Re: Hoist Portfolio Court Claim. A little hand holding please!
Hello Charlie see amendments and suggestions.
nem
Originally posted by CharlieP
View Post
It's getting nearer the date so I guess I must file my defense. Could someone please run through it for me? Anything in bold I am unsure of.
Many thanks in advance.
Defence
1: I received the claim C2AL376R from Northampton County Court on 17th March 2016.
2: Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.
3: This claim appears to be for a Credit card agreement regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
4: The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate information to enable me to properly assess my position with regards the claim.
5. The particulars of claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.
6. The Claimants statement of case states that the account was assigned from From Bcard to MKDP and then to Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd.
The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment. The claimant has not stated when the alleged assignment (s) took place.
7. It is denied that BARCLAYCARD OR MKDP LLP served any Default notice on the Defendant pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served upon the Defendant.
8: On the 17th March 2016 I sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimants statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to Howard Cohen & Co. I requested the Claimant provide copies of the Agreement, Default Notice and Notice of Assignment.
9. Howard Cohen & Co has not sent any of these documents to me.
10. On the 17th March 2016 I sent a formal request for a copy of the original agreement to Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd pursuant to section s78of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1 fee. ****This was returned to me and subsequently I sent the request & fee on to Howard Cohen who gave it to Robinson Way who banked it as a payment to the account despite it being endorsed Statutory fee only on the PO. I make this point to show the court the unethical conduct of the claimant and their solicitors.
11. The Claimant has failed to comply with s 78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s 78 (6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement
12: I have asked the Claimant if we may agree to extend the time period allowed for filing of my defence pending receipt of documents (as allowed under CPR 15.5) but they have not responded. ***this isnt quite right, please see the attached letter from RW saying that they will grant me a further 14 days. Shall I enter that here?*****Put in exactly what happened*****
13. 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.
14. I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case else the Claim should stand struck out.
15. In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment.
16. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.
Statement of Truth
The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true.
Signed
Dated .................................................. ....
Thanks, Charlie
Many thanks in advance.
Defence
1: I received the claim C2AL376R from Northampton County Court on 17th March 2016.
2: Each and every allegation in the Claimants statement of case is denied unless specifically admitted in this Defence.
3: This claim appears to be for a Credit card agreement regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974.
4: The Claimants statement of case fails to give adequate information to enable me to properly assess my position with regards the claim.
5. The particulars of claim fail to state when the agreement was entered into.
6. The Claimants statement of case states that the account was assigned from From Bcard to MKDP and then to Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd.
The Defendant does not recall receiving notice of this assignment. The claimant has not stated when the alleged assignment (s) took place.
7. It is denied that BARCLAYCARD OR MKDP LLP served any Default notice on the Defendant pursuant to s87 Consumer Credit Act 1974. The Claimant is required to prove that a compliant Default Notice was served upon the Defendant.
8: On the 17th March 2016 I sent a request for inspection of documents mentioned in the claimants statement of case under Civil Procedure Rule 31.14 to Howard Cohen & Co. I requested the Claimant provide copies of the Agreement, Default Notice and Notice of Assignment.
9. Howard Cohen & Co has not sent any of these documents to me.
10. On the 17th March 2016 I sent a formal request for a copy of the original agreement to Hoist Portfolio Holding 2 Ltd pursuant to section s78of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 along with the statutory £1 fee. ****This was returned to me and subsequently I sent the request & fee on to Howard Cohen who gave it to Robinson Way who banked it as a payment to the account despite it being endorsed Statutory fee only on the PO. I make this point to show the court the unethical conduct of the claimant and their solicitors.
11. The Claimant has failed to comply with s 78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and by virtue of s 78 (6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 cannot enforce the agreement
12: I have asked the Claimant if we may agree to extend the time period allowed for filing of my defence pending receipt of documents (as allowed under CPR 15.5) but they have not responded. ***this isnt quite right, please see the attached letter from RW saying that they will grant me a further 14 days. Shall I enter that here?*****Put in exactly what happened*****
13. 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.
14. I request the court orders the Claimants to provide the necessary documentation in order for me to fully plead my case else the Claim should stand struck out.
15. In the event that the relevant documents are received from the Claimants I will then be in a position to amend my defence, and would ask that the Claimants bear the costs of the amendment.
16. It is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief as claimed or at all.
Statement of Truth
The Defendant believes that the facts stated in this Defence are true.
Signed
Dated .................................................. ....
Thanks, Charlie
nem
Comment