which province of canada are you in ?

http://www.beatmydebt.com/panic-room/county-court-claims/can-interest-be-added-to-a-ccj.htm It says " How to stop contractual interest being added to a county court judgment You can try to stop any contractual interest being added by asking the county court to make a ‘instalment order’. An instalment order is simply an agreement to pay off the debt you owe on the basis of affordable monthly payments. If the court agrees to make the order, it can revise the rate of payment and alter the rate of interest, from that which is written in the agreement to that which it thinks is just and fair. This could mean a zero rate of interest, if the court agrees to make the order in those terms. "

"Additionally, POC states daily pji at 0.252%," The daily rate of interest of 0.252% equates to 150.588% However The S130A notice states that the rate at which PJI was applied was 7.69% per month which is 143.28% the S130A notice also states the rate of interest payable will be 0.33% per day this equates to 232.48%, this is different from the rate charged. Why the discrepancies, even within the same document (S130A) ? These interest rates are insane on the amounts concerned. They really have taken you to the cleaners and any reasonable judge should see that. The monthly interest is significantly more than the Gross pre-tax average annual salary in the UK, I thought the amount borrowed at the outset was only £20k or so. The interest is £64,611.11, the monthly interest changed is £4,972.39 this is a monthly interest rate of 7.692303%. This equates to an APR of 143.341% The Office of Fair Trading have published the final draft of a booklet “Consumer Credit Act 1974: Credit Charges and APR”. This is obtainable as a download from the offices web http://www.oft.gov.uk. An overstatement of up to 1% and an understatement of unto 0.1% is acceptable. The 0.33% quoted would be outside of the acceptable limit. Is there no requirement for an APR to be included in a 130A ?

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=extortionate%20credit%20bargain%20case%20law%20post%20judgment&source=web&cd=11&ved=0CFIQFjAAOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.slaughterandmay.com%2Fmedia%2F760154%2Fconsumer_credit_act_2006_amendments_to_the_consumer_credit_act_1974.pdf&ei=1l-6T5LaKczZiQL03ZX8Bg&usg=AFQjCNFNDqNWBRv1W-FVjM524FZAKDyhdQ&sig2=VgXDQmMHjIuHneQevCYD-Q

Search for "extortionate credit bargain case law" without the quotes in google. It's for the creditor to prove that it is not unfair once you make the allegation. Fairness would be different for different parties. I don't know if you could make this allegation post judgment.

"Additionally, POC states daily pji at 0.252%," The daily rate of interest amounts to 150% interest per annum. Surely, such a high interest rate would be unconscionable and amount to usury .

http://www.swarb.co.uk/phpbb/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=12756

Is the debtor an individual or a limited company ? Is there a contract which says the jurisdiction is in England ? Were the goods delivered to them in Ireland or did they collect in England ? How much is the debt ?

Bang! " ...If its down to £500 and you are worried - it points to your income being pretty low, so have you checked what charges interest that has been added....." I got the charges back, and no PPI added. As regards my income being low..... no, but, twice as much would always be nice. The problem is not with my ability to pay the £500 it's about the fact that I have been well and truly shafted by HSBC since 1999 and £500 would represent a small victory in a battle that I have been on the losing end of. I resent the fact that the £500 will be used to pay some bankers bonus. I don't like being a victim.

"Have you considered contacting the two credit reference agencies in Canada, Equifax Canada Inc., and Trans Union of Canada, Inc," Great idea. Why didn't i think of that? I contacted the provincial legal body and they were really woolly on the matter.

Cerberusalert thanks for your responses "Once a default has been registered and it drops off your credit file after six years it cannot be re-registered." There was a default at around the time of termination of the account in 2000 and I have been making payments ever since until maybe last year. Can they default me now as I have stopped making payments against the previously defaulted account or, does my action in now not paying them represent a new cause of action for the default ?

I am living in Canada, and only have a home in Canada. HSBC have known where I have lived for quite a while as I was making payments to them. When the debt was reduced to around £500 andI stopped paying. The English debt is covered by the CCA and the DPA but the local collection lot seem to be very threatening as regards marking my local (Canadian) file with a UK debt.

Hi. My HSBC file is currently in the hands of Wiggins adjustments. Did you get anywhere with them. Did they mark you credit file?

ConsumerprotectionBC which deals with this say the DCA can register the debt against my credit file if they can properly evidence the debt as still outstanding - the law in BC is pretty wooly. The Canadian DCA are acting for an American registered company to whom the debt has been assigned, but ultimately this is the same debt I was already defaulted for in the UK 12 years ago. If they default me here I will have had the same debt on my credit file from 1999 to 2018. It occurs to me that HSBC have exported my credit information (held under the DPA) to Canada to facilitate the committing of an act, i.e. the re-reporting of the default, that would not be lawful in England.

