Nope. I've seen many stays be lifted without notice in advance.

Oh, are you the creditor in this case? A third party debt order can only be used in relation to the debtor's assets. You cannot take money from an innocent third party who happens to be married to the debtor.

A stay puts the claim on hold and no further action can be taken without the stay being lifted. It is however not unusual for stays to be lifted years after they were first imposed and without notice being given to the debtor prior to the event. If the claim is struck out it is brought to an end but the creditor can apply for relief from sanctions pursuant to CPR r. 3.9. If you have a look at Part 3 of the CPR you will find the court's powers to strike out a claim and the bases upon which it may do so. If a fresh claim was issued after the original was struck out this would run the risk of also being struck out as an abuse of process.

Would you be prepared to bet all of your assets that this is just an empty threat? That is what you are asking the OP to do.

The AQ is designed to help the judge decide what track to allocate the claim to (small claims, fast or multi) and to allow the judge to give appropriate directions to enable the case to progress smoothly to trial. The intention is that the court can deal with this procedural matter without then needing to convene a hearing so it is less costly and more convenient for all.

1) I suspect that you would not be entitled to a rebate if they had to terminate the agreement due to your default and therefore it has been removed. I can however only repeat my earlier suggestion that you ask for a statement of account as without that it is just guesswork. 2) Was the agreement secured on the car at all? Is there anything in the terms and conditions which all them to fix a charge in the event of your default? 3) You *should* attend court but you are not really obliged to. If you don't then you miss the chance to go before the judge and put your case; it is always better to attend because even if you complete the forms there is no guarantee that they will be on the file for the hearing and in any event the judge is likely to be much more sympathetic if you attend. The hearing is not like on TV; there will be no wigs and gowns. You will go to the judge's chambers which is basically his office and will be allowed to speak in plain English in a relatively informal environment.

Sorry you've not had any replies yet. 1) You will have to ask the creditor for a statement of account to see why the balance has increased and whether any additions are legitimate. I suspect they have charges interest and fees due to your default. 2) I don't understand what you mean when you say 'a interest'? 3) I don't see why not provided that they have not terminated the agreement on the basis of the first default notice if that notice was in some way defective. 4) The court can, and frequently does, make a suspended return of goods order on the basis that monthly payments are maintained. The court can make any order it considers just and therefore can extend the term of the agreement by ordering you to pay less than the contractual instalments. The court can however order that you return the goods immediately so it is important that you engage with any court claim, file a defence and attend the hearing.

On what basis did you dispute it?

Pardon me?

Just to clarify a few inaccuracies there: 1) An order for payment forthwith, as the name suggests, obliges payment immediately rather than in 21 days. 2) There are more than 3 ways to enforce a CCJ. A third party debt order or bankruptcy can also be used (I can't remember if even that is now an exhaustive list but I can't recall any other methods).

It certainly wouldn't hurt to scan/type up the details of the SD and covering letter. Is this a debt you are already familiar with? Is it a debt you dispute?

Are you referring to my advice? If so, what on Earth are you talking about?! I'm sorry you feel a personal animosity towards creditors which is preventing you from being objective or polite and I'm sure you're not alone but let's not play with other people's lives here.

Perhaps we should just copy and past the above few posts into every thread as, sooner or later, these exact same points crop up

You can't go into a mediation demanding that the claim be thrown out, the mediator has no power to compel anyone to do anything and cannot make any orders. The point of mediation is to try to reach a negotiated settlement as an alternative to court. I would suggest you do a bit of reading up on mediation as a concept so that you know what to do when you get there, otherwise it will be a waste of time.

Yes, that would probably be sufficient if no response is then received. There's no need to send a formal 'Notice of Intended Litigation' but a letter before action is expected. However, this is only a requirement of the pre-action protocol which does not alter the legal position between the parties or prevent a claim being issued if it is not followed, it is only relevant to costs where it is relevant at all.