Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Belaflat

  1. Well Lowells offered me an 80% discount and 1st Credit offered me a christmas special of 95% discount. I can see them grabbing wildly for the straws now.
  2. The guy at Redwoods can say what he wants, it wont be his decision. If you want, send a copy of your benefits income or at least proof you are on benefits, tell them you have no assets and then sit back. I will lay money on it that they wont proceed as it will cost them over £1000 to chase for zero return.
  3. To be honest, what do you have to fear from bankruptcy....you have no assets, no income so what can they take. If you were made bankrupt, this debt would be gone along with the rest.... A letter to them outlining your situation and gladly accepting the outcome would soon put a stop to them as soon as they realise it will cost them and not you.
  4. Sound advice for you there pretoria. Can I suggest 1 thing though, I know you have had a PM over on PW from a bailiff. The problem with PMs is the advice can be very good, it can also be bad and land you in hot water. Policy on this site is to post on open forums to weed out such advice. I suspect that the advice you have received will be good judging from previous posts but it might be an idea to share them on here just in case. Its not a betrayal of confidence, more a safeguard.
  5. I agree that Liability orders are virtually impossible to overturn, especially in a dispute with word of mouth but surely it can't hurt to start off guns blazing, quoting the allowed schedule of fees and that the council are responsible for thier agents behaviour..which they are. If that approach does not work (it has been known to succeed) then they may be whittled down into taking back the debt, disallowing the bailiffs fees, especially if the OP is insistent upon making a formal complaint against the Council and thier agents. Also point out that the bailiffs will not be allowed entry and the debt will pass back to the council at some point where it will then be paid without interference from bailiffs. A compromise might then be reached where the amount to be paid is the £148, no fees.
  6. This is true but also paying a debt which he was told was not originally owed means he will be out of pocket and once the council have his money, they will not be too bothered about resolving this any more. Since the Council is responsible for the actions of the bailiffs who represent them, how about he goes into the council and makes a formal complaint of thier agent attempting to unlafully obtain moneys by submitting fees in excess of permitted amounts...quoting regulations of course and insisting that they must take reponsibility for the actions of the bailiff company. I will wager they might soon accept the original amount only rather than face up to such a complaint.
  7. Pretoria, there is a letter in the sticky section you can give to the bailiffs to demand this information. may also help you to decide if they are acting lawfully or not. Letter is here. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?58550-Council-Tax-and-Bailiffs-ref-only-NO-POSTS-ALLOWED Plodder and pimpernel....why should he pay the council when he was informed that his wife was owed money but it was difficult to pay. I know that it will call off the hounds but there is an injustice here, not an avoidance. By all means contact the council but only to first ask them to contact the bailiffs and hold off whilst the dispute is resolved.
  8. Without a valid agreement to produce, they should not be able to prove a debt. Thats your grounds for a set aside. You did not receive notification, grounds 1. No Valid CCA produced, debt in dispute, grounds 2. You have the letter to back up your claim.
  9. Hi, are you sure that the letter you have received is not a copy of one sent to capquest. I have seen one similar my brother had when i helped him with a case that was eventually struck out from non compliance of the complainant.
  10. Another minefield.....you buy a new car, park up the old one in your drive which still has tax and test left. Cancel that insurance and transfer to your new vehicle while you try to sell the old one 'taxed and tested'. Under these rules you are now liable unless you sorn and send back the tax disc. No refunds for part months but the new buyer must tax it from the beginning of the month so potentially the government get 2 months tax for the single month. Yet more money grabbing ........how they can keep banging on about honesty when they pull tricks like this beggars belief.
