Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • An update to this case as I’ve not been on in a while.    I am still awaiting a charging decision in the case. The two police officers involved have said their personal belief is a section 47 ABH charge is the most likely outcome but this isn’t a sure thing of course.    The EA certificate from the issuing court has now lapsed. The court have refused to recertify him until they’ve had a hearing in to the case, and the district judge has issued orders to surrender all evidence, footage, photos etc.    I have done so promptly.    the EA, not so much . Equita have claimed they cannot provide his bodycam footage as the camera he was wearing is the EA personal one not one of theirs.   the EA has claimed he has asked Equita and the police for the footage as he claims he doesn’t have it.    the police have confirmed they didn’t seize his camera and they don’t have it.    so they are basically pointing the finger at each other all the while failing to comply with the district judges order to provide all evidence they intend to rely on at the rescheduled hearing.    The district judge has stated the hearing for his certification will NOT be the hearing for my complaint as there is no charge as of yet, and just as to whether he should be recertified or not.    I’m not 100% on why that can’t be done at the time, but I’m not about to question a judge…..      
    • Thanks FTMDave, I like the cut of your jib - I'll go with that and obtain proof of postage. Encouraging that NPE have never followed through and seem to blowing hot air, let's see where they go after this   Regards
    • Please see my comments in orange within your post.
    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.   House or Flat? Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Again, points as above. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) Why serve a delapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease. I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to buy the freehold of the property. It's normal, whether it is a "normal" leaseholder or a repossession with a leasehold house, to claim this right of enfranchisement and sell the property with said rights attached and the purchase price of the freehold included in the final completion price. That's likely what the mortgage provider wished to do. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at? Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. So this is dealt with then. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.  You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension. You'd need a Deed of Variation for that. This may be done at the same time but the lease has already been extended once and that's all they have a right to. The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved. The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there. Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Can a county court summons be issued on an overseas address?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5357 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I have received a letter from a solicitor acting for a credit card company I am in dispute with. I sent a CCA request back in March but despite writing to the credit card company saying the account is in dispute I have heard nothing.

 

Now these solicitors say they will be issuing a county court claim. Can they do that when I am not resident in the UK and am permanently resident overseas (not in EU.) Is it lawful for them to issue on my last known UK address, (een though they know I do not live there) in which case they will probably get judgement by default without me knowing about it.

 

Any info much appreciated. Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

General Information

Normally court papers must be served on the proper address of the defendant (which

must be within England and Wales), and if they are not, the defendant is generally

entitled to get any order made set aside, if they can show that there is an arguable

defence. However in some circumstances you can apply for an order that the papers

be served somewhere else. This is called an order for substituted service. If the

application is granted it means that papers served at the substituted address will be

treated as if they were served on the defendant at his own address address.

 

However before the court will make this order, it needs to be sure that the papers will

eventually reach the defendant. You therefore need to make it clear in the application

that the person at the substituted service addressawill, or is likely to, pass the papers

on to the defendant.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well thats key, will they issue a summons most of the time its just hot air into frightening you into contacting them.I assume they have your non UK address and have contacted you at your current address.have you sold your uk property? or still own it?

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I gave them my non UK address. I wrote to them to say I have not had the CCA from the credit card company nor has anyone told me that it the debt has been passed to them to deal with. The UK address they have is not a property I own or have ever owned.

 

I was aware of the substituted service issue but I did not think that also applied to an overseas address as I thought they had to serve within the jurisdiction of the court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jurisdiction under the Conventions

 

 

 

 

The English courts will take jurisdiction if you can serve one Defendant here, and show that everyone else is “a necessary and proper party” who ought to be brought before the court for the purpose of determining the dispute.

Edited by Andyorch

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

If a summons is issued (which i doubt they would) you can defend it MCOL.If its issued without your knowledge you can set it a side for all the above reasons.No they cant enforce it you are not here and have no property here.The best they would achive is for it sit on your Credit file for 6 years (if successful) so little achived.I would advocate waiting to see what there next move is if any.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

But we are talking about the county court here not the High court. I am not domiciled in the UK or any EU country. What is the likelihood of them going ahead do you think? After they have obtained their CCJ by default, they cannot enforce it surely?

