Is it too late to request CCA now CCJ has been awarded, or can I still do this? If I can, and they can't supply me with it or ignore it, can I then have the judgement set aside on these grounds???

Thankyou, I wish for it be set aside under the civil rights of not being notified, eg, not receiving 14 day letter of warning that court proceedings were about to be issued. It looks like I did send the right document to the solicitor with my accompanying letter, but I failed to acknowledge with the court at the same time as I assumed replying to the solicitor was all I had to do. (One or the other so to speak). Surely the fact we DID reply is relevant enough to have it set aside and start the whole thing again where WE can be given a chance to fight the debt?

N9 acknowledgemnt of service, but then sent it to solicitors not the court back in october. I contested jurisdiction as I had received no prior warning to such debt, no letter from anyone.

Is there anything I can do? Can I apply to have it set aside, I have proof of postage that I replied at the right time. Should the solicitors (morally) have informed me of such?

In Oct,we received ccj papers for an old debt from egg. The claimant was Marlin and the solicitors was Mortimor clarke. I sent the court paper to the solicitors in Oct with a request contest jurisdiction as we had received no warning from anyone re the debt. Not even a 14day warning letter. We heard nothing until a letter dated 23 January from solicitors saying the ccj had been awarded by default. What do I do now? Should I have sent it to the court? Have I done it wrong, anyone advise? Regards

It's been a long time since i initiated this thread, the court hearing is today!!!

Or was it not a Company car?????????? If so I cannot fathom why he used a Company cheque to pay you when it has nothing to do with his Company. He said he was on company business and hadn't "done this kind of driving for a long time - but nobody else was available to do the drop so they asked me". But, the car he was driving belonged to another employee ( the signatory on the cheque) and then the boss stopped the cheque (D)

Sorry, not informative enough. I am A, B admitted liability. A = Me B = driver (and employee of company) C = Owner of car(and employee of company & signatory on cheque) D = Boss stops cheque! Isn't it confusing! You can see wherein my dilemma lays!

Consider this: A bangs into the back of B. A admits liablilty for the damage. A's great-aunt, C, writes out a cheque and sends it to B. She then talks to A who says that perhaps he was not responsible after all. C puts a stop on the cheque. If B sues C she has no counterclaim because there is no connection between B and C. The company is in the same position as the great aunt. A did not admit liability. B did

Hey, thanks for your reply/interest. Here is where it becomes interesting. The car he was driving belonged to another employee - insured only for him and his wife (so clearly not a company car) "OK well that explains why he so readily wrote you a cheque even though technically you were more at fault than he was, he didn't want this coming to light" Yes - our thoughts entirely - but- the man who signed the cheque was the owner of the car and we believeto be an authrsd sgntry - and the guy who was driving was not an authorised signatory for the company. However - it deepens - the man i had accident with admitted to 4 witnesses he was on company business whereas the car he was driving was covered for sdp only - confusing isnt it? The driver is now stating he was on personal business! However - The crux of the matter is - the accident is irrelevant, the point is I have emails from the other drivier admitting liability and 'offering' to pay direct and not thru insurance (for now obvious apparent reasons) and my leverage is now the 'dishonoured cheque'. Which as far as I know is not in question!!!! They have to pay. ????? Will keep you guys posted And ............ thank you. Aztec xxx

Hi guys, Just to throw a spanner in the works, it turns out the driver of the other car was NOT INSURED! He has no insurance at all. Only as a named driver on his wifes policy (which wasnt the car he was driving) . I have emails from him the day after the accident confirming that he will pay direct upon receipt of estimate 4 damage to my car and did not wish to go thru insurance company!.... Interesting, You guys are making me nervous that I may lose now!!!! Any more thoughts!!! Aztec

Many thanks for your replies. After further investigation I can confirm Derek is correct. The accident is irrelevant and the dishonoured cheque is now the arguement in question. The person I sue is the name printed on the cheque (who the funds belong to) and there is indeed no defence for a dishonoured cheque in this instance. But for future reference, who you sue depends on whether an individual or a LTD company as separate rules apply. Thanks Derek and to all.

I had a minor car accident where i hit the back of a man who was unable to drive an automatic car and he went to change gear and hit the brake, my car glided to a stop and nudged him in the back corner. He admitted it was his fault and agreed to pay for my damages. He sent a cheque which turned out to be a company cheque. The boss came back and stopped it after i had banked it. Been to see a brief who said the cheque must be honoured and i can sue for breach of contract and that the accident is now irrelevant since liability has been acknowledged in the sending of the cheque. I forgot to ask him, who do i name on the court papers. the printed name on the cheque, the signatory on the cheque or the guy who sent it? Anyone help???? aztecmusic

Many thanks you guys for all your advice and replies. Will head onto the FOS, Was just unsure whether to go to court or the FOS. Will try one more letter to them just to see if they reply. I have their direct fax no, so i fax them - its quicker. Thanks again x

Hi to all, Help needed for this one please. I have already done the SAR for my lloyds tsb credit card and been successful in reclaiming back the late payment fees (although I didn't at the time charge interest because was unaware I could). Looking thru the statements I noticed PPI, which I now vaguely remember a heated conversation on the phone with them demanding they remove it (a couple of years in) as I realised I would not be able to claim under their T+c's as I was self employed. I have now requested the PPI back plus the CI and have received a get lost letter and a copy of my original agreement with my signature on it and the box ticked for accepting PPI. My memory is vague on this as it was dec 2002 but my policy has always been to refuse any kind of ppi on anything for the length of time Ive been self empld-20 years!! Their letter states When the cover was arranged we sent you the policy document which explained in detail the t+cs of the contract. The policy document alsoasked you to ensure the cover met with your requirements and that you had 30 day cooling off period. ....... it is your responsibility to read and understand the T+Cs. I should also explain that the premiums have been shown on your statements so you have always had the opportunity to query and cancel if you felt it unsuitable (which I did) They go on to say that although Im self empld it did not exclude me from the unemployment section of the policy or the life benefit or Positive Jobs solutions (whatever that is). They go on to say this is their final response so basically bugger off. Im an entertainer- singer, so them getting me a job would be laughable. Only now have I found out that it truly would not have covered me (as my gut feeling has told me for all these years) and I honestly believe it was missold as they knew I was self employed when I took the card. I also have no recollection of agreeing to the PPI (which I doubt I did) and that the 'tick' could have been placed in the box after id signed. What do I do now??????