  11. Thanks sequenci. I think since the forum split into loads of subsections, some posts do seem to get missed a bit more than usual especially since the DCA's and Legal issues became seperate. Reassuring to know that there is someone around in the backround though. I do have a question re the DRO though. I have spoken to my ex today and she says she has recieved the paperwork from the DSS setting out the overpayment but to date has not recieved any formal demand from the Council although all payments were stopped after her interview some months ago. As this is likely to be housing benefit and council tak overpayments, if she went for the DRO now, what would the position be regarding them being included as my understanding from the information gleaned is a debt which appears after the DRO cannot be included. Should she wait until all demands are in or would the Council overpayments still count as they are for a period prior to the DRO.
  12. Does'nt matter, found what I was looking for. Must say I am surprised at no response in over 24 hours. the forum does seem to be slowing down in that respect.
  13. Asking the question for my ex partner. She has been judged to have been cohabiting whilst claiming benefits and the local council and benefits office have now said they want 2 years worth of back money off her. She hasnt been prosecuted and to be fair boyfriend was not staying there very often but they say he was and thats that as far as they are concerned. She has no assets, her home is rented and she does not own any cars or other items of value. Her boyfriend has now moved in permanently as she has nothing coming in at all now. He is a contractor who only has periodic work so has no assets either. Would this be written off if she went bankrupt.
  14. *House has NEGATIVE equity and unlikely to improve for a long time *claimaint not seeking to force sale *in fact, claimant refusing to let me IVA or bankrupt Claimant can object to IVA legally and object to bankruptcy on a personal level to stop them losing out but they cannot legally stop you going bankrupt. They really cannot do a thing to stop it although the down side is , they already have the charging order in place so could just sit and wait it out until the market upturns. If you were to offload house now, they have lost out but you would struggle to get another mortgage for a good few years. Tough call.
  15. Hope it goes OK mate. I wish I could help but my knowledge is very limited in matters such as this. I have noticed though that since the forum format changed, there seems to be a lot of threads like yours, unanswered or only partially helped. Perhaps its there are now so many sub forums that things are getting missed.
  16. Have you contacted the Court yet..?
  17. Carter wont bother doing anything now that he has judgement. I would call the Court and ask why there is a default judgement when you filed a defence. See if they have record of one being recieved. You will have to file for a set aside but I am not too sure of the grounds as yet. Will just do some digging around for you.....it would have helped if you had proof of posting and delivery. Not sure if claiming a defence was sent but not recieved will be accepted as grounds without proof.
  18. I note that this is from the bulk centre at Northampton. Did you file defence as normally it would be allocated to your local court for a hearing if you did. It seems strange to get what amounts to a default judgement if a defence was filed. I had a look at your original post but you dont state if you ever recieved the D N or submitted an embarrased defence if you didnt get it.
  19. Oh and one more thing...be careful of how much detail you give out....Lowells have spies abord.
  20. I think you need to be speaking to 42man as i believe he went through something similar. On the details you have posted, you are certainly going to be able to get an annulment but the bad news is, going by 42mans experiences, it is not easy and may involve a fair amount of expense. i will try and get him to drop by for you, have reported the post for attention. On another note, the fact that Lowells were the ones who made you bankrupt might raise a few eyebrows as it appears they may now be upping the stakes. They have a generally bad reputation but this is the first bankruptcy I have heard about them applying for and going through with although the non delivery of Stat Demand and subsequent false claims to the contrary would be par for the course for them.
  21. The Mould, if payments have been kept up as per the 2007 letter, then surely if they are then cancelled that would give the claim legitimacy. If the claim is to be defended by arguing a new agreement was made and adhered to then breaking the agreement by not making a payment could prove costly. I think I understand your reasoning but if only enough money was left available to service the payment, then I can't see there being a problem.
  22. Are these debt management firms DCA's or does this article refer to companies claiming to be able to write off debts etc. I would like to think DCA's but I fear the latter is actually the case.
  23. There is your answer....as Ford has posted which confirms what you are thinking. They cannot add interest.
  24. Unless of course that post judgement interest was asked for and granted at the hearing. It should state that on your paperwork but if what you have posted is all you have then they can whistle.
  • Create New...