Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Wrongly convicted Horizon victims in Scotland to be exonerated NEWS.STV.TV Victims who faced wrongful convictions are to be exonerated the day after Royal Assent is granted.  
    • If anybody has any advice here, it would be greatly appreciated, I already suffer with pre-existing disabilities & have struggled with this so far. 
    • so return of goods order etc etc read upload  scan pages to jpg, redact in mspaint. the convert to and merge to one mass PDF  read upload and use the online listed sites for all 3 stages. do you want to keep the car? i will guess this was a manual paper claimform direct from the co.court or was it org sent from salford bulk processing and has just got reaq ssigned?      
    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue –  29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM 1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached  2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00. The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month. 3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement, Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us. Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement 9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate 4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:- a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement  number xxxxxx. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     The total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by First class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges 5.  At the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage. Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024  What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg  
  • 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

RBS CCA request refused due to CCJ


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4654 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

Thanks Paul, I wondered if that decision was behind your concerns ie: subject to the existence of a relevant provision in D&D's contract, the post judgment interest is not merged with the judgment but, by reason of that contractual provision, a liability for it endures and, since any action for its recovery will necessarily require reliance on the contractual provision. Where better to find that provision than in the contract? [QED].

 

OK and that's good. The thing is and where I was coming from, was that according to D&D, it is the bank's case that (and I quote D&D) 'our Contract/Agreement with them is our CCJ, NOT our original agreements', which suggests to me at least, that the bank is treating the contract as having merged with the judgment so that nothing endures which is actionable independent of the judgment. The adoption of such a position would be consistent with their having destroyed the original agreement. The court would be slow to allow the bank to resile from the position it represented in its statement to D&D and even more slow to allow such a claim in the absence of production of the agreement. This would be so without prejudice to any limitation defences which might be avalable to D&D.

 

DG of Fair Trading v First National Bank [2001] makes it a sure fire given by reason of article 2 that the bank's CCJ does not entitled them to post judgment statutory interest. First National accepted this was so in their situation. Any payments made by D&D will therefore be payments in reduction of the judgment debt and there will be no deduction or off set towards interest or accumulation of interest. If the judgment debt was £1000.00 and was repaid at £100.00 pcm, in ten months, D&D wold be entitled to a certificate of satisfaction of the judgment for it would have been discharged in full.

 

I think Paul, that where you were coming from was affording protection against the risk that a second action for post-judgment interest might be brought. At present, I think there's little risk of that.

 

Interesting though.

 

I'll look at D&D's question shortly. I notice it's gone ten to eleven so I'd best get myself off to the pub!

 

x20

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 305
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi S - unfortunatley for D&D there's already been a second action on this judgment debt by way of a legal charge gained on their property. The charging order was granted on the basis that all interest post judgment is rightly due. (the judge was obviously ignorant of the law even after this was contested)

 

There are now major concerns regarding RBSs internal accounting behaviour that what seems to be going on with their so called "router accounts" maybe contrary to law. I think you'll find out by viewing threads that involve RBS customers that they are witholding documents. Several MPs are now on their case and i believe some form of political action will be forthcoming.

 

I quote from a recent letter to my MP from RBS.

 

"However, as i have explained above, there would NEVER be any intention to charge or to collect this interest from a customer after a judgment is obtained, unless of course the original terms and conditions and, indeed, the judgment itself permits."

 

PW

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's been a second action and a charging order!? How old are this pair? And how come you're a step ahead with the information PW:):confused:

 

Check out the links - i know all about D&Ds case. (and others). Their thread is worth subscribing to.

 

PW

 

How trustworthy is your bank? | Money | The Guardian

 

MP fears bank's phantom paperwork may be just the tip of an iceberg | Money | The Guardian

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would appear that the banks argument would be, that once they got judgement, then they destroyed the agreement which existed when the CCJ was gained. & therefore do not have to substantiate there claim against us.

We have retained all correspondence prior to the CCJ. & with the info from our SAR we can prove that the accounts had been altered without our knowledge or consent. We can provide letters which show the bank was withholding this from us, & we can provide proof that no agreements ever existed for these accounts.

In most cases nowadays, banks encourage people in debt to turn overdraft accounts into loans, & a new agreement is set up & signed. In our case, & others the RBS did this without consulting or informing the customer.

Paul's MP has already asked the bank to explain this action,& to question whether it is legal.

Only in court will we get an answer.

 

Debs

Link to post
Share on other sites

My personal opinion is that the banks behaviour is illegal, they're over cooking their book debt (not good for shareholders) and once the **** its the fan more will come forward.

 

I understand you've involved your MP - any news on that front?

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. <br />

Winston Churchill

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

 

has anyone looked at this www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/rbs_12dec.02.pdf

 

It would appear that the banks failure to retain records & evidence of identity when new accounts are opened constitutes a breach of the Money Laundering Act ,section 7.3.2[1].

 

In 2002 the FSA fined the RBS £750,000 for failing to keep adequate records of accounts opened.

