Jump to content

Will Goodfellow

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    159
  • Avg. Content Per Day

    0.5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Will Goodfellow

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It depends on her partner's income, possibly not. Carer's allowance is not classed as income in the calculation.
  2. There doesn't seem to be much point paying £50 to vary the order when Cloverfield has no disposable income to pay the debts of £8k plus in reasonable instalments each month. She doesn't own property, doesn't own a car as she uses her son's motability car, doesn't have disposable income over £50 a month so if the total debt is under £20,000, the £50 fee would pay more than half the £90 cost of a DRO. Even if the order is varied, one missed payment can result in enforcement action starting all over again. It's just delaying the process for a while.
  3. There is no point in applying for an instalment order if you have no money to pay, and no point in applying to set aside if you don't have grounds to contest the CCJs. Were the debts statute barred? Gather information about all of your debts and consider applying for a Debt Relief Order if you are eligible, this will write off all of your qualifying debts and you can forget about them. Although it will affect your creditworthiness for the next six years.
  4. They don't have a lot of choice but to accept what he offers if they cannot take control of goods. The builder can keep his door locked to keep the bailiffs out as they have no right to force entry. If his vehicle cannot be seized for whatever reason, they can't do much else.
  5. The amount owed for the full 48 months is £11,280, you are being charged £7,341 so you have not been charged the full amount of interest due over that period. As you only took the loan out 18 months ago, there were still 30 months left and not 18. Paragraph 2.2 of the Terms and Conditions also states: "Unless otherwise provided in this Loan Agreement, all payments will be applied to default charges, interest, then capital." So any payments which you make offset default charges and interest first before capital. Although as mentioned, the consumer credit act means you cannot be charged the full amount of interest if you settle the loan earlier.
  6. Offering a token payment won't necessarily stop a money claim against you unless the creditor agrees. A judge won't penalise the creditor for rejecting the offer either, particularly if you can afford to pay more.
  7. It's usual practice offering a discount to encourage a payment. If it is almost six years since the date on the certificate of termination you can chance it and use delaying tactics or ignore them. They can either make a claim against you or not. It doesn't seem as if they have long left to do that which is probably the reason for all of the recent contact.
  8. At the moment you are making 'token offers' of £1 per month which your creditors have agreed to accept, and stop legal action against you for the time being. If you stop paying, your creditors might take action by applying for a county court judgment against you (CCJ) or commencing enforcement against you where a CCJ already exists. They may also do nothing, particularly if they cannot prove you owe the debt when challenged.
  9. It is the PPI claim itself which is an admission of liability so any claim for a debt which is not statute barred will restart the limitation period regardless of which party receives the payout. Where a PPI claim was rejected, it would depend at which stage that happened and the reasons why. A PPI claim directly to a creditor acknowledging the debt is technically an admission of liability but unlikely to be presented as evidence in my view. Whereas the creditor may not even be aware of a PPI claim if it was rejected by a claims management company. There are a lot of variables without further information.
  10. It's a good idea but just to clarify, the PIP claimant must be in receipt of the daily living component of PIP, the mobility component alone is insufficient.
  11. The NEA scheme is a red herring in this case. The MIF applies to everyone who is self-employed and claiming universal credit. After 12 months of self-employment the MIF applies, even where the claimant was self-employed for 12 months or more before claiming UC. You can thank the Tory government for that. The argument is that if after 12 months you are not earning at least minimum wage for the hours you work in self-employment, the business is not viable. A problem with legacy benefits is that self-employment was used as an alternative to claiming unemployment benefits. People were claiming to be self-employed, not working but receiving the same amount in benefits as being unemployed while having no unemployment conditionality such as attending the Jobcentre regularly to sign on or perform other work related activity. It's a good way to fiddle unemployment figures are hundreds of thousands of people claim to be self-employed while earning no money and surviving on benefits only. However, it backfired on the Tory government as the benefit bill massively increased. Now it wants to clamp down on paying out benefits to people who are bogusly self-employed to cut the benefits bill, hence the MIF under UC. As the MIF has now triggered after 12 months and you are not earning enough to survive, one option is to claim benefits as unemployed and declare any income you receive from music lessons.
  12. An IVA is legally binding so while you are in an IVA, your creditors can take no further legal action against you. Missing a couple of payments does not terminate the IVA so your creditors have no cause of action, you and your creditors are still bound by the IVA. The notice of termination informs you and your creditors that the IVA is no longer legally binding on the debts you have included in the IVA so the date of the termination gives creditors cause of action to take further legal action against you. It would be unfair on creditors if the cause of action started when you failed to make a payment in to the IVA as they are unable to take any legal action against you at that point. Statue barring starts from the cause of action which is when the IVA is terminated. Up until the date of termination, the IVA is in place in which you admit liability for the debts. Until that agreement is terminated, your acknowledgement of liability does not end.
  13. As the IVA failed, your insolvency practitioner would have written to all of your creditors and informed then that the debt which you owe is no longer being paid through the IVA as it is being terminated. This is the date at which the last acknowledgement of the debt is made so statute barring starts from when the IVA was terminated and not the date of the last payment.
  14. As it does take time, all you can do is make an official complaint to the CMS. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/what-to-do-if-you-re-unhappy-with-the-child-maintenance-service If he is working on PAYE, the payments can be deducted directly from his wages. As he has another child, if he informs the CMS, the amount he has to pay you will be reduced.
  15. That depends which date you officially terminate the agreement. You may be charged for the full month or a pro-rata payment.
×
×
  • Create New...