Hi Guys, been a while since I have been on here. I have a HSBC debt that was terminated, and registered to the credit reference agencies around 2000. I moved to Canada (notifying HSBC in the process) and paid the debt down to a few hundred. A local debt collection agency in Canada is now threatening to report the debt to my Canadian Credit file if I don't pay the remainder. I am aware that a UK default can only be legally issued ONCE on the same debt. It has a 'life-span'of six years and must come off the credit reference agencies files after this time - this is the law under the Consumer Credit Act. However,if they DO re-issue the default, it is NOT consumer credit law being broken, it comes under the Data Protection Act. How does all this work with me being in Canada. Can I complain to the ICO ? The local Canadian Agency seem to think that if the debt is owing it can be recorded.

i would go to another solicitor it is clearly a negligence issue and you should sue your former solicitors

I successfully took a complaint to the Solicitors Regulation Authority as the Regulations used to state (it's difficult to get hold of a copy of the regulations) Basically you can't have an interim bill "taxed" or assessed for fairness hence they can't sue on it. Interim bills http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/dcs/fourth_tier.asp?section_id=1914#4021 - this is no longer on the web 6. It is possible to deliver an interim statute bill. These would be regarded as final bills for work done to date and arise:- *where the client has agreed to, or asked for delivery of a final bill for work done to date; *at the conclusion of the matter; *when either you or your client terminates the retainer; *at a "natural break" in protracted work, although it is the opinion of the Law Society’s Council that it is wiser not to rely on this factor as a ground except in the clearest cases. 7. Generally, if it is not made clear in the retainer letter that interim bills will be interim statute final bills they would not be regarded as final bills and the solicitor cannot sue on them and the client cannot apply for taxation of the costs contained in such a bill. The amount in such bills can of course be included in a later final bill on which the solicitor can sue. 8. Interim bills which are not final bills will be a request for a payment on account only. Most interim bills are in fact requests for payments on account. Where the solicitor requests the client to make a payment of a reasonable sum on account of the costs incurred or to be incurred, and the client refuses or fails within a reasonable time to make that payment, then the solicitor may terminate the retainer upon giving reasonable notice under Section 65(2) Solicitors Act 1974. The bill or letter accompanying the bill should be signed by the principal or a partner of the firm – see section 69 of the Solicitors Act 1974 (Annex 14A at p.289). This follows from the Entire Contract Rule at Common Law It is trite law that, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, when a client retains a solicitor to do certain work, the solicitor contracts to finish the business for which he/ she is retained. This means that a retainer is an 'entire contract' where the solicitor is not entitled to any remuneration or profit costs until the work, being the subject matter of the retainer, has been completed or the retainer has been terminated for some other reasons. The 'entire contract' rule has been succinctly summarised by Jessel MR in the case of Re Hall & Barker (1878) 9 Ch D 538 at 545 as follows: 'If a shoemaker agrees to make a pair of shoes he cannot deliver one to you and ask for half the price'. In our discussion with the Supreme Court of Costs (SCC), in regard this matter, an Interim Bill cannot be presented for taxation. We believe that a course of action by a solicitor (Statutory Demand/Winding up petition) which denies their client, former or otherwise, their right to independent assessment of a bill, within the times prescribed by The Solicitors Act 1974, is a fundamental abuse of process and that they barred from taking such action by the Rules of the Law Society. Note here the bill must be signed otherwis they cannot sue on it. Action to Recover solicitors costs (Annex 14A – Solicitors Act 1974 section 69) Subject to the provisions of this Act, no action shall be brought to recover any costs due to a solicitor before the expiration of one month from the date on which a bill of those costs is delivered in accordance with the requirements mentioned in subsection (2) Subsection (2) states The requirements referred to in subsection (1) are that the bill – (a) must be signed by the solicitor, or if the costs are due to a firm, by one of the partners of that firm, either in his own name or in the name of the firm, or be enclosed in, or accompanied by, a letter which is so signed and refers to the bill; and (b) must be delivered to the party to be charged with the bill, either personally or by being sent to him by post to, or left for him at, his place of business, dwelling-house, or last known place of abode; This is worth a look http://lawgazette.co.uk/inpractice/qa/difference-between-interim-bill-and-interim-statute-bill

Did you go bankrupt? If so, was the loan made before you went bankrupt? Was it included in your statement of affairs?

See Blackstones on the cheque rule. At the point at which they raise a cheque there are two contracts, one for the services provided and one for the payment of the cheque. Assuming you haven't done anything to compromise your claim, you can sue on the bounced cheque rather than the underlying contract. This limits the other sides defence, they can't raise issues about the underlying services that you have provided.

BBC News - Debt sale firm hit by legal ban

If it was me, I would pay Cap One by internet banking (sufficient to bring the debt fairly well below £750) and advise all parties that a payment has been made. You want to make sure the funds are applied against the correct account and identifiable and not a gift. All sent today they will receive in morning.

I am not an expert. It sounds like you are going to have to submit an embarrassed defence (due to lack of paperwork). Given that the tax debt is partially yours there is probably consideration. Did you query the statements being in your name? How much time has elapsed since they conducted the work? I don't know whether these kind of arrangements are covered by the CCA.

Did they provide any invoices? If so, are they in your name? Did you enter into a retainer arrangement? The tax liability they are resolving, is it personal or corporate? Did you sign a personal guarantee? Answers to the foregoing would useful. There maybe a lack of "consideration".

don't know what you should do now. hopefully somebody else can help. but i would say the agreement does not have the necessary prescribed terms