Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks for that. I will give them till Tuesday. Thanks for your help, very much appreciated. 
    • Ok thanks for that, well spotted and all duly noted. Yes they did eventually submit those docs to me after a second letter advising them I was contacting the ICO to make a formal complaint for failing to comply with an earlier SAR that they brushed off as an "administrative error" or something. When I sent the letter telling them I was in contact with the information commissioner to lodge the complaint, the original PCN etc quickly followed along with their excuse!
    • its not about the migrants .. Barrister Helena Kennedy warns that the Conservatives will use their victory over Rwanda to dismantle the law that protects our human rights here in the UK.   Angela Rayner made fun of Rishi Sunak’s height in a fiery exchange at Prime Minister’s Questions, which prompted Joe Murphy to ask: just how low will Labour go? .. well .. not as low as sunak 
    • From #38 where you wrote the following, all in the 3rd person so we don't know which party is you. When you sy it was your family home, was that before or after? " A FH split to create 2 Leasehold adjoining houses (terrace) FH remains under original ownership and 1 Leasehold house sold on 100y+ lease. . Freeholder resides in the other Leasehold house. The property was originally resided in as one house by Freeholder"
    • The property was our family home.  A fixed low rate btl/ development loan was given (last century!). It was derelict. Did it up/ was rented out for a while.  Then moved in/out over the years (mostly around school)  It was a mix of rental and family home. The ad-hoc rents covered the loan amply.  Nowadays  banks don't allow such a mix.  (I have written this before.) Problems started when the lease was extended and needed to re-mortgage to cover the expense.  Wanted another btl.  Got a tenant in situ. Was located elsewhere (work). A broker found a btl lender, they reneged.  Broker didn't find another btl loan.  The tenant was paying enough to cover the proposed annual btl mortgage in 4 months. The broker gave up trying to find another.  I ended up on a bridge and this disastrous path.  (I have raised previous issues about the broker) Not sure what you mean by 'split'.  The property was always leasehold with a separate freeholder  The freeholder eventually sold the fh to another entity by private agreement (the trust) but it's always been separate.  That's quite normal.  One can't merge titles - unless lease runs out/ is forfeited and new one is not created/ granted. The bridge lender had a special condition in loan offer - their own lawyer had to check title first.  Check that lease wasn't onerous and there was nothing that would affect good saleability.  The lawyer (that got sacked for dishonesty) signed off the loan on the basis the lease and title was good and clean.  The same law firm then tried to complain the lease clauses were onerous and the lease too short, even though the loan was to cover a 90y lease extension!! 
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

MBNA/Restons CCJ/ CO


phatram
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3473 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Ok, as I read it you have agreed to judgment against you.

 

1. Your to pay the costs of the claimant immediately

 

2. The total sum to be paid by £100 per month until repaid starting 10th Feb (GET a standing order setup for at least a couple of days prior to this if you can afford it)

 

3. They can apply for a charging order but can take no further action so long as you keep to the agreement.

 

Did they try for interest? was it mentioned?

 

s.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, as I read it you have agreed to judgment against you.

 

1. Your to pay the costs of the claimant immediately

 

2. The total sum to be paid by £100 per month until repaid starting 10th Feb (GET a standing order setup for at least a couple of days prior to this if you can afford it)

 

3. They can apply for a charging order but can take no further action so long as you keep to the agreement.

 

Did they try for interest? was it mentioned?

 

s.

 

Could the OP apply for an N245 redetermination for £100 pcm??

 

That way the CO would not be allowed

The CO is only allowed as the OP has failed to comply with the Order (i.e. forthwith)

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, as I read it you have agreed to judgment against you.

 

1. Your to pay the costs of the claimant immediately

 

2. The total sum to be paid by £100 per month until repaid starting 10th Feb (GET a standing order setup for at least a couple of days prior to this if you can afford it)

 

3. They can apply for a charging order but can take no further action so long as you keep to the agreement.

 

Did they try for interest? was it mentioned?

 

s.

 

Interest after judgement was not mentioned.

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

and is not payable on a regulated agreement debt

 

Really?

 

I openly confess I havent looked back through the history of the case so dont know if it applies in this instance or rather could have been applied for but post judgement interest is allowed as far as I'm aware if the terms&conditions allow it and the default notice warned of it.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We've now received a load of stuff from the land registry which seems to say we cant stop this charging order going ahead. Any suggestions please.

 

???