 

It seems very unlikely that they could ever enforce, there is another post on here recently somewhere from a guy living in NZ, the discussion is mainly about can overseas CRA's be affected by defaults from the uk, the general answer would seem to be 'no'.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a similar problem to deal with for a friend who no longer lives here. Is it possible to prevent judgment being entered by responding to the claimants before it reaches court or during the summons process by informing all the parties that the person is no longer here and therefore it would not be fair to enter judgment when they cannot defend themselves? This would save the cost implication of applying for the judgment to be set aside and prevent ruining someone's credit file! I have been informed that if the other party are aware that the person is out of the country and has not received the paperwork, and judgment is entered, then they themselves should apply for the judgment to be set aside under Civil Rules (13.5 I think) and request directions of the court. Not that the Judge listened when I quoted this recently in Court for my friend, she charged my friend the costs in her absence for me trying to have it set aside on her behalf. Both the Court and the claimant had been notified of her absence. In fact the claimant knew in advance of filing the Court papers and probably did it on purpose knowing they would secure the judgment!

 

I believe prevention better than cure?

 

Am I in the minority?

 

JQ

Link to post
Share on other sites

But we are talking about the county court here not the High court. I am not domiciled in the UK or any EU country. What is the likelihood of them going ahead do you think? After they have obtained their CCJ by default, they cannot enforce it surely?

 

Well are they going to throw good money after bad to chase you across the world for something you may not have? DCA's and creditors like the easy life and unless you own property and the debt is considerable it's just not worth enforcing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a similar problem to deal with for a friend who no longer lives here. Is it possible to prevent judgment being entered by responding to the claimants before it reaches court or during the summons process by informing all the parties that the person is no longer here and therefore it would not be fair to enter judgment when they cannot defend themselves? This would save the cost implication of applying for the judgment to be set aside and prevent ruining someone's credit file! I have been informed that if the other party are aware that the person is out of the country and has not received the paperwork, and judgment is entered, then they themselves should apply for the judgment to be set aside under Civil Rules (13.5 I think) and request directions of the court. Not that the Judge listened when I quoted this recently in Court for my friend, she charged my friend the costs in her absence for me trying to have it set aside on her behalf. Both the Court and the claimant had been notified of her absence. In fact the claimant knew in advance of filing the Court papers and probably did it on purpose knowing they would secure the judgment!

 

I believe prevention better than cure?

 

Am I in the minority?

 

JQ

 

I have responded to them saying that if they issue on the previous UK address, they do so in the knowledge that it is not my current address and that anything served there will not reach me. They may go ahead and do it anyway, but they can't plead ignorance. My CCA request is over 6 months old and has been ignored and I know from looking at copies of others of around that date that it should not be enforceable anyway, so perhaps they are all mouth and trousers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well are they going to throw good money after bad to chase you across the world for something you may not have? DCA's and creditors like the easy life and unless you own property and the debt is considerable it's just not worth enforcing.

 

It is around GBP3000 but I do not think they have an enforceable agreement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the court should strike out anything that is knowingly issued in someone's absence!

 

However, although it was twenty years ago, I was pursued to Spain, where I lived and worked, by Barclays for an overdraft of approx £300! They employed Dun & Bradstreet I think, and they obtained info from my work permit etc and came looking for me! For £300!! I can't remember what the outcome was but I bet the charges amounted to a whole lot more!

 

I hope for your sake they do not do the same!

 

Good luck.

 

JQ

Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that the court should strike out anything that is knowingly issued in someone's absence!

 

However, although it was twenty years ago, I was pursued to Spain, where I lived and worked, by Barclays for an overdraft of approx £300! They employed Dun & Bradstreet I think, and they obtained info from my work permit etc and came looking for me! For £300!! I can't remember what the outcome was but I bet the charges amounted to a whole lot more!

 

I hope for your sake they do not do the same!

 

Good luck.

 

JQ

They don't have to try and trace me, I have told them where I am but I am not in the EU or a country with a reciprocal agreement, so I can't see what jurisidiction they will have to enforce the debt even if they are successful in obtaining a UK CCJ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that is a complete waste of time and money if they cant enforce it!!? Let's hope they weigh it up and take the sensible route.

I wish you well.

JQ

 

Thank you! I will let you know what happens. I am not trying to avoid this debt, but let's face it if there was a clause in there, that said if I didn't pay they would take my grandmother, they would do it, so it seems only fair that the contract terms (or lack of them) work for both parties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...