Template On 6.4 And 6.5 Statutory Demands/ People Still Getting It Wrong

[postggj]

ill Photobucket The Forms Later Tonight

[robcag]

ill Photobucket The Forms Later Tonight

 

Hi postggj

 

I've decided to go ahead with my own SD setaside following your persuasive advice on another thread , despite Cr@pQuest saying there is no need .

 

I'll checkout the other threads where you have advised people recently to guide me in filling in the forms which I will have to take to the court tomorrow morning (last day of my 18 days).

 

However, as your thread title seems to suggest people may be getting things wrong with their forms, can you please give me some pointers as to what you are referring as I now need to be getting on with this.

 

TIA

 

Cheers

Rob

[postggj]

OK PEOPLE

 

THIS IS HOW A STATUTORY DEMAND IS FILLED IN TO SET IT ASIDE

 

IVE USED GODEBT AS AN EXAMPLE

 

ANY QUESTIONS JUST FIRE AWAY

 

 

 

Edited July 5, 2010 by postggj

[postggj]

You Take The 6.4 And 6.5 Along With The Statutory Demand To The Court Listed On The Demand

 

Check Before Hand The Court Does Bankrupcy Petitions

 

Make A Copy

 

You Keep One And The Court Takes Ones After You Have Sworn An Oath With The Court Clerk

 

Then You Just Wait For A Court Date

[miss muppet]

Thanks for this Postggj, very helpful, should really be in the Debt Collectors Library.

[robcag]

Regarding the costs issue, it might be worth bearing in mind this post by JonCris, as not only should you be going for costs, but costs on an idemnity basis (which AIUI is extra costs as compensation to you, or as a penalty to the offending petitioner);

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/149346-statutory-demand-set-aside.html#post1580111

 

Also

 

Remember to add an application for costs when applying to set aside a SD (Statutory Demand) Remember to have your bill of costs at the ready

 

Hammonds (A Firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd (2007) EWHC 1998 (ch)

 

In this case, Mr Justice Warren confirmed that it was usual for an indemnity award to be made-

 

27 So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such debt (Usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).

 

Also IMHO more such applications by consumers should, if successful, eventually stop DCA’s using the sledge hammer of threatened bankruptcy as a tool in the collection of consumer debt. A method of collecting ordinary consumer debt which even the courts dislike

 

Not wishing to interfere, but just thinking it might be worth making that point clear to the Judge (as we all know that some of them aren't aware of a lot of things ).

 

Cheers

Rob