Jump to content

Andy111

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

    233
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

2 Neutral

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks for the reply, I'm not actually trying to wriggle out of this as such, I was always accepting in paying what was set by the court for as long as it took to pay it. Though with the above in mind, that at the point they sent the letter regards to cancelling the payment plan\ agreement being nothing to do with what was a variation order endorsed by the court as said above. The intent and impression given by Intrum when they took it over and the letter all seems to give the impression that by using wording like "there is problem with the payment plan" " we have cancelled the agreement" they therefore cancelled exactly what was set by the court in what was a variation order. They also at the time suggested I therefore needed to negotiate a new payment plan than offered an alternative payment method for the variation order set\endorsed by the court. It was about that time payments into the payment account that was never previously an issue stopped getting accepted. If that was never their intent to give such a false impression then it begs the question to exactly what it was that they did mean and intend by that letter. Even then, that they closed the account used to make the payments at about the same time, they surely can't exactly claim I breached the CCJ and stopped payments myself as they stopped accepting the payments and never at any point offered an alternative payment method for the payments, simply the said letter. The payment options offered & or suggested by the court at the time was direct debit, standing order or payment via a card at a post office counter, the latter which was agreed by IND and they even sent the card out to facilitate this. As the bank account at the time I used never had my name on it my partner declined the other 2 options to give them access to the back details in any form as the matter was nothing to do with her.
  2. Thanks Andyorch for clarifying that. However, is there anything similar or specific that covers CCJ's?. As whilst they may or may not act to enforce the CCJ, it would interest me to read up on and research to self inform and arm myself in the event that they try to escalate matters further. Like it would be a complete lie if they went back to court to try and enforce the CCJ or take further action citing I breached the conditions by stopping payments when they are the ones who cancelled payments.
  3. I've been thinking about my case and past history with Intrum since they took over\bought the debt. And the 1 thing that's always hugged me to try & look into was that they, the claimant\Intrum cancelled the payments\agreement (or whatever you call what was set by the court judge as part of the CCJ). And I've always wandered if they can simply just cancel (I have it in writing they have cancelled it) the repayments that went before, was set by the court as part on the CCJ and agreed to by IND at the time. And if not can it be seen or considered as a breach by the claimant?. Now what I've found is not clear, Google comes back with zero info or cases on it a claimant themselves can actually breach a CCJ which I find rather odd. However what I have come by when trying to search the matter suggests there is a very strict process for either party with regards to such details. And that's called "PART 38 - DISCONTINUANCE" I'm not fully sure what exactly that "Part 38 Discontinuance" means or if it counts for anything or applies with regards to CCJ's. But if it does it might indicate they can't just discontinue or cancel any part of a claim or agreement without going back to court which they don't appear to have done. To do so can be a serious matter maybe and a breach of legal process. Not sure if anyone here understands this Part 38 thing or what it might mean if anything. But would be interested to hear it it could apply to show they legally acted wrong in simply cancelling the payments without first going back to court and then demanding I renegotiate an agreement with them directly?.
  4. Ah, so apart from these recent letters then it's unlikely anything much as changed. But it was more the letter mentioning the charging order option that rattled me somewhat. That & with this changing of solicitors letter had me thinking what they might be upto.
  5. Yes, I get what you are saying, not so much forgetting again, as I'm fully accepting no matter what the debt exists. But more their ability to take enforcement action, both before (as they claimed they would but failed to) and after the form to change solicitors went to the courts. As in if they can easily enforce it why have they failed to do so in the last 4-5 years?. I don't want to digress and go over old ground again, but they did cancel the payment agreement without reason that went before the court and was signed off by the judge as part of the CCJ judgement of whatever. I've hardly breached the CCJ myself since they stopped the payments and I still have the letter from IND stating they have cancelled it before payments ceased. Wondering can they therefore claim I've breached the CCJ conditions to enforce it?.
  6. So previously they were wasting their time with enforcement threat letters where legally they never could at that point if they were not the appointed solicitors over the matter?. So whilst this form in itself is therefore nothing to worry about, does it not mean that they would at least have the correct legal status for enforcement now?
  7. Ok, since the last letters received threatening enforcement action in not replied to within 14 days I've received 2 more letters, like the previous ones both received within a few days of the 14 days from which they were dated, seems to be a standard practice for them. The first letter from near 3 months ago again threatening enforcement action unless I reply with it the 3 days of the 14 remaining by the time it was received. Though with the added extra threat of information provided within that letter that makes things difficult to know if it could help identify me were Intrum to see these posts. The most recent received at the weekend yet again dated 12 days earlier was a N434 form with notice to change solicitors from IND to Intrum to act with regards to the claim and enforcement action and to contact them only from this point to arrange payment etc. Not sure if they are really getting ready for possible enforcement action with the N434 letter. But if they have an enforceable CCJ, then I just don't see why they have so far failed to enforce it?. Apparently they can even force me back to court by a previous letter posted here, yet so far no sign of that either. So any thoughts over this?
