Hello ,

I was hoping someone could give me some Advice?

-Partner Got in trouble in Jan 2011with police ,

which led to magistrates court and the crown .

He was granted legal aid.

Eventually sentenced and found Guilty in Dec 2012.

our relationship went down the pan years ago,

and he eventually got his own Flat in Aug 2011 after living with sister for about a month and a half .

Since 2008 I have been paying mortgage and all bills ( I can prove this and he does'nt deny this!)

Received a letter about 2 weeks ago dated 7/08/2012 From Rossendales , A Capital Contribution Order.

Dear Mr.....

Following your conviction in the crown court , you are required to pay a contribution to the cost of your defence representation

The amount you are required to pay £2,286.61

This amount must be paid within 28 days of this order-04/09/2012.

The legal services commision, who paid the cost of your defence, has the power to make this capital contribution order under the criminal defence

(contribution order)regulations 2009.

Rossendales ltd is contracted by the legal services commission to collect and if necessary enforce payment of this amount.

Errm...

* He got Legal aid?

* never Received any letters or anything saying he had to pay this before ,

( the court case finished beginning of Dec 20110)

8months ago! letter from rossendales - first notification.

Aparrently If you have savings or equity up to £30k.

Anything over the £30k threshold you may have to pay a certain amount, if found guilty at crown court- news to us

he has no savings and is on ESA.

the only equity is the Joint mortgage he has with me ,

and they're saying that after the mortgage thats outstanding and the value of the house this leaves £48k, worth of equity ,

then take the £30k away leaves £18 which they call disposable capital?.

My arguements as follows:

Ive have not got a perfect credit history

- and Know a little about CCJ ,Charging Orders.

Now I have a debt ( not mine , Long story, can see my other posts for that)

- got the interim charging order then the final .

Ended up with a notice of restriction against land.

this is against me and "is expressed to charge the share and property and interest of Me. not my Ex Joint mortgage holder."

my thought is sole named debts go on the persons share of the Mortgage?

county courts recognise a 50/50 share with joint Mortgages ?

When phoning Rossendales and informing them my Ex has not got £48k in equity ,

Because the house is mine as well, 48 divided by 2 = £24k in equity each. which then means Ex is under the £30k threshold ,

( you only start to pay something after the £30k threshold .)

at first the lady agreed

- but when she spoke to her manager the 50/50 share on a joint mortgage does not apply

and they have calculated the amount owing of any capital or equity in property and includes an allowance of £30k.

I hope im not rambling on , and hope you understand

Had no letter to say had not got legal aid or to say or there was a problem

first letter informing him that there was money to be paid sent by bailiff and only giving 28 days ,to pay and 8 months after the case finished

If he doesnt pay this it will lead to a charging order or our property

- now if thats the case that a county court judgement,

Charging order.

A debt in a sole name, would be against thats person share in a property .

Then how could the original calculation of the debt not take in to account that this house is half mine,and my Ex does'nt have all the equity or capital they say...

oh someone please tell me where i stand with this , solicitor said this is the first they've heard of this , and cant really tell me anything more.

I Know rossendales they will be here on the dot on the 4/09 and im scared stiff for me and my son..

Sorry about spelling, Grammar ,I'm a little worked up at the Minute.

I guess what I'm asking is;

That if a debt in a sole name is dealt with by a county court and it's also recognised that there is a joint mortgage ( someone else has a share if you like ) and that any judgement made would be against the Debtors share. Why does'nt that apply when the courts and legal services dept are calculating equity or capital someone has ( that some one else has a share in that property) and that they have equity and capital in that property also ?

First off let me say I know nothing about these matters at all.

However I do believe that Rossendales are acting under their Rossendales Collect banner

- that is they are purely debt collectors.

I don't doubt their letter heading may be that which alludes to Bailiffs and/or High Court Enforcement Officers.

It may be that if you tell them to get lost they could start enforcement proceedings which may include applying for a CCJ for which they will add those costs to whatever debt they are chasing.

I may be barking up the wrong tree but thought it worthwhile commenting on their different parts.

my thoughts too

can you scan up the letter please.

Just a couple of thoughts, enquire with Legal Services Commission exactly what criteria are used regarding joint equity, as normally yes surely partners equity only if non resident and split up should be taken into account, as is below threshold no order. Once you have this in writing and if it backs you tell rossers to do one spelling out from information what the rules are, and where they have bent them.

Bear in mind that whatever banner rossers operate under they will not play fair, and will make it up as they go along, interpreting everything in their favour whatever law or regulation they purport to be abiding by or applying. If you work from that standpoint and research and rebut their demands you won't go far wrong. you can be sure Caggers will look up and research this alongside you to help you sort it out.

Leaflets in pdf about charging and legal aid are here

http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/public/help/information_leaflets.asp

http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/LSC_StepByStep_leaflet_2010.pdf

http://www.legalservices.gov.uk/docs/cls_main/LSC_PayingForLegalAid_leaflet_2010.pdf

Hi and thanks ,

I hope you can see these

- In fact I dont think you can,

just waiting for my friend to come home

And ill use her scanner to scan them .

Has it Worked?

002.jpg.pdf

001.jpg.pdf

003.jpg.pdf

yes worked ......well certaintly not the bailiffs arm the DCA bit.

dx

Does anyone know who is behind another website as they are coming up with various statements in dealing with bailiffs that I have not seen before.

