Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • S13 (2)The creditor may not exercise the right under paragraph 4 to recover from the keeper any unpaid parking charges specified in the notice to keeper if, within the period of 28 days beginning with the day after that on which that notice was given, the creditor is given— (a)a statement signed by or on behalf of the vehicle-hire firm to the effect that at the material time the vehicle was hired to a named person under a hire agreement; (b)a copy of the hire agreement; and (c)a copy of a statement of liability signed by the hirer under that hire agreement. As  Arval has complied with the above they cannot be pursued by EC----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S14 [1]   the creditor may recover those charges (so far as they remain unpaid) from the hirer. (2)The conditions are that— (a)the creditor has within the relevant period given the hirer a notice in accordance with sub-paragraph (5) (a “notice to hirer”), together with a copy of the documents mentioned in paragraph 13(2) and the notice to keeper; (b)a period of 21 days beginning with the day on which the notice to hirer was given has elapsed;  As ECP did not send copies of the documents to your company and they have given 28 days instead of 21 days they have failed to comply with  the Act so you and your Company are absolved from paying. That is not to say that they won't continue asking to be paid as they do not have the faintest idea how PoFA works. 
    • Euro have got a lot wrong and have failed to comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4.  According to Section 13 after ECP have written to Arval they should then send a NTH to the Hirer  which they have done.This eliminates Arval from any further pursuit by ECP. When they wrote to your company they should have sent copies of everything that they asked Arval for. This is to prove that your company agree what happened on the day of the breach. If ECP then comply with the Act they are allowed to pursue the hirer. If they fail, to comply they cannot make the hirer pay. They can pursue until they are blue in the face but the Hirer is not lawfully required to pay them and if it went to Court ECP would lose. Your company could say who was driving but the only person that can be pursued is the Hirer, there does not appear to be an extension for a driver to be pursued. Even if there was, because ECP have failed miserably to comply with the Act  they still have no chance of winning in Court. Here are the relevant Hire sections from the Act below.
    • Thank-you FTMDave for your feedback. May I take this opportunity to say that after reading numerous threads to which you are a contributor, I have great admiration for you. You really do go above and beyond in your efforts to help other people. The time you put in to help, in particular with witness statements is incredible. I am also impressed by the way in which you will defer to others with more experience should there be a particular point that you are not 100% clear on and return with answers or advice that you have sought. I wish I had the ability to help others as you do. There is another forum expert that I must also thank for his time and patience answering my questions and allowing me to come to a “penny drops” moment on one particular issue. I believe he has helped me immensely to understand and to strengthen my own case. I shall not mention who it is here at the moment just in case he would rather I didn't but I greatly appreciate the time he took working through that issue with me. I spent 20+ years of working in an industry that rules and regulations had to be strictly adhered to, indeed, exams had to be taken in order that one had to become qualified in those rules and regulations in order to carry out the duties of the post. In a way, such things as PoFA 2012 are rules and regulations that are not completely alien to me. It has been very enjoyable for me to learn these regulations and the law surrounding them. I wish I had found this forum years ago. I admit that perhaps I had been too keen to express my opinions given that I am still in the learning process. After a suitable period in this industry I became Qualified to teach the rules and regulations and I always said to those I taught that there is no such thing as a stupid question. If opinions, theories and observations are put forward, discussion can take place and as long as the result is that the student is able to clearly see where they went wrong and got to that moment where the penny drops then that is a valuable learning experience. No matter how experienced one is, there is always something to learn and if I did not know the answer to a question, I would say, I don't know the answer to that question but I will go and find out what the answer is. In any posts I have made, I have stated, “unless I am wrong” or “as far as I can see” awaiting a response telling me what I got wrong, if it was wrong. If I am wrong I am only too happy to admit it and take it as a valuable learning experience. I take the point that perhaps I should not post on other peoples threads and I shall refrain from doing so going forward. 🤐 As alluded to, circumstances can change, FTMDave made the following point that it had been boasted that no Caggers, over two years, who had sent a PPC the wrong registration snotty letter, had even been taken to court, let alone lost a court hearing .... but now they have. I too used the word "seemed" because it is true, we haven't had all the details. After perusing this forum I believe certain advice changed here after the Beavis case, I could be wrong but that is what I seem to remember reading. Could it be that after winning the above case in question, a claimant could refer back to this case and claim that a defendant had not made use of the appeal process, therefore allowing the claimant to win? Again, in this instance only, I do not know what is to be gained by not making an appeal or concealing the identity of the driver, especially if it is later admitted that the defendant was the driver and was the one to input the incorrect VRN in error. So far no one has educated me as to the reason why. But, of course, when making an appeal, it should be worded carefully so that an error in the appeal process cannot be referred back to. I thought long and hard about whether or not to post here but I wanted to bring up this point for discussion. Yes, I admit I have limited knowledge, but does that mean I should have kept silent? After I posted that I moved away from this forum slightly to find other avenues to increase my knowledge. I bought a law book and am now following certain lawyers on Youtube in the hope of arming myself with enough ammunition to use in my own case. In one video titled “7 Reasons You Will LOSE Your Court Case (and how to avoid them)” by Black Belt Barrister I believe he makes my point by saying the following, and I quote: “If you ignore the complaint in the first instance and it does eventually end up in court then it's going to look bad that you didn't co-operate in the first place. The court is not going to look kindly on you simply ignoring the company and not, let's say, availing yourself of any kind of appeal opportunities, particularly if we are talking about parking charge notices and things like that.” This point makes me think that, it is not such a bizarre judgement in the end. Only in the case of having proof of payment and inputting an incorrect VRN .... could it be worthwhile making a carefully worded appeal in the first instance? .... If the appeal fails, depending on the reason, surely this could only help if it went to court? As always, any feedback gratefully received.
    • To which official body does one make a formal complaint about a LPA fixed charge receiver? Does one make a complaint first to the company employing the appointed individuals?    Or can one complain immediately to an official body, such as nara?    I've tried researching but there doesn't seem a very clear route on how to legally hold them to account for wrongful behaviour.  It seems frustratingly complicated because they are considered to be officers of the court and held in high esteem - and the borrower is deemed liable for their actions.  Yet what does the borrower do when disclosure shows clear evidence of wrong-doing? Does anyone have any pointers please?
    • Steam is still needed in many industries, but much of it is still made with fossil fuels.View the full article
  • 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

