Fresh off the back of our win in the High Court last Monday (details to follow later) we had two hearings on Thursday and Friday against Cabot Financial (UK) Limited and MKDP LLP respectively.
The first case involved a case which could happen to any of us, the Defendant had been out of the Country for an extended time, in their absence they had been subject to a County Court claim which as a result of not being here went undefended. Judgment was entered as a result and thereafter a charging order obtained.
The Defendant only became aware of this when they returned to the UK many months later.
The Defendant rightly sought information from Cabot but the response was at best misleading and factually incorrect. What was said was that this matter related to a Current Account thus the Consumer Credit Act 1974 didnt apply. The Defendant had held only one current account for the last 15 years and had never used the overdraft. Furthermore the Defendant had a perfect credit report and no debts outstanding as being owed.
The Defendant was a lay person and not trained legally. The Defendant was unaware of the difficulties in setting aside judgment, but fortunately found my firm at the last minute. We immediately took instructions and placed the otherside on notice that we were instructed. We submitted a witness statement in support of the application and invited the opponent to consent to setting aside the Judgment, they refused citing difficulty in obtaining instructions, furthermore they claimed that they needed more information about the client being out of the Country.
We stood our ground and pointed out that if they wanted more info then the onus is on them to ask, as the Defendant isnt psychic at all.
The hearing took place on Thursday, the Defendant was represented by Thomas Brennan who is one of the best barristers i have ever had the pleasure of working with, Tom dismantled the opponents case and succeeded in securing the set aside for the client.
We also secured 75% of our costs in doing so too. The case was a small claims matter but we were able to recover costs under CPR rule 27.14(2)(g).
The outcome was as expected, the Defendant no longer has a charge or judgment.
There were other issues with the Cabot matter but at this stage they are not things i can share at this moment.
Turning attention to the MKDP matter, well it was one of the MKDP cases, same old same old really. Ill prepared, misconceived, lack of evidence, illegible documents, the list goes on.
Once again the Defendant was being sued by MKDP concerning a Barclays credit card. The Defendant instructed us after reading this blog and noting our results with MKDP. We instructed Thomas Brennan and the result was as expected, total demolition.
The opponents had not complied with s78(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Default notice was defective, the credit agreement was unenforceable due to non compliance with s61(1)(a) Consumer Credit Act 1974.
The case was a small claims matter, so once again we sought the costs under CPR rule 27.14(2)(g).
We were due to be in Court in the morning but due to an overloaded list we didnt get in til the afternoon. To save time, Tom put to the judge that the best way to deal with the case was to deal with each issue in turn, if we won on any of the points then we stop there and we win.
The Judge agreed, and we tried the s61(1)(a) Point first. The Judge accepted our submissions based on the evidence that the agreement was irredeemably unenforceable and declared this using his powers under s142 CCA 1974. This now means the creditor MKDP cannot record a default on the Defendants credit file see Grace v Blackhorse and therefore they must within 28 days remove the default or there may be a claim for damages coming their way too.
The Claim was dismissed and we also secured costs at 50% of our schedule, so this means the Defendant doesnt have to pay MKDP a penny and only has a minimum amount to pay us, a win win situation.
Lots more happening in the near future 🙂