  8. As in just wait and see what their next move is ?. Likely my preferred option as they have had no response from me yet & they have not even enquired to try and verify the person they are looking for is the correct person and present at the address.
  9. Ah, didn't recall that, thought it was more purchasing of some of their debts. Can't deny the debt doesn't exist in 1 form of another regadless. Does ind even exist as a company then I wander?. makes unsure on how to proceed & respond now and how likely intrum are to really do much after this long if they really do have an enforceable ccj?.
  10. Thanks for the reply, converted from image to pdf, so I hope this works. 2022-04 IND serviced by Intrum - no payment agreement.pdf
  11. I now wonder if this now might be related to last year's connex letters I and several received?. As after hearing nothing from intrum for 2 1/2 years last month out of the blue I get 2 letters from them again over this threads issue. Since my last post in here and following previous advice, payments then stopped being accepted for some reason (barcode & account number not recognised I was told) and I was not negotiating anything with intrum and this no payments have been made is about 2 years. Moved house, contacted everyone re new address yet heard nothing from intrum despite also having been on the electoral roll constantly. 2 letters received, neither of which yet responded to or identity confirmed as the correct person, the first going over their very first letter from early 2019, saying the account is now being "serviced" by them and again inviting me to agree to a payment plan with them, didn't respond. Second letter received last week & unsure on how to respond. The letter is more ramping up with a threat to carry out a number of legal options. They say about IND may have taken legal action against me & saying how they are now serving the account on behalf on IND. They repeat about there being no payment plan in place and finished it with them or things will be subject to a review for further action. They also refer to if legal proceedings have been issued previously they might look at continuing with that and if IND have previously obtained judgement then they (intrum) by a number of mentioned methods look to enforce it by a number of methods including: Attachment of earnings Warrant of control Charging order Order for questioning Third party debt order. Not to sure on how seriously to take this. As if intrum have bought the debt then can they use the old ind judgement at all?
  12. Still don't know DX as nothing is detailed either "client" or date of alleged debt. Even the call to connex last week they wouldn't say anything on who the client is or the age of the alleged debt, nothing at all. So at this point nothing is proved, verified or confirmed over the alleged debt which is suspicions in itself for me. The address they did disclose I've had no connection to for over 20 years, surely they can't be that stupid or think I am to simply accept a debt that would have to be at least 13 years statute barred. Slight update: I even received an email from global debt recovery saying my email details had been passed on by connex as they had received a phone call from a\the alleged person the letter was sent to so they are breaching data protection and or personal & confidential information at the very least. The email contact being of a different person and name the per was sent to. They are pretty much demanding I identify myself by sending them a copy of my tenancy agreement, for which like hell am I sending them anything. The email was and will not be replied to, but just giving notice if you contact connex by email they will pass that info on as a point of contact and ask you for personal information for you to prove who you are. What a pile of jokers!.
  13. Still don't know DX as nothing is detailed either "client" or date of alleged debt. Even the call to connex last week they wouldn't say anything on who the client is or the age of the alleged debt, nothing at all. So at this point nothing is proved, verified or confirmed over the alleged debt which is suspicions in itself for me. The address they did disclose I've had no connection to for over 20 years, surely they can't be that stupid or think I am to simply accept a debt that would have to be at least 13 years statute barred.
  14. Letter received from global debt recovery despite connex accepting the claim the person they were looking for is not living at the address and saying they would then remove our address from their file and look elsewhere. This was an actual lie from connex (no surprise there) and despite connex then being unable to verify either the person or the address they have to be correct has then sent a letter out under the global debt recovery letter making a demand for monies and to call them to discuss the debt without detailing any details of the client or verifying both the person or the debt. These letters will now all be ignored as I'm not getting into any discussion with this pond life.
  15. Lol, rather than send to their office or p.o. box office address maybe people are better searching "Allen Process Solutions LTD" where the exact same and confirmed people look to have registered their company correspondence address to their personal home address, oh dear . Yeah, my mistake was to phone them before any info posted. Their mistake was to register a proven connection to their residential address. And where I to get ANY correspondence from either Connex or Global Debt Whatever over an assumed (by default due to lack of time) debt that's would if genuine be over 20 years old, well won't be me getting worried!!!
×
×
  • Create New...