Abbey National / DLA : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread

Just received today from DLA after asking continually for documents to substantiate their claim received a letter with a lot of illegible copied documents. DLA letter states "We are disappointed to note you have failed to enter into the spirit of cival justice reforms in co-operation to resolve this matter amicably. You have continually used procedural taticts (persistent questioning which is not proportionate or expedient in resolving the claim) to frustrate our client's attempt to resolve this matter in a reasonable manner, despite our co-operation" !!!!!! lol States at the bottom of the letter going to start High Court Proceedings. Sound advice would be really helpful at this time.

-- Alex Carlisle (, September 28, 2001


Oho! Please scan and email me copies of the letters if possible. I know people who are hungry to see this kind of thing.


-- Lee (, September 28, 2001.

Well I hope this is sound advice.

1) The treat of court action is just that. I am sure the High Court would not take on such a case. This sort of thing is a matter for a county court.

2) The wording they are using is simply trying to show you as the uncooperative one. What I would write and say is something like:

Many thanks for the copy documents that you hae finally sent after repeated requests. Unforunately, due to the poor quality copying many are not legible and I therefor erequest that clear readable copies are forwarded by return.

I am at a loss to understand whay you feel I am not 'entering into the spirit of civil justice reforms'. I am simply requesting that you provide me with documentary evidence that the debt is just and that I am indeed liable. At no time have I ever tried to delay matters and will remain more tha happy to progress your claim with the utmost speed once I am in possession of the required documentation."

Or something like that!!!!!

-- Matt (, September 28, 2001.


Is their letter entitled: "Important : Notice of High Court Proceedings". Also, is there a sentence in there somewhere which asks you if you would like their Writ served upon you personally, or whether you will instruct a solicitor to accept service of proceedings.

I have a hunch we have been sent basically the same letter.


-- (, September 28, 2001.

There was an article about the Office of Fair Trading being interested in legal letters with statements like, Warning of Court Proceedings. These are not allowed and the Office of Fair Trading warned that they will take action against firms who continue to issue such letters. I'd send them a copy and ask if this is allowed?

Also send a copy to the Office for the supervison of solicitors as well.

-- anon (, September 28, 2001.

I have seen a copy of one of these letters. I wonder what a decent Human Rights lawyer would make of them.

You could try Ahmad Butt of the Mary Ward Legal Centre in London for an opinion (in my opinion!).

-- E Scott (, September 29, 2001.

A few further thoughts on the lead post here.

What DLA are trying to do (it seems to me) is turn our knowledge of CPR against us. The Civil Procedure Rules certainly demand a 'cards on the table' approach from both parties, but that's in the sense that Lord Justice Woolf doesn't want one party springing surprises on the other (and the judge) in any subsequent court hearing. What surprises are you keeping back? None. What information are you holding back? None. What you are keeping back is the contents of your wallet, which you are entitled to do until the lender has responded to your request for proof (strict proof). Holding back money is not the same as holding back information about your case. (You are, however,IMHO, entitled hold back information about your financial status, as that has no bearing until Abbey/DLA have proved the case properly.)

Does this make any sense?

-- E Scott (, September 30, 2001.

The Civil Procedure Rules (the 'civil justice reforms' alluded to by DLA) are on the internet, on the Lord Chancellor's Department's web site. The Home Page is and there is a useful legal terms glossary at .htm

If a lender's solicitor's throw CPR 31.6 at you, look at

Hope this is of interest.

-- E Scott (, October 03, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