Alison's UE Diary

[Still Waving]

The Protocols state, under Section 4 - Response by the Debtor
"4.2
If the debtor indicates that they are seeking debt advice, the creditor must allow the debtor a reasonable period for the advice to be obtained. In any event, the creditor should not start court proceedings less than 30 days from receipt of the completed Reply Form or 30 days from the creditor providing any documents requested by the debtor whichever is the later."

So it seems to me that they are currently unable to start proceedings without being in contravention of the Protocols. However, I understand that the OP may have missed the original deadline for returning the response to the first LBA, which could complicate matters.

MC could be covering their bases by resending the LBA and hoping the OP doesn't ask for the documents again.

[Still Waving]

Further to my previous post

Section 5 says

"5 DISCLOSURE OF DOCUMENTS
5.2
If the debtor requests a document or information, the creditor must –

(a) provide the document or information; or
b) explain why the document or information is unavailable,

within 30 days of receipt of the request."

[Roger]

The Protocols state, under Section 4 - Response by the Debtor
"4.2
If the debtor indicates that they are seeking debt advice, the creditor must allow the debtor a reasonable period for the advice to be obtained. In any event, the creditor should not start court proceedings less than 30 days from receipt of the completed Reply Form or 30 days from the creditor providing any documents requested by the debtor whichever is the later."

So it seems to me that they are currently unable to start proceedings without being in contravention of the Protocols. However, I understand that the OP may have missed the original deadline for returning the response to the first LBA, which could complicate matters.

MC could be covering their bases by resending the LBA and hoping the OP doesn't ask for the documents again.

I Agree.

By filling in a New Form you might be giving them a way out of the Legal Process which they have instigated.

I would however make certain that you have recorded delivery details etc.. signature . Then send this proof plus copy of your Old Form back to them
I wouldn't wait 30 days because this might be interpreted as agreeing with their New Form.
The delay in sending I suggest can be weighted against their tactics here

[RhodriMawr]

Thanks for your responses. With regards to missing the first deadline, I am not sure how the response below affected the deadline. They might be just restarting the process after placing it on hold. I have checked online and my form was received by them and signed for on the 3rd of July.
June 23rd

-

Letter from Mortimer Clarke (dated June 18th) , acknowledging our letter. For the avoidance of doubt, this firm acts on its client's instructions. This firm does not hold the documentation you have requested. We have asked our client to provide them and will come back to you as soon as we can. In the meantime, the matter has been placed on hold and no further action will be taken.

[Warwick65]

My understanding is that any letter of claim has a 'shelf life' so the creditor is acting correctly in sending out a new one although the time span does seem a little short. Incidentally the protocols say the creditor should take into account the response might have been posted towards the end of the 30 days i.e gives a little bit of leeway.

Personally , as I suggested earlier I would ask for the documents I listed because these are the same ones you asked for before. There is of course a school of thought that says don't ask for anything because it gives the creditor time to get their ducks in a row and these things should only be asked for once a claim has been received. However as the AAD way is to avoid court at all costs, asking for something they might not be able to find is IMO a good call.

I notice Di has previously said ask for the DN, NOA and DOA

[Still Waving]

Thanks for your responses. With regards to missing the first deadline, I am not sure how the response below affected the deadline. They might be just restarting the process after placing it on hold. I have checked online and my form was received by them and signed for on the 3rd of July.
June 23rd

-

Letter from Mortimer Clarke (dated June 18th) , acknowledging our letter. For the avoidance of doubt, this firm acts on its client's instructions. This firm does not hold the documentation you have requested. We have asked our client to provide them and will come back to you as soon as we can. In the meantime, the matter has been placed on hold and no further action will be taken.

The timeline suggests that when MC received your (copy) letter of 7 June stating that a CCA request was outstanding, they would have realised that the account was UE at that time. They will since have been advised by their client that the copy agreement has been supplied, so they are beginning again at LBA step one. Seems entirely reasonable.