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2208 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 am a vulnerable person having suffered a violent attack for which I am receiving counselling for and has left me with anxiety problems,

 

at the time this led to me leaving work which in turn led to me running up rental arrears and a possesion order granted ( I moved out before the date ).

 

The vast majority have been paid off and I am now in a new place,

at the time of the hearing I offered through his solicitor to pay £200 per month which was accepted via the solicitor in writing and I have kept paying to this arrangement.

 

I have today been informed that a letter has arrived to my old address

( even though my old LL has my new address )

for which I have not been in for over 5 years to say a baliff ( High Court Sheriffs Office ) will arrive after the 11th

- I know the person in there now luckily!

 

I have a few questions on this:

 

- Am I right in saying that if my friend ( who lives in my old place ) states I am not there then I will have to be re-notified at my new addy?

- which gives me some time to sort something ( as they will not know I know )

 

- Is there a court route I can go through?

 

- Is this allowed when I have a written agreement on repayments?

 

- The original order is for 2 of us and the action just lists me ( not sure if it makes a difference?)

 

- Why would he put the wrong addy on?

 

- I am not sure if it makes a difference but it was seen at Eastbourne County Court on September 11th and the paperwork from Bailiff states it was seen at Manchester County Court on September 11th

 

What information would my friend need to provide to show I do not live there anymore?

 

The total remaining on the form is £2600 ( which is after the £200 per month payments I have made )

 

I obviously have medical/counselling/doctors notes I can provide that support my anxiety and people turning up to the house will obviously set this off

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am a vulnerable person having suffered a violent attack for which I am receiving counselling for and has left me with anxiety problems. At the time, this led to me leaving work which in turn led to me running up rental arrears and a possesion order granted ( I moved out before the date ).

 

The vast majority have been paid off and I am now in a new place. At the time of the hearing I offered through his solicitor to pay £200 per month which was accepted via the solicitor in writing and I have kept paying to this arrangement.

 

I have today been informed that a letter has arrived to my old address ( even though my old LL has my new address ) for which I have not been in for over 5 years to say a baliff ( High Court Sheriffs Office ) will arrive after the 11th

 

- I know the person in there now luckily!