 

Does this mean if they fail to provide a Credit agreement with the correct address, name, & signature, aswell as not complying with a CA Request are they breaching the Money Laundering Act aswell.

 

I also now know who to contact about the audit carried out on our accounts in 1999, something that CMS Telford did not want us to Know.

Accounts are monitored by RBS Group Internal Audit["GIA"].

Anybody else had dealings with them ?

Debs

Link to post
Share on other sites

hi

 

has anyone looked at this www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/rbs_12dec.02.pdf

 

URL not found? I'd be very interested in reading this.

 

 

Cheers

 

BB

BTONBADGER vs

 

HSBC Current Account - Settled £400 and closed acccount.

Egg Loan - Settled £106.32

 

Nat West Current Account - full resolution thanks to BCOB's. Refund of £5k unfair charges and interest plus £80 compensation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTONBADGER vs

 

HSBC Current Account - Settled £400 and closed acccount.

Egg Loan - Settled £106.32

 

Nat West Current Account - full resolution thanks to BCOB's. Refund of £5k unfair charges and interest plus £80 compensation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi All

 

A lot of you will be aware of our problem.

 

We had stopped writing to the Bank a few months ago as we had been recommended to contact a specialist Solicitor. we sent ALL of our documents to this solicitor and they came back to us saying that we had a very good case to have our Judgement 'Set Aside' and therefore our 'Charging Orders' dismissed.

 

They said that they understood the case.

 

They advised us to send them £1000, so that they could employ a Barrister to build the Case. This was done a few months ago. Over the last 3 weeks I have phoned the Solicitor on many occasions to get an update. I have been promised a call back many times, but as yet have had no phone reply.

 

Today we receive a letter from them........here's what it said...

 

Dear Mr D & Mrs D

 

ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND

 

I write further to recent correspondence by way of update. I can confirm that I have now heard back from the Barrister,xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, who has conducted an initial perusal of your case.

 

Following a discussion with your barrister, his initial view is that you do have very good prospects of setting aside judgments obtained against you as they were entered against you some 10 years ago based on an admission. (I think this is a typo, it maybe should read 'do NOT have very good prospect'). On this basis, the barrister's veiw is that this makes your case difficult.

 

He has however indicated that he is happy to provide a more detailed advice and has suggested the following:-

 

1. Mr xxxxx can provide a full advice in relation to your case. He has estimated that this will involve around 6 hours work at a cost of £150.00 per hour plus VAT. You are therefore looking at a cost of around £900.00 plus VAT. Please note that Mr xxxxxx is a senior barrister and this is reflected in his hourly rate.

 

2. The other option is to have a telephone conference without Mr xxxxx fully considering the papers (which you can appreciate, will take some time). This is likely to be less time consuming and therefore cheaper. It may also be cheaper if you used a junior barrister to advise in a telephone conference.

 

In light of the above, please advise me how you wish to proceed based on the above estimated fees and the barrister's initial perusal of your case.

 

I look forward to hearing from you. Should you have any queries or concerns in the meantime then please do not hesitate in contacting me.

 

Yours sincerley

 

Expensive Solicitor

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely the barrister is not aware of the full facts.

 

Are they saying that your case is so open/closed that you don't need a Barrister involved? If so, then yes, and the advice is right, in that you don't need to pay all that out in this case. If not, then probably not...

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Hi all,

 

It's been a while!!

 

Well if trying to resolve matters with the RBS is not enough, it looks as if we have been completely SCR**** by Stephensons.

 

Back in June, our case was passed to Stephensons by a CAG member, we had a whole evening with them at their home [not PW], the CAG member recommended this solicitor as being ideal to handle our case, he made the initial contact with Mark Bowden about our predicament with the RBS.

 

We initailly said to him "This might be difficult because the CCJ is 10 Years old"

 

We then spoke directly with Mark,he was made fully aware from the outset that this was not a straight forwared case,he accepted this, his words were..."I understand your case,you have a case to have this judgement set a side, we have similar cases which we are currently dealing with, we will piggyback your case so as not to duplicate work, I will not look at your case directly, I will pass your case straight over to a barrister. Send me £1000 to pay for the Barristers time."

 

This we did in June.

 

We then recieved confirmation in writing 1 month later ."We have recieved your payment"....we knew this!

 

A phone call form Mark Bowden middle of August, "we are instructing a Barrister to look at your case."

 

September, another letter confirming it had been passed to the barrister[but Mark had already told us this during the phone conversation] & we would be contacted within the next 2/3 weeks with his advice.

 

Then absolutely nothing until that confusing letter on the 17th Oct, which we have already posted.

 

Since then we have phoned repeatedly to find out what is going on. Not once have we been able to speak with Mr Bowden, all we get is his STAFF, who have no idea what is going on.

 

So, today.

 

We phone yet again, after being promised last thursday that Mr Bowden would call back that day. He didn't.

 

We were told that an interim bill had been sent yesterday. It wasn't recieved today, so we got them to send it by email........you won't believe this guys, but not only has Mr Bowden & his staff spent every single penny of our £1000 they want yet another £300.

 

So