What about occupier's liability?

Sorry Ganymede, I meant that your question was interesting and the OP's response rude. Anyway, it's not really anything to do with me if you didn't take offence!

An interesting question leading to a rude response, not the best way for the OP to get help! The people who contribute to this forum are not here to 'deal with your queries'. If you want an actual service then instruct a solicitor to find out the answer and pay them for their time.

Anyway, the fact that judgment was entered following a hearing is totally irrelevant to it's registration. I would suggest you contact the court again and request that the court manager give you the real reason.

Hi all i sent a section 78 to mbna in feb 2009 they finally replied in feb 2011... i was was trying to find out if i had paid any ppi and tick the box on the form so sent it to them in feb 09,they replyed in jan 2011...in feb i recieved a court summons... had a letter off restons giving a date for court on the morning of court went... now received a warrant of exicution... the default notice was issued is different to the one i received

 

I stopped paying because i broke my foot

It seems that you have, by accident or design, received everything. Did you file a defence to the claim? In any event you appear to have attended the relevant hearings.

The fact you broke your foot, although unfortunate, is not a valid legal reason to stop paying.

I see, that makes more sense.

Was that for the claim itself or just the CO application? I appreciate this is something of a tangent but it's a very high sum for a CO application.

They can legally do all of those things notwithstanding that the account is in dispute (I'm not saying that it's good practice just that it is not unlawful). Otherwise we'd all put accounts in dispute for frivolous reasons and the creditor could do nothing about it!

EDIT: The judge awarded £2,000 of costs on a charging order application?!

In fairness a failure of service itself means that judgment should not have been entered. If the pleadings weren't served then the judgment must be set aside on mandatory grounds even if there's no real prospect of successfully defending the claim. You can't sue someone by sending the pleadings to the moon and then keep your judgment unless there's a real prospect of successfully defending the claim or some other good reason why the judgment should be set aside!

The OP should read CPR Part 6 and, in particular, note the conceptual difference between service and actual receipt. If the OP is still confident that service was not effected then perhaps the application should be made. Bear in mind though that it isn't just the cost of making the application (for which the fee remission will apply) but any costs the applicant is ordered to pay the other side (which are not means tested).

Why not inform BG so they can take whatever safety measures they consider appropriate?

EDIT: in fact, why let it get to that stage? Why not allow BG entry at a mutually convenient time and put the dogs securely in a room that they won't need to enter?

What exactly were the terms of the default repayment plan you set up? Are you certain you never defaulted by a single penny or a single day late?

It may be that an estoppel arises, thoughts anyone?

But what, verbatim, did the last order actually say? Did it make any reference to costs or was this just the judge's musing at the time?

Well, the probate office staff are purely admInistrative employees; they don't check the family tree of each deceased!

You should I believe have the opportunity to challenge any grant of letters of administration if you believe other beneficiaries are being prejudiced but to be frank as there's a £60,00-odd estate in issue here you may want to take some advice from a dedicated probate solicitor. A few hundred pounds is a fairly small proportion of the sum that stands to be improperly administered otherwise.

EDIT: A quick google search tells me that there is a specific statutory framework for determining who should inherit what. Google 'intestate deceased' and you should be able to see it for yourself. Then just work through it applying the statutory framework to the deceased's own family.

Be sure to include in the N244 a mention of your costs. There'd be no harm in drafting an order including a provision for you to recover £45 of costs.

You should make the point that your costs of the application should be recovered in any event as the application would not have been made if the other side had complied with the order.

Do write to the other side first though and see why they're delaying.

Obviously experiences vary but Tomlin orders really aren't some sort of quasi-judgment cooked up by creditors to use when they can't prove their case. They are tremendously efficient ways of settling a claim on *agreed* terms.

A lot of people don't dispute their liability to pay but would prefer to avoid a CCJ. Tomlin orders are a good way of reaching that goal.

EDIT: As for the OP's query, apply for redetermination of the judgment. Beware however that this may be viewed as an attempt to deny the creditor its part of the bargain when it entered into a Tomlin order with you in the first place.

There's nothing to stop you trying to negotiate withe the owner of the debt (whether it has actually been assigned to a third party or an agent is simply collecting for the water company is somewhat unclear).

I would hope that they've given you notice of the intention to serve a SD precisely to scare you into contacting them, hopefully they will therefore be amenable to a payment proposal.

When they asked for copy bank statements why did you not provide them? Negotiation is a two way street and it wouldn't hurt to produce a budget sheet or something similar to show what you can afford to pay. If you're not prepared to evidence the reasonableness of your proposal the creditor is likely to reject it.

If you are ultimately made bankrupt the Trustee in Bankruptcy will own your share of the house and your assets. The house would likely be considered for sale in order to best effect payment to your creditors.

As the matter has been listed for a hearing solely to decide costs, what exactly did the order say? It may be that the order mentioned costs such as one party to pay the other in any event a sum to be summarily assessed at the next hearing.

There's no reason why they would be unless a party to the litigation has told them.

Mediation by it's nature has to be without prejudice to be effective, otherwise neither party would make any concessions. In any event I was referring to the suggestion that these documents be disclosed as part of standard disclosure to show the OP tried to reach an agreement, any correspondence that is a genuine attempt to settle the claim is without prejudice and therefore should not be disclosed until after the trial.

EDIT: As a further point the parties in this case are negotiating rather than mediating.

It asks whether you intend to argue that the case has an international element and the proper forum for the case is a court outside of the jurisdiction of England and Wales.

For the avoidance of doubt, it does not refer to whether the claim was issued in your local County Court.

The problem of course is that it's more likely on the balance of probabilities that the document was not a forgery designed to mislead the court and therefore there's a 51% chance the assignment was valid.

.Introduce your attempts to mediate at Standard Disclosure...

 

Andy

Not wishing to nitpick but for any others using this thread as guidance on their own cases the without prejudice correspondence should not be disclosed until after the conclusion of the trial. Such correspondence is relevant to any summary or detailed assessment of costs only.

Ah, there we are then. The OP should receive an interim charging order with the date and time of the hearing of the application to finalise that order in due course.

Technically the FOS complaint should defer to the court action but I wouldn't worry, at worst that is what will happen and at best they will both run alongside each other until you get a judgment and can stop the FOS complaint.

But if you have already defaulted or shortly will then the judgment is payable forthwith so therefore any application for redetermination to that rate of payment is otiose.

No, enforcement is a matter for the creditor. Issuing a warrant doesn't even require a court hearing or any judicial intervention. Your debt is over the bankruptcy limit of £750 so that is also an option as I've said. You mustn't fall into the trap of thinking that putting an offer and paying an affordable monthly sum is all you need to do; it isn't.