 

I'm confused... I thought you got what you wanted... the consent order gave them judgement, they can obtain a charging order to protect the money owed but they arent allowed to proceed to any further enforcement so long as you keep paying the £100 per month and pay their solicitor fees now.

 

Is this not what you expected?

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could the OP apply for an N245 redetermination for £100 pcm??

 

That way the CO would not be allowed

The CO is only allowed as the OP has failed to comply with the Order (i.e. forthwith)

 

You sure GH? re-read the judgment again, it clearly states the CO is allowed to be applied for despite agreement of £100 PCM.

 

or are my eyes decieving me (or my brain confusing me :-))

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the order says that in return for accepting your payments you agree to the charge being registered but they agree that if you keep up the repayments they cannot apply for an order for sale

 

IMO the order also means that cannot even apply at any time for an order to redetermination of payments- since they agree in the order not to take ANY further action

 

i would advise two steps

 

1/ if the due date for payments is close to your pay going into your bank- make an extra payment up front and /or ask for the repayment date to be moved to at least two week safter your pay normally goes into the bank

 

2/ set up a standing order (not a direct debit) for the payments and again make sure that this is dated for 7 days before the date it is actually due

 

this is to ensure - that due to any possible banking problems or crisis- bank holidays etc- that you do not miss the payment deadline

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?

 

Really :)

 

I've blogged about it sir:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/entry.php?191-Post-judgment-interest-on-CCA-regulated-debts

 

I'll take a look at the rest of the trhead once I'm home as my work PC doesn't allow me to view linked images.

 

But it sounds like they've gone for a Hybrid order - which I thought were dead and buried a LONG time ago.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the order says that in return for accepting your payments you agree to the charge being registered but they agree that if you keep up the repayments they cannot apply for an order for sale

 

IMO the order also means that cannot even apply at any time for an order to redetermination of payments- since they agree in the order not to take ANY further action

 

i would advise two steps

 

1/ if the due date for payments is close to your pay going into your bank- make an extra payment up front and /or ask for the repayment date to be moved to at least two week safter your pay normally goes into the bank

 

2/ set up a standing order (not a direct debit) for the payments and again make sure that this is dated for 7 days before the date it is actually due

 

this is to ensure - that due to any possible banking problems or crisis- bank holidays etc- that you do not miss the payment deadline

 

We don't have a bank account and will probably never have one again. We pay all bills in cash or building society cheque, will of course be sending to Restons using registered mail. We will also be paying more than we should so as to be in front with payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You sure GH? re-read the judgment again, it clearly states the CO is allowed to be applied for despite agreement of £100 PCM.

 

or are my eyes decieving me (or my brain confusing me :-))

 

S.

 

Well, that's what I would do - the CO is ONLY being allowed as the original Judgement is forthwith (not £100 pcm) and hence the debtor is already in breach of that Order

 

If the original Order can be redetermined to £100 pcm until debt is cleared then, as long as those payments are made any further enforcement of the debt would not be allowed.

 

AFAIK the test is of the debt being repaid in 'a reasonable time'

If you find my advice helpful - please click on my scales

<<<<<< - they're over there!

Well, it's a funny black star now ...

The small print - any advice I give is freely given on the understanding that I am a layman and am not legally qualified in anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
They already have an interim order, how? I wasn't notified of any application or hearing about this.

 

An interim order doesnt require a hearing.. it just needs an application from a creditor and the courts just need to be provided evidence you own or have a part ownership in the property (land registry will show this).

 

Its the permanent charging order that comes with a hearing.

 

S.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Restons have been granted an interim charging order and I'm a little confused as to what I should do to fight this.

 

 

I've had judgement against after a dispute with MBNA,

a condition of the judgement was that they could apply for a CO.

 

 

The property is mortgaged and is on a joint mortgage with Mrs P. The debt is entirely mine.

 

We are foster carers and this order if granted could jeopardise our job.

 

 

I don't believe the order should be granted but need as much ammo and advice as possible please.

 

 

We can't afford legal fees amd if Restons win this and claimed loads of costs again we may as well pack up as we would never be out of their debt.

Edited by phatram
Link to post
Share on other sites

Last paragraph on continuation sheet 1 and the bit about PPI. This has not been refunded and so does this make the court order wrong as the amount they've sued me for is incorrect?

 

I take it you are referring to the trial? if so Judgement has been obtained, the time to point out any errors was at the trial or before.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...