 

I have a few questions on this:

 

- Am I right in saying that if my friend ( who lives in my old place ) states I am not there then I will have to be re-notified at my new addy?

- which gives me some time to sort something ( as they will not know I know )

 

It is almost certainly the case that if a new address is identified that the enforcement company should serve a fresh Notice of Enforcement to the new address establish. Sadly, I have come across too many occasions where this is not happening and therefore, given your quite obvious 'vulnerability', I would not suggest that you sit back and wait for a new notice.

 

Almost certainly you need to be making enquiries with the solicitor today to ascertain WHY they are taking the route of bailiff enforcement when you are abiding by the agreement made to pay £200 per month.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have today been informed that a letter has arrived to my old address ( even though my old LL has my new address ) for which I have not been in for over 5 years to say a baliff ( High Court Sheriffs Office ) will arrive after the 11th

 

The way in which I am reading the above is that you moved out of the property 5 years ago and that the landlord is aware that you had moved and has your new address.

 

When the proceedings were issued against you, was the claim addressed to your previous...or current address.

 

When was the landlord made aware of your current address?

 

Is the solicitor who represents the landlord aware that you moved 5 years ago?

 

PS: I forgot to ask....are you working or still unemployed?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it was where I lived before I moved into the property of the claimant, the court order was sent to that address - ie the claimants I was renting- as I was still there at the time but have had correspondence with him at my new address since- so its very odd its gone back there

 

I am back in work but still suffer from anxiety- have counselling for it- so obviously want to avoid people just turning up as its already starting to effect me

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

So a quick update,

 

I tried calling the claimants solicitor yesterday but he is on holiday for 2 weeks so with this in mind I am planning on writing to the claimant today asking for him to take it back and citing that he was aware that I was suffering from anxiety ( he has seen records to this effect ) which this course of action will make worse and that I had maintained payments, I am going to offer to increase it to £275 a month if he agrees to take it back.

 

With the baliff side do you think I should contact them and ask them to put it on hold for 14 days while I provide them with my proof of vulnerability/ have heard back from the claimant or are they likely to reject that or am I better calling and saying I have been told a letter has arrived for me but don't know what it is about so they have to post the same notice through to me- stressing at the same time I am classed as vunerable

 

I am on the electoral roll and have been for a while as well as having correspondence to my address so I am still baffled as to why it went to my previous address.

 

It is frustrating to me as it was agreed at the set amount which has not been broken I could have understood it if it had been

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the first instance, you need to be making the creditor aware of Item 12 of the Taking Control of Goods: National Standards 2014 which states this:

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/353396/taking-control-of-goods-national-standards.pdf

 

12. Creditors must not issue a warrant knowing that the debtor is not at the address, as a means of tracing the debtor at no cost.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent,

 

Thanks a lot I will add that into the letter

 

Is there anything I can do with the courts to take it back to the agreement that was made?

 

Do you think it is likely the Sheriffs Office will put it on hold for 14 days while I supply the details to them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hi all,

 

Just to let you know I have now had a letter at my current address

 

The court listing is still wrong though and still lists Manchester when it was heard in Eastbourne, I have written to both the claimant and HCEO to ask for time to prove vulnerability and come to an arrangement, will let you know when I have heard further.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

Just to let you know I have now had a letter at my current address

 

The court listing is still wrong though and still lists Manchester when it was heard in Eastbourne, I have written to both the claimant and HCEO to ask for time to prove vulnerability and come to an arrangement, will let you know when I have heard further.

 

I am assuming that the letter is a fresh Notice of Enforcement. Is this the case? If so, what date is the notice dated and most importantly, what date is provided on the notice by when you must make payment?

 

The problem with a judgement transferred to the High Court for enforcement, is that if payment is not made in full within what is called the 'compliance stage' (this is the period from when you receive the notice until the 'cut off' date for making payment in order to avoid a bailiff visit), then in ALL cases, the enforcement agent is under a legal obligation to make a PERSONAL visit for the purpose of 'taking control of goods'. This requirement is outlined under item 7.3 of the Memorandum supporting the Taking Control of Goods Fees Regulations 2014 (see link below).

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1/pdfs/uksiem_20140001_en.pdf

 

When the agreement was made with the creditors solicitor to accept a payment arrangement of £200 per month, was this agreement in writing?

 

Have you ensured that you made the payments on the exact dates specified (i.e; if payment was to be made by 15th of each month, were all your payments made in cleared funds by this date?