In regard to Rossendales,

it is interesting to note that that site states that although the demand for payment usually comes on bailiff headed notepaper, there is no

facility for bailiff enforcement which is misleading.

You have 28 days to dispute the Order-the one from the legal Services Commission, not Rossendales, and one of the ways [apart from not having the required amount] is to query the letter sent to you as it fails to comply with the Regulations

for example.

Does your letter from the Commission cover the 5 points below.

Contents of capital contribution order and payment22.—(1) A capital contribution order must state—

(a)the amount payable under the order;

(b)that the amount must be paid within 28 days of the order or within such other period as may be agreed by the Commission and the individual;

©the remedies available to the Commission as a creditor if payment is not made by the due date;

(d)that if a payment is not made by the due date compound interest at the rate of 6% a year with half-yearly rests may be added to that payment from that date;

(e)the individual’s right under regulation 29.

(2) Payments under a capital contribution order must be made to the Commission.

On top of that, Regulation 29 below gives you further reasons to dispute the demand-

29.—(1) An individual in respect of whom the assessing authority has made a contribution order may apply to the Commission for a review of the order, on the grounds that—

(a)there has been—

(i)a miscalculation of the individual’s income or capital or the cost determined under regulation 11, or

(ii)an administrative error; or

(b)the individual is suffering or would suffer financial hardship as a result of making the payments required under the contribution order.

(2) An application under paragraph (1)(a) must be made within 28 days of the making of the order.

(3) The Commission may determine a review without a hearing.

(4) On a review the Commission may confirm, revoke or vary the contribution order.

(5) Where the Commission—

(a)revokes a contribution order, and the individual has already made a payment under the order, or

(b)varies a contribution order so as to require a lower payment, and the individual has already made a payment above the amount as varied,

the Commission must repay to the individual the amount of such payment together with compound interest thereon, from the date of the payment, at the rate of 2% a year with yearly rests.

Previous: ProvisionNext: ProvisionBack to top© Crown copyright

As usual, Rossendales have got it wrong again.

When assessing how much capital the potential debtor has in a property the Regulations state-

Assessment of capital16. The value of any interest in real property shall be taken to be the amount for which that interest could be sold less the amount of any debt

secured by a mortgage or charge on the property.

So the interest in the property is 50% less the mortgage cost-just as you said to Rossendales.

Hi - Just an update to let you know where I'm at with rossendales/Lsc,

Well I wrote a letter to the LSC , one to my local office and sent a copy to head office and also emailed a copy,

(see below)

Legal Services Commission

5th Floor, Boulton House

17-21 Chorlton Street

Manchester

M1 3HY

DX14343 Manchester.

28/08/2012

CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION ORDER.

CASE REF

CLIENT /MAAT

Formal Complaint / Dispute:

I would like to dispute the amount owing for legal aid, (£2286.81) that you have sent via Rossendale’s. I would also like to add that this is the first notification I have had of this money owing, dated 7/08/2012 since my conviction in Dec 2011.

I believe there has been a miscalculation concerning my Income and Capital, and would like this to be Reviewed, As, At the time the case was going on, my ESA benefit had been suspended, I appealed this Decision and took the matter to a Tribunal which I won and my benefits where backdated to when they were suspended - 13th April 2011.

As from the 12th July 2012 my ESA has been suspended again Due to a Medical, and again I am appealing the decision and awaiting the Response.

So at the moment I have Nil Income and in Regards to the Capital of( Address), Although I am a Joint Name on the mortgage I no longer live at this address My ex-partner Pays the Mortgage , as she has since 2008, She lives at that address with my son .

I ask For the Capital Contribution Order to be looks at again and the following points to be taken into consideration:

The assessment to My Current & previous means and circumstances is wrong and is based on incorrect information. I am an exempt person for the purposes of a Capital Contribution Order because I am in receipt of a benefit ESA.

My income is less than the prescribed minimum.

My combined assets and property is less than £30,000

I received the Order more than 21 days after the end of the proceedings (Dec 2011) in the convicting court which denies my statutory right of appeal.

The bailiff’s letter is not a qualified notice under Regulation 8(11) because the company is not “the Assessing Authority”

I am already Suffering Severe Hardship, and can In No-way pay any amount to this Bill.

I look forward to hearing from you.

( Name)

Received reply

Saying they had looked into my complaint and can confirm that Rossendales letter was right,

however the data from which they have drawn their info was flawed

"our means assessment administration tool( MAAT system) send automatic data feed to Rossendale's system each night and Rossendale's act on the info received.

Our MAAT system had incorrectly included your partners share of the property and calculated equity for 100% of the property rather than your 5o% share only.

your partner should not have been taken into consideration in this assess:ment as there was a conflict of interest in the case."

50% share of equity = £24k, which makes total equity and capital apportioned to you is lower than the £30k capital allowance therefore your capital contribution should be Nil.

I would just like to Say a massive Thank you to all your comments and Advice , I could not of done it with out your help.

THANKS AGAIN!

Well done on getting it all sorted and thank you for posting back,your methods for tackling this and the result will help many others.

Good result and very pleased for you....well done you and well done caggers who contributed to this post.

WD

My spirits feel slightly lifted after reading your thread, I am having a similar battle with rossendales/LSC ! I will start my own thread on it in a moment.