Me versus Capital one LEEDS 26th APRIL !

[donbracho]

Right its me again have posted about my partners case reguarding transfer to mercantile in this threads http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...eeds-26th.html

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk...ht-rescue.html

I have received the same letters re my C One claim.
have received no copy of the defence which everyone else appears to have its just gone straight from n1 /acknowledgement / then this !
Anyway have goen throught the template of the case management information sheet and at part 5 statements of case the template says

Yes. We believe CPR 18 may only become necessary if the Court directs other than to a small claim.
However, the Defendant has insisted the Claimant complies with the Defendants CPR part 18, the Claimant therefore seeks the Court to order full disclosure and breakdown of the administrative cost incurred in applying the said charges.

now as i havent received their defence or anything besides the acknowledgemnet slip should i say NO and leave it at that ?

[Calculator]

Donbracho,

Don't worry about not receiving the Defence at this stage. It is the fact that your case has been transferred to trhe Mercantile Court that has put things out of the normal sequence. Had the matter proceeeded down the County/Court/Small Claims route, then you are quite right that it would have been N1 claim form > Acknowledgement of Service > Defence > Request for Judgement > Alocation Questionnaire etc.etc.
The way the cases are being dealt with via the Mercantile Court cuts short that sequence and brings in the Directions Hearing requiring only the CMI sheet to be submitted.
I suggest you phone the Court to see if the Defendant has submitted a defence, and if so ask the Court if, now that the case has been transferred to the Mercantile, it is the Court's intention that you should still have a copy of the Defence at this stage.

With regard to the quote in your posting, your quote is an example answer sheet for the CMI originating from months ago on the forum. It has been used time and time again since then, but I stress it is only an example and the originator of it had obviously received the Defence and therefore referred to it at Answer 5 on the CMI sheet.
I tried to deal with the point that you have raised on the thread entiltled 'Mercantile Hearing 20th February' where jbarton gave the example answer sheet you have quoted and I wrote a subsequent post (post no. 14 on that thread on 10 Feb) to give the alternative wording if no defence had been received - see that thread. I hope this helps.

[donbracho]

thanks mate all this help is really appreciated as it happens i received a settlement letter from Capital One today !