Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

[Guest]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

No im talking about discovery applications where the Claimant fails to provide documents mentioned in the Claim form.

Frost was an entirely different matter with different facts as youre aware having read the judgment.

Ahh I see

[Bigsis]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

Hi pt2537

I feel we could be screwed without representation if we have to deal with him again. Anyway need to get this defence sorted out first, but need a bit of help with it please.

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

BigSis, I've included what I can gauge from your thread and witness statement, can you give us any more facts / correct anything I've missed/got wrong etc. Basically - does he remember there being a debt left, and has he had letters and done an ostrich on them, or just never received anything due to having moved house ? Has he had any contact with Lloyds since closing/stopping using the account ? Is the account number recognised ? etc. etc. You get the idea.

We've got the rest of this week to get this cracked, whether we go with entering the defence as ordered or appeal the Judge's decision. I am concerned that as it isn't your claim and your son would be in need of representation if any alternative route was taken.


VERY ROUGH DRAFT - for discussion/input etc from PT / M1 please. This is just to try help you get started with what the court ordered.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT (CCBC) CASE No: xxxxxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

Lowell Portfolio xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

CLAIMANT

And

BigSis xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

DEFENDANT

__________________________________________________ _____
Defence
__________________________________________________ _____

1. It is admitted that the Defendant held a current account with Lloyds Bank Plc.

2. The Particulars of Claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.

3. The Defendant believes the account was opened in / around XXXX and closed in / around XXXX.

4. The Defendant believes this claim may relate to an overdraft on the account.

5. The Defendant is unaware of any outstanding debt due on the current account previously held with Lloyds Bank Plc.

6. The Defendant does not recognise the reference/account number given in the Particulars of Claim.

7. The Defendant is unaware of any contact from Lloyds regarding any debt. The Defendant has not received any statements of account showing how any debt may have been calculated.

8. The Particulars of Claim state that the account was assigned from Lloyds Bank Plc to Lowell Portfolio on 30/6/13. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.

9. The Claimants additionally mention a Default Notice.The Defendant does not recall receiving a default notice.

10. On the 15th April 2014 the Defendant made a request for inspection of documents disclosed in the Claimant's statement of case, namely the Credit Agreement, the Default Notice and the Assignment.

11. The Claimants claim is based upon Defendant’s alleged breach of contract and therefore the agreement is entirely central to the Claimants case.

12. The Claimant has failed to disclose any documents relating to their claim to the Defendant.

13. Upon the Claimant clarifying matters set out above the Defendant reserves his position to amend this Defence further. The Defendant shall seek the costs of the amendments from the Claimant due to the Claimants failure to plead its case adequately. Should the Claimant fail to replead his case his claim should stand struck out.


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



Signed …………………………………………
Dated

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

We felt he had made assumptions about us right from the start by saying he knew people take this course of action when they know they owe a debt in order to avoid paying it. Also the fact that he thought it unlikely Lowell would be able to produce the documents and would probably have to produce a speciman of what would have been signed and he would have to judge on the probability of whether it had been signed or not!

Only just read that bit :doggieyes: Pretty sh*t that any LIP trying to make sure the claimant has the right to claim the debt is labelled as a debt avoider. This isn't even obscure technicalities, just basic pre action and CPR so you can properly defend or admit the claim.

[Guest]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

Only just read that bit :doggieyes:

Yes this was the issue in Frost I was referring to, the fact that an agreement can be found to be an executed agreement without it being produced.

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

Have made a few amendments. Remember you are still asking for information to ascertain the details of the debt, and how it is made up.


IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT (CCBC) CASE No: xxxxxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

Lowell Portfolio xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

CLAIMANT

And

BigSis xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

DEFENDANT

__________________________________________________ _____
Defence
__________________________________________________ _____

1. It is admitted that the Defendant previously held a current account with Lloyds Bank Plc.

2. The Particulars of Claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.

3. The Defendant believes the account was opened in / around 1983 and closed in 2010. It is believed the last activity on the account was in July 2009.

4. The Defendant is unaware of any outstanding debt due on the current account previously held with Lloyds Bank Plc. The Defendant did have an overdraft on the account however believed this to be cleared at the time the account was closed.

