Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

[InDebtToSociety]

Dear friends

Nice to meet you and nice to be a part of this community. I received a court claim from Mortimer Clarke solicitors for a three year old unpaid mobile phone bill; not sure if the amount they're asking is correct or not but I know there was no warning or letters prior to this action. I went through a few threads regarding this company and the procedures one should follow once a court claim has been received. And I was wondering if a case regarding an old unpaid mobile phone bill is any different from cases involving credit card or other kinds of debt.

So far I have filed the acknowledgement of the proceedings online thus extending my response deadline to 28 days from service date and I have prepared a CPR 31.14 request that I am going to send tomorrow with recorded delivery to Mortimer Clarke. Any advice at this stage that may come in handy?

[InDebtToSociety]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

I think I've found an answer to my own question. Flowing the instructions on this thread http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...larke-vodafone

I am going to include in my CPR 31.14 not only a request for the agreement mentioned in the claim, but also copies of statements to show how the account amount has been arrived at, terms and conditions, termination and notice of assignment. I think I am good to go, but if anyone has any advise feel free to jump in as I am going g to the post office in a few hours.

[Amethyst]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

Morning Welcome to LB xxx

The CPR letter should only ask for copies of documents mentioned in the statement of case - so probably just contract, assignment, default notices. However it doesn't hurt to ask in a letter

You could ask for the other bits ( statement etc) under Part 18 but tbh you might be better sending a SAR to the original creditor (mobile company ).

Also did the contract include a handset on credit terms ( in which case send a CCA as well) or just airtime etc ?

[InDebtToSociety]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

Thanks Amethyst
The wording of the claim is as such: “ By an agreement between XXXXX and the defendant dated ......., XXXXX agreed to issue the defendant with credit relating to a mobile telephone. The defendant failed to make the minimum payments due & the agreement was terminated. The agreement was assigned to the claimant. The claimant therefore claims..”


I will ask for a copy of the agreement, default notice and assignment. Will it hurt to also ask for statements showing failure to make minimum payments since it’s mentioned in the claim?


Since there was a mobile phone as part of the deal I am also going to sent a CCA ( http://legalbeagles.info/forums/show...y-of-Agreement ) to Mortimer Clarke, within the same envelope, and include two £1 postal orders, one for each letter. I am going to prepare these now, feel free to add any more suggestions.


I wish they have sent some communication beforehand or they were able to make a good offer which they refused. This is an old contract and I wish this case closed asap, but not prepared to pay what they’re asking (below £500 but still too much) plus fees.

[InDebtToSociety]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

I received this reply from Mortimer Clarke:

" We refer to your letter dated XXXXXX, We can confirm we are taking our clients instructions in relation to the documents you have requested; in the meantime your account has been placed on hold. The notices of assignment have been enclosed for your reference. We trust this information is of assistance. Yours faithfully".


Should I let the court know that the claimant is unable to produce the required by the law documents and get an indefinite extension until they are able to do so, or should I proceed with filing my defence on the basis that the claim cannot be substantiated?


Edit: The letter is dated 31/07 but the claim is active on MCOL. Mortimer Clarke have not offered an extension so it looks like they are trying to trick me into missing the deadline for submission of my defence on the 23rd.

[InDebtToSociety]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

Maybe some of you super busy people can offer a word of advice?

[Kati]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

tagging [MENTION=6]Amethyst[/MENTION] [MENTION=87380]Diana M[/MENTION]

[charitynjw]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

I received this reply from Mortimer Clarke:

" We refer to your letter dated XXXXXX, We can confirm we are taking our clients instructions in relation to the documents you have requested; in the meantime your account has been placed on hold. The notices of assignment have been enclosed for your reference. We trust this information is of assistance. Yours faithfully".


Should I let the court know that the claimant is unable to produce the required by the law documents
You should do this in your filed defence unless they do come up with the goods meantime.
and get an indefinite extension until they are able to do so,
Normally an extension is agreed to by both parties & is 28 days max.
or should I proceed with filing my defence on the basis that the claim cannot be substantiated?
Yes. 33 days (latest) from the claim issue date, unless there is an agreed extension.
Best to leave it until close to the deadline in case they do produce documentation.


Edit: The letter is dated 31/07 but the claim is active on MCOL. Mortimer Clarke have not offered an extension so it looks like they are trying to trick me into missing the deadline for submission of my defence on the 23rd.
You may very well think that........

####

[InDebtToSociety]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

Thanks for the replies

You may very well think that........

Well, they are sly foxes. In my letter I asked them to agree to a further 28 day extension if they are unable to gather the necessary documents but none was offered. The 33 days since the issuing of the claim is 11 days from now so I should be filing my defence about a week from now. There is barely enough time for them to gather any evidence. Should I attempt to call and see if I can get that 28 day extension or just go ahead and file my defence when the time is due? As things stand their claim against me is unlikely to be successful.

[Diana M]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

Why would you want to agree to an extension to file your Defence? Have they specifically asked for an extension?

If they haven't got the documents to prove their case then they shouldn't have issued the claim in the first place.

The longer you give them the more time they have to come up with the goods.

Di

[InDebtToSociety]

Re: Mortimer Clarke - Court Claim - Mobile phone bill

That makes perfect sense.

I have prepared my defence, maybe someone can check for any mistakes? Please note I received this morning the notice of assignment, the address printed on is wrong, which may explain why I don't recall ever receiving that document before. Anyway, here is my defence:

1. The Claimant's statement of case fails to adequately set out the nature of the Claim.

2. The Defendant avers that the Claimants pleadings are an abuse of process. The Claimants pleadings are lacking detail, there are no details as to what the debt relates excepting that the original debt is alleged to be owed under an agreement between the Defendant and EE

3. Despite requests for information from the Defendant, the Claimant has not provided any details as to how the sums claimed have accrued.

4. There is a reference number for the account provided but no phone number was provided to allow the defendant to conduct their own research into the validity of this debt

5. The particulars of claim state that the account was assigned from EE to CABOT CREDIT MANAGEMENT GROUP on xx/xx/2016. The Defendant had not received any notification of this assignment BEFORE the 9^th of August 2017.

6. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974 was served upon the Defendant.

7: On XX/07/2017 the Defendant wrote to the Claimants requesting inspection of documents disclosed in its statement of case under CPR 31.14 & CCA 1974 - being the agreement, terms, assignment and default notice, a statement of account, statements showing failure to make minimum payments, a true copy, or reconstituted copy of the credit agreement relating to any account they deem to be mine, together with any other documentation the CCA 1974 Act require them to provide.

8: The claimants have failed to supply these documents.

9: Had the claim not been issued through County Court Business Centre the Claimant would have been obliged to attach copies of the documentation upon which it relies to the Particulars of Claim. The Defendant is entitled to see the documents on which the Claimant relies and which they will have to produce at trial. Inspection of disclosed documents at this stage will enable the Defendant to fully plead the case and further the Overriding Objective.

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

11. The Claimants have also failed to comply with a reasonable request for inspection of documents made under CPR 31.14 & CCA 1974.

13. The Defendant admits having held credit accounts with EE historically however is unaware of any debt owing. The Defendant is unable to identify to which account the claim refers to as he does not recognise the account number given in the claim.

14. Under Civil Procedure Rule 16.5 (4) Where the claim includes a money claim, a defendant shall be taken to require that any allegation relating to the amount of money claimed be proved unless he expressly admits the allegation. Therefore, It is expected that the Claimant be required to prove the allegation that the money is owed as claimed.

15. Should the Claimant evidence their claim properly the Defendant reserves the right to plead further.

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

Signed


Dated