lists (listing questionnaires) by the court	20 weeks
Filing of completed pre-trial check lists	22 weeks
Hearing	30 weeks

These periods will run from the date of the notice of allocation.
3.13
(1) Where it considers that some or all of the steps in that timetable are not necessary the court may omit them and direct an earlier trial.

[mrroper]

Re: Legal question

You've not said whether your case is in the Small claims court or Fast Track. But if it's the latter then Witness Statements must be served 10 weeks after allocation which is twenty weeks before the hearing. Assuming no adjournments along the line.

Here is the timetable:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pro.../pd_part28#7.1

*sorry I seem to be having trouble with that link so here's a C & P job instead


3.11 Where the court is proposing on its own initiative to make an order under rule 35.15 (which gives the court power to appoint an assessor), the court must, unless the parties have consented in writing to the order, list a directions hearing.
3.12 The table set out below contains a typical timetable the court may give for the preparation of the case.

Disclosure	4 weeks
Exchange of witness statements	10 weeks
Exchange of experts’ reports	14 weeks
Sending of pre-trial check lists (listing questionnaires) by the court	20 weeks
Filing of completed pre-trial check lists	22 weeks
Hearing	30 weeks

These periods will run from the date of the notice of allocation.
3.13
(1) Where it considers that some or all of the steps in that timetable are not necessary the court may omit them and direct an earlier trial.

It's Small Claims.

[mrroper]

Re: Legal question

I should also mention that I found out (today) about a peculiarity on one of my credit reports (I'm waiting for the other two).

There's no default listed by the 'OC', but Lowell have done - they've given a 'Default Balance' of just over £100, but the 'Current Balance' on the same report is far higher than that.

Lowell seem to have added 'court costs' (+£20) in the balance that they've logged on that report. It isn't the balance they were citing at first.

I've been told before that incorrect information can constitute defamation - wondering if I'd have a case against Lowell for it.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Legal question

It's Small Claims.

This is the link to Practice Direction 27 - Small Claims: http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/pro...rt27/pd_part27

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Legal question

I should also mention that I found out (today) about a peculiarity on one of my credit reports (I'm waiting for the other two).

There's no default listed by the 'OC', but Lowell have done - they've given a 'Default Balance' of just over £100, but the 'Current Balance' on the same report is far higher than that.

Lowell seem to have added 'court costs' (+£20) in the balance that they've logged on that report. It isn't the balance they were citing at first.

I've been told before that incorrect information can constitute defamation - wondering if I'd have a case against Lowell for it.

Not quite, there are guidance notes for reporting to the CRAs but they don't have the force of law. When it comes to defaults, the most important thing is the dates, you don't want defaults erroneously recorded years later because you want them to drop off after 6 years. The OC has sold the debt to Lowell, which is why there is no default under their name, you don't want a duplicate default either. :nono:

Do bear in mind companies conducting credit searches don't see exactly the same things you see when you look at your own file, each company plugs into the CRAs using their own software and may not see things in as much detail as you are seeing them. :nerd:

This is a link to the guidance notes I mentioned above: http://www.ico.org.uk/~/media/docume...%20%20doc.ashx

[mrroper]

Re: Legal question

Not quite, there are guidance notes for reporting to the CRAs but they don't have the force of law. When it comes to defaults, the most important thing is the dates, you don't want defaults erroneously recorded years later because you want them to drop off after 6 years. The OC has sold the debt to Lowell, which is why there is no default under their name, you don't want a duplicate default either. :nono:

Do bear in mind companies conducting credit searches don't see exactly the same things you see when you look at your own file, each company plugs into the CRAs using their own software and may not see things in as much detail as you are seeing them. :nerd:

This is a link to the guidance notes I mentioned above: http://www.ico.org.uk/~/media/docume...%20%20doc.ashx

I'm looking at it from what information's actually in the default - they've cited a balance which includes court costs, even though nothing's been decided on costs as of yet because the hearing itself has yet to happen. Also, it's the first time I've actually seen that balance - it's not in their previous correspondence.