Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
  • 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
      • 160 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

MCA chasing YB CCJ 10yrs old now threatening Charging Order


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2634 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

Hi

I've received a letter threatening me with a charging order if satisfactory payment proposal is not made within 7 days.

 

This relates to a ccj that was made against me over 10 years ago

I was ordered to pay £1 per month but when I changed banks I forgot to reset a direct debit.

 

I have rang them requesting more info about this

they said I've missed the last 6 payments and said the debt is for 3k and will post the details to me holding my account for 2 weeks.

 

It is quite threatening saying if not paid or an acceptable and sustainable offer not made a charging order will be made

it also offers the client may accept a reduced offer.

 

I do not have the means to pay in full,

or what would be a reduced offer

what would that be I could pay more monthly but not much,

the debt is from 1997 the court order made in 2003

Link to post
Share on other sites

why are you ringing a no powers DCA?

they are NOT BAILIFFS!!

 

tell us the full story please

 

and read the letter PROPERLY

it doesn't say WILL anywhere

its a threat-o-gram..

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it's the threat of court action and a charge putting on house.with not much equity could they force to sell it,

 

i paid the ccj for over 10 years but just forgot when I changed banks

 

do I send off the income and expenditure form off when it comes

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heck no, you only do that for a court.

 

So, couple of questions

 

Is the ccj in your name?

Is the house in your name or joint names?

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so the letters don't say WILL anywhere then?

 

who got the CCJ

and who is sending these silly threats?

 

name names please

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This relates to a ccj that was made against me over 10 years ago To Who??

I was ordered to pay £1 per month but when I changed banks I forgot to reset a direct debit.

 

It is quite threatening saying if not paid or an acceptable and sustainable offer not made a charging order will be made

it also offers the client may accept a reduced offer.

You cannot make a reduced payment on a CCJ, the judge will have told you what must be paid, these clowns are chancing their arm!

 

the court order made in 2003

 

So it's only being chased up now??

When did you start paying and when did you last pay this CCJ?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so, even if the letters did say will...

they could only get a restriction which is nothing to worry about.

 

you could sell the house and if your sols was cute, forget about informing them...

 

anyhow..

 

as I said earlier

I bet these letters don't actually say WILL anything

you're just not reading them carefully.

sorry but it sounds like you are/have been cash cowed from day one.

 

I bet if you look even more carefully

the name of the fleecers chasing you now

is NOT the name of the claimant of the CCJ..........

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

When was the ccj. When did they actually start chasing it? It's important as if there's a gap of 6 years where they have entered done anything then it will be extremely difficult for them to enforce it at all

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

A County Court Judge would look at any application to enforce the CCJ with a very jaundiced eye, as in tell them to go away, they left it far too long,

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 OTHERS

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

When was the ccj. When did they actually start chasing it? It's important as if there's a gap of 6 years where they have entered done anything then it will be extremely difficult for them to enforce it at all

 

I changed banks 6 month ago and forgot to reset direct debit.

I had made monthly £1 payments since Feb 2003

 

so, even if the letters did say will...

they could only get a restriction which is nothing to worry about.

 

you could sell the house and if your sols was cute, forget about informing them...

 

anyhow..

 

as I said earlier

I bet these letters don't actually say WILL anything

you're just not reading them carefully.

sorry but it sounds like you are/have been cash cowed from day one.

 

I bet if you look even more carefully

the name of the fleecers chasing you now

is NOT the name of the claimant of the CCJ..........

 

Hi dx100uk thanks for the reply

 

I've found original ccj

the name for payment is different I don't remember changing this

 

 

.it was Feb 2003

I have made all payments up until late March this year when I changed banks and forgot to reset direct debit.

 

It does say "if an acceptable payment offer is not made, an application for a charging order WILL be made in order to secure the above judgement debt against your property and if awarded, may affect your ability to remortgage or sell your property.

Mortimer clarke solicitors are the firm sending this.

I have asked them to send more details of this

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any charging order would be a form K restriction which in real money means very little other than they have to be informed if you sell, not that you have to pay it from the proceeds via a solicitor disbursement.

Nowt to worry about at all in reality

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok thank you

who got the CCJ against you do you know?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you own your own property then?

 

Who is the name on the original CCJ?

 

You should ONLY pay the person/company named on the CCJ, if they have varied the judgement and not gone through the correct procedure, ie court, then they are in contempt.

 

Definitely needs more digging.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you own your own property then?

 

Who is the name on the original CCJ?

 

You should ONLY pay the person/company named on the CCJ, if they have varied the judgement and not gone through the correct procedure, ie court, then they are in contempt.

 

Definitely needs more digging.

 

Not quite BB :-)

 

Thread moved to Financial Legal Issues and title amended

 

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

Not quite BB :-)

 

Thread moved to Financial Legal Issues

 

Andy

 

In the words of James May ''Oh manhood!''

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and who were the solicitors too!

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

hugo

have a read of the charge orders threads/sticky.

recent legislation says that if an inst order is in place and up to date at the time of a CO , then there can be no sale order.

then there is the type of CO, as marty boy :) mentioned.

if the ccj etc is legit, then cld make up the missed inst order payments, and then continue with the instalments. (if they want to vary the amount of the inst order then they wld have to make an application re)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you have a jointly owned home and the debt is in your sole name, the most they can hope for is to be notified as and when you and yours decide to sell, if you ever do.

Other than that theres nowt they do to force you to sell.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Click Here To Make A Donation

I am not legally trained or qualified, any advice i offer is gleaned from experience and general knowledge, if you are still unsure after receiving advice please seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK YB & JS tally for A CCJ from that era

 

Who are Mortimer's stating are their client please? I suspect it's Cabot?

 

The account has obviously been sold on?

Did you ever get a notice of assignment in recent times?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again just an update on this thread

 

 

Just recieved letter from mortimers

it just has a imcome and expenditure form

 

 

I requested they send more detailed information about this debt and ccj but they have not

 

 

dx100uk i will check when im home who their client is and

 

 

i dont recall having any assignment letter but i must have had to set up the direct debit i think

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...