 

Has there been any occasion when the payment may have been a few days late?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The problem with a judgement transferred to the High Court for enforcement, is that if payment is not made in full within what is called the 'compliance stage' (this is the period from when you receive the notice until the 'cut off' date for making payment in order to avoid a bailiff visit), then in ALL cases, the enforcement agent is under a legal obligation to make a PERSONAL visit for the purpose of 'taking control of goods'. This requirement is outlined under item 7.3 of the Memorandum supporting the Taking Control of Goods Fees Regulations 2014 (see link below).

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1/pdfs/uksiem_20140001_en.pdf

 

Item 7.3 is vitally important and states this:

 

While the fee structure applies across debt streams, there are two separate fee levels – one for High Court Enforcement and one for non-High Court Enforcement, with the High Court level containing higher fees. This reflects the findings in the 2009 independent report5 that High Court Enforcement has a higher cost base due to the personal responsibility of a High Court Enforcement Officer (who has writs addressed directly to them) and the fact that they enforce higher value debts.

 

The personal liability of the HighCourt Enforcement Officer has also necessitated the need for High Court enforcement to have first and second enforcement stages with the associated fees.

 

The fee structure for High Court cases also introduces an incentive to enter into, and adhere to, an affordable controlled goods agreement. Unless a debtor pays in full at the compliance stage, the enforcement agent is obliged to visit the debtor in every High Court case in order to take control of goods, thereby triggering the first enforcement stage.

 

If the enforcement agent is then unable to enter into a controlled goods agreement (and has to take control of goods in another manner) or a debtor defaults on a controlled goods agreement, the enforcement agent will be under an obligation to remove goods and therefore the second enforcement stage fee will also apply

.
Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with a pre hearing payment arrangement, is that unless it was sanctioned by the court the creditor is fully entitled to enforce the amount owed on the judgment in the way stated on it.(forthwith) unless the judgment is subsequently varied.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with a pre hearing payment arrangement, is that unless it was sanctioned by the court the creditor is fully entitled to enforce the amount owed on the judgment in the way stated on it.(forthwith) unless the judgment is subsequently varied.

 

Just on this ( and not sure if it makes a difference ) but the payment agreement was made by his solictor post the hearing

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

When the agreement was made with the creditors solicitor to accept a payment arrangement of £200 per month, was this agreement in writing?

 

Have you ensured that you made the payments on the exact dates specified (i.e; if payment was to be made by 15th of each month, were all your payments made in cleared funds by this date?

 

Has there been any occasion when the payment may have been a few days late?

 

If you could please respond to the above question that I raised on the 18th February, that would greatly assist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just on this ( and not sure if it makes a difference ) but the payment agreement was made by his solictor post the hearing

 

The judgement encapsulates what was said before, so yes it makes a difference. If it is not reflected within the judgment or under an order of the court post, it is irrelevant.

Be good if you could answer BA's question.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sorry so an update on it all,

 

I have had a written letter today from the claimant saying he has received my letter and stated he will remove the enforcement action if I pay a higher rate of £250 with the first payment by 23/02 and I agree not to pursue him in the future for lack of deposit protection - which I am guessing is what this may be about?

 

I can do this and am happy to but I don't want to if him just saying he will end the action is not legally binding, if I pay and he does not would I have a case to have the warrant suspended?

 

In terms of the earlier questions, yes it was in writing and stated the claimant is happy for the payment of £200 per month by the 24th of each month until the balance is cleared and will seek further action if this is not adhered to, I have paid it each month as agreed via bank transfer ( so on my account ) and have never paid late, sometimes paying a few days early

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi sorry so an update on it all,

 

I have had a written letter today from the claimant saying he has received my letter and stated he will remove the enforcement action if I pay a higher rate of £250 with the first payment by 23/02 and I agree not to pursue him in the future for lack of deposit protection - which I am guessing is what this may be about?

 

I can do this and am happy to but I don't want to if him just saying he will end the action is not legally binding, if I pay and he does not would I have a case to have the warrant suspended?

 

In terms of the earlier questions, yes it was in writing and stated the claimant is happy for the payment of £200 per month by the 24th of each month until the balance is cleared and will seek further action if this is not adhered to, I have paid it each month as agreed via bank transfer ( so on my account ) and have never paid late, sometimes paying a few days early

 

Hang on, back up a bit, lack of deposit protection ?

