G24 PCN *EDIT* Now with DCB Legal - Here we go!

Gr1pr

So SE signed it, but might not have the authority to do so, as mentioned in another thread here recently 

Do your AOS online on MCOL next week,  Tuesday or later in the week 

Your deadline date for the defence submission will be 4pm on Monday 27th October 

The alleged breach is pleaded,  overstay 

The post by Johnersh was a reply post,  not his thread,  but someone else's with the same concerns as you,  he replied 

PCN_Junkie0101

Gr1pr said:

So SE signed it, but might not have the authority to do so, as mentioned in another thread here recently 

I saw something on the DCB discontinuation thread about this for the N279 signatures. In regards to this claim, is there anything I should raise/note in regards to SE's authority to sign?

I'll get on it and have defence ready to submit. Will post it here beforehand for advice.

Thanks!

Coupon-mad

You can add the extra paragraphs discussed here but may have to cut out some fluff from other paras and make your para 3 very concise, to make the template defence fit (with this ending as a replacement) for DCB Legal cases:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81663319#Comment_81663319

Johnersh

Courts are, in my view, unlikely to order unreasonable costs where claim forms have been issued in accordance with guidance from cilex and the sra that supervision was adequate.

However, the law is the law and signing a claim form is regulated conduct of litigation, which it is clear cannot be done. Ironically Ms Ensall's position (a head of litigation) at DCB Legal appears similar to that of the debt recovery firm employed by CRS in Mazar. The existence of the precedent (i.e. the disaster for CRS) should, from a defendant perspective, mean DJs are less inclined to simply make good the defect in these cases.