So you would need to do as you were previously advised and ask for the specific documents that Di laid out, when you send back the LBA questionnaire -
"Then go to Box I (where you can request documents) and ask for the Default Notice, the Notice of Assignment and the Deed of Assignment between RBS and Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd. I have a reason for stressing the importance of asking for this."

[Roger]

I wouldn't play any games here. My take is your existing LBC stands, so why would you send another?

The LBC becomes the LBA in this context. They have acknowledged in writing but not rebutted that LBC document request.

So either ignore and let their process continue or resend a copy of what you have already sent and I would do that immediately without comment!.
I wouldn't send in a NEW LBC with a new date etc.. !

You see the argument that they can just keep asking again and again until they get a version that suits them isn't what this new process is about is it?

[Joanna Connolly Solicitors]

The timeline suggests that when MC received your (copy) letter of 7 June stating that a CCA request was outstanding, they would have realised that the account was UE at that time. They will since have been advised by their client that the copy agreement has been supplied, so they are beginning again at LBA step one. Seems entirely reasonable.

So you would need to do as you were previously advised and ask for the specific documents that Di laid out, when you send back the LBA questionnaire -
"Then go to Box I (where you can request documents) and ask for the Default Notice, the Notice of Assignment and the Deed of Assignment between RBS and Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd. I have a reason for stressing the importance of asking for this."

^ ^ ^ that makes sense to me

Di

[RhodriMawr]

Thanks for your responses. Should I send the LBA back to MC now, or run the clock down a bit? In my reply should I reference my previous return of a LBC and my request for documents which has not been complied with?

[RhodriMawr]

Response received from MC.
Please find a copy of the original agreement, statement of account and default notice as requested. We can confirm that you have requested a copy of the Notice of Assignment, and will forward to you upon receipt. You have requested a copy of the deed of assignment. This is a confidential document between our client and the original creditor. This document does not contain any personal detail relating to you and is not available for disclosure. Our client requires the outstanding balance to be addressed. Please find enclosed an I & E form which we require you to complete and return within 14 days. If no response is received we will refer the matter to our client for further instruction.
The aforementioned default notice appears to be some kind of computer generated screenshot with the heading "Certegy Based Product Default Notice Details. There is a Roll Number, issue date,DFN letter code used,and details held on account at time of issue. There is no names or addresses.

[Joanna Connolly Solicitors]

Response received from MC.
Please find a copy of the original agreement, statement of account and default notice as requested. We can confirm that you have requested a copy of the Notice of Assignment, and will forward to you upon receipt. You have requested a copy of the deed of assignment. This is a confidential document between our client and the original creditor. This document does not contain any personal detail relating to you and is not available for disclosure. Our client requires the outstanding balance to be addressed. Please find enclosed an I & E form which we require you to complete and return within 14 days. If no response is received we will refer the matter to our client for further instruction.

^ ^ ^ ^ In which case how would they be able to prove to the court that the assignment actually took place for this specific debt if it's not referred to in the Deed

Reading back through your thread I believe that the debt owner is Cabot Financial (UK) Ltd. Is that correct?

Keep that letter from Mortimer Clarke solicitors safe.

Di

[RhodriMawr]

Hi Diana, Yes, the debt owner is Cabot Financial (UK). Does the Default Notice sound valid to you?

[Warwick65]

Personally I would say that while I don't think the DN is valid (bit of a guess as I've not seen it) it is possible they could persuade a judge one was sent. Even if that is so there are other arguments to use. Deed of assignment being one.

[RhodriMawr]

Further letter received from MC dated 04/09/18 noting that we not responded to previous letter asking for I & E details. "Our client is keen to find out more about your financial situation so that we can agree an appropriate & affordable repayment plan. If the I & E form is not completed within 10 days from the date of this letter we will refer the matter to our client for further instruction".

[Still Waving]

Sit tight.