 

Can you tell us a bit about your lease, was it an AST? if so what was the term.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on, back up a bit, lack of deposit protection ?

 

Can you tell us a bit about your lease, was it an AST? if so what was the term.

 

Hi yes it was, it was for an initial 12 months but we lived there for 3 years under a periodic, for 2 years of the tenancy it was not protected, the LL sent a letter stating it had been but later admitted it had not and the deposit schemes have confirmed this.

 

To be honest I am not disputing I owe the money and want to pay it back but just want to avoid the enforcement action if possible

 

I do have a bit more time as the sheriffs office have agreed a 10 day extension until 7th March to send evidence of vulnerability in

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In terms of the earlier questions, yes it was in writing and stated the claimant is happy for the payment of £200 per month by the 24th of each month until the balance is cleared and will seek further action if this is not adhered to, I have paid it each month as agreed via bank transfer ( so on my account ) and have never paid late, sometimes paying a few days early

 

You mentioned in your initial post that the agreement to repay the debt at £200 per month had taken place 'at the hearing'. If so, the payment terms should feature on the judgment issued by the court. Unless you have defaulted (which you have not), then to my mind at least, there is no possibility of the creditor seeking to bypass that court order.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi yes it was, it was for an initial 12 months but we lived there for 3 years under a periodic, for 2 years of the tenancy it was not protected, the LL sent a letter stating it had been but later admitted it had not and the deposit schemes have confirmed this.

 

To be honest I am not disputing I owe the money and want to pay it back but just want to avoid the enforcement action if possible

 

I do have a bit more time as the sheriffs office have agreed a 10 day extension until 7th March to send evidence of vulnerability in

 

Well, i don't now whether to applaud your honesty or criticise, but there are strict rules including presenting proof of deposit protection which must be followed before a section 21 or 8 APO termination can proceed, if for some reason these were overlooked there may be reason to set aside.

 

If you change your mind let me know.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

You mentioned in your initial post that the agreement to repay the debt at £200 per month had taken place 'at the hearing'. If so, the payment terms should feature on the judgment issued by the court. Unless you have defaulted (which you have not), then to my mind at least, there is no possibility of the creditor seeking to bypass that court order.

 

 

I thought HCE had to have a forthwith judgement? What does the judgement say?

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

You mentioned in your initial post that the agreement to repay the debt at £200 per month had taken place 'at the hearing'. If so, the payment terms should feature on the judgment issued by the court. Unless you have defaulted (which you have not), then to my mind at least, there is no possibility of the creditor seeking to bypass that court order.

 

Sorry I was not clear, I made the £200 per month offer prior to the hearing and I was told it had been accepted in writing on the afternoon following the hearing, it is not on the order

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, i don't now whether to applaud your honesty or criticise, but there are strict rules including presenting proof of deposit protection which must be followed before a section 21 or 8 APO termination can proceed, if for some reason these were overlooked there may be reason to set aside.

 

If you change your mind let me know.

 

The claimant protected the deposit a few months before he issued the section 8 which I assumed made it valid

Link to post
Share on other sites

The claimant protected the deposit a few months before he issued the section 8 which I assumed made it valid

 

Was the proof of protection included in the county court bundle?

 

So presumably the deposit was not protected during the AST period?

 

TBH i am unsure if registering the deposit after the AST makes a difference, it should be protected when it is paid, at least i would haver thought.

if you think you may want to pursue this i can find out.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I was not clear, I made the £200 per month offer prior to the hearing and I was told it had been accepted in writing on the afternoon following the hearing, it is not on the order

 

Then as said it is not relevant.

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES TO COLD CALLERS PROMISING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS

DO NOT PAY UPFRONT FEES FOR COSTLY TELEPHONE CONSULTATIONS WITH SO CALLED "EXPERTS" THEY INVARIABLY ARE NOTHING OF THE SORT

BEWARE OF QUICK FIX DEBT SOLUTIONS, IF IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS TO GOOD TO BE TRUE IT INVARIABLY IS

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just been given advise that I should submit an N244 to stay the enforcement action and vary the order and to include my medical records + the latest letter from the claimant stating he would agree to £250 per month and to send a copy of both to the HCEO group as well

 

Is this what you would recommend?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...