5. The Defendant does not recognise the reference/account number given in the Particulars of Claim.That is not to say it is incorrect but he holds no records of that account to check it against.

6. The Defendant is unaware of any contact from Lloyds Bank Plc regarding any debt since the account was closed.

7. The Defendant has not received any statements of account showing how any debt may have been calculated. In 2010 the Defendant visited a branch of Lloyds Bank and asked for statement of his account which they were unable to provide apart from to inform him the last activity on the account was a £10 payment into the account made in July 2009.

8. The Particulars of Claim state that the account was assigned from Lloyds Bank Plc to Lowell Portfolio on 30/6/13. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.

9. The Claimants additionally mention a Default Notice.The Defendant does not recall receiving a default notice.

10. On the 15th April 2014 the Defendant made a request for inspection of documents disclosed in the Claimant's statement of case, namely the Agreement, the Default Notice and the Assignment.

11. The Claimants claim is based upon Defendant’s alleged breach of contract and therefore the agreement is entirely central to the Claimants case.

12. The Claimant has failed to disclose any documents relating to their claim to the Defendant.

13. Upon the Claimant clarifying matters set out above the Defendant reserves his position to amend this Defence further. The Defendant shall seek the costs of the amendments from the Claimant due to the Claimants failure to plead its case adequately. Should the Claimant fail to replead his case his claim should stand struck out.


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



Signed …………………………………………
Dated

[Bigsis]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

Hi Amethyst

4. He didn't know the acct was closed until a few weeks ago and didn't realise there was still an outstanding o/draft.

7. It was March 2014 that he went into a branch (see post #45)
when all this started and they told him the bank had closed acct 25/2/10 and last activity was July'09.

As the Judge made reference to whether he had a loan or credit card, do we need to mention that he didn't, somewhere in the
defence.

Thanks for your help

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

It;s okay better to get it right.




IN THE NORTHAMPTON COUNTY COURT (CCBC) CASE No: xxxxxxxxxxxxx

BETWEEN:

Lowell Portfolio xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

CLAIMANT

And

BigSis xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

DEFENDANT

__________________________________________________ _____
Defence
__________________________________________________ _____

1. It is admitted that the Defendant previously held a current account with Lloyds Bank Plc.

2. The Particulars of Claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.

3. The Defendant believes the account was opened in / around 1983. Until receipt of this court claim the Defendant was unaware of any debt outstanding on this account.

4. In March 2014, following receipt of the claim in this case, the Defendant visited a branch of Lloyds Bank to try and find out any information to assist him responding to the claim form. He asked for statement of his account which they were unable to provide apart from to inform him the last activity on the account was a £10 payment into the account made in July 2009.

5. The bank also informed the defendant the account had been closed on 25/2/10 and there was a debt of £1720.89. They were unable to give any details as to how this debt was made up.

6. The Defendant does not have any other financial products with Lloyds bank.

7. The Defendant is unaware of any contact from Lloyds Bank Plc regarding any debt since the account was closed, in fact he was unaware it had been closed until receipt of this claim.

8. The Defendant has not received any statements of account showing how any debt may have been calculated.

9. The Particulars of Claim state that the account was assigned from Lloyds Bank Plc to Lowell Portfolio on 30/6/13. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.

10. The Claimants additionally mention a Default Notice.The Defendant does not recall receiving a default notice.

11. On the 15th April 2014 the Defendant made a request for inspection of documents disclosed in the Claimant's statement of case, namely the Agreement, the Default Notice and the Assignment.

12. The Claimants claim is based upon Defendant’s alleged breach of contract and therefore the agreement is entirely central to the Claimants case.

13. The Claimant has failed to disclose any documents relating to their claim to the Defendant.

14. Upon the Claimant clarifying matters set out above the Defendant reserves his position to amend this Defence further. The Defendant shall seek the costs of the amendments from the Claimant due to the Claimants failure to plead its case adequately. Should the Claimant fail to replead his case his claim should stand struck out.


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



Signed …………………………………………
Dated

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

As M1 points out we haven't got much of a denial here, it's more of a 'I admit I owe Lloyds something, but I don't know who the claimants are, if they are eligible to collect the debt or how the debt with lloyds was built up' which is the problem with trying to enter a defence BEFORE they have to give you the documents. This judge really has got it arse about face.

Let us have a ponder over the weekend.

[Bigsis]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

Yeah I agree, it feels like a game of poker and we're showing our hand too soon. Maybe just stick to the basic facts, as they have not given us any info in the POC's to either deny or admit.

[Bigsis]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

1. It is admitted that the Defendant previously held a current account with Lloyds TSB Bank Plc.

2. The Particulars of Claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.

3. The Defendant believes the account was opened in / around 1983, he did not close the account.


5. The Defendant does not recognise the reference/account number given in the Particulars of Claim.That is not to say it is incorrect but he holds no records of that account to check it against.

6. The Defendant does not have a credit card or loan with Lloyds TSB bank.

7. The Defendant is unaware of any contact from Lloyds TSB Bank Plc regarding any debt.

8. The Defendant has not received any statements of account showing how any debt may have been calculated.

9. The Particulars of Claim state that the account was assigned from Lloyds TSB Bank Plc to Lowell Portfolio on 30/6/13. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment.

10. The Claimants additionally mention a Default Notice.The Defendant does not recall receiving a default notice.

11. On the 15th April 2014 the Defendant made a request for inspection of documents disclosed in the Claimant's statement of case, namely the Agreement, the Default Notice and the Assignment.

12. The Claimants claim is based upon Defendant’s alleged breach of contract and therefore the agreement is entirely central to the Claimants case.

13. The Claimant has failed to disclose any documents relating to their claim to the Defendant.

14. Upon the Claimant clarifying matters set out above the Defendant reserves his position to amend this Defence further. The Defendant shall seek the costs of the amendments from the Claimant due to the Claimants failure to plead its case adequately. Should the Claimant fail to replead his case his claim should stand struck out.

I've omitted no. 4 (unless you think it should be kept in) and kept it to the known basics.

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

Yes I think so. That is the position it would be had he not gone into Lloyds to ask them about the account - the claimants still haven't given any information about the debt to enable any defence nor admission to be made and haven't disclosed any documents they want to rely on, so therefore why should we assist them because of making our own enquiries separately.

[mystery1]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

1. It is admitted that the Defendant previously held a current account with Lloyds TSB Bank Plc.


2. The Particulars of Claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.


3. The Defendant believes the account was opened in / around 1983, he did not close the account.


4. The Defendant does not recognise the reference/account number given in the Particulars of Claim.That is not to say it is incorrect but he holds no records of that account to check it against.

5. The defendant did not borrow money from Lloyds TSB Bank Plc and puts the claimant to strict proof thereof.

6. The Defendant does not have a credit card or loan with Lloyds TSB bank.


7. The Defendant is unaware of any contact from Lloyds TSB Bank Plc regarding any debt.


8. The Defendant has not received any statements of account showing how any debt may have been calculated.


9. The Particulars of Claim state that the account was assigned from Lloyds TSB Bank Plc to Lowell Portfolio on 30/6/13. The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment and puts the claimant to strict proof thereof.


10. The Claimants additionally mention a Default Notice.The Defendant does not recall receiving a default notice and puts the claimant to strict proof thereof.


11. On the 15th April 2014 the Defendant made a request for inspection of documents disclosed in the Claimant's statement of case, namely the Agreement, the Default Notice and the Assignment.


12. The Claimants claim is based upon Defendant’s alleged breach of contract and therefore the agreement is entirely central to the Claimants case.


13. The Claimant has failed to disclose any documents relating to their claim to the Defendant.


14. Upon the Claimant clarifying matters set out above the Defendant reserves his position to amend this Defence further. The Defendant shall seek the costs of the amendments from the Claimant due to the Claimants failure to plead its case adequately. Should the Claimant fail to replead his case his claim should stand struck out.



M1

[Amethyst]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

Much better, cheers M1 xx

[mystery1]

Re: Lowell/Lloyds TSB/BW Legal

Much better, cheers M1 xx

Just edited yours. Number 5 came from the court recap.

I'm still hoping they will fail to comply with the judges orders. To be honest there isn't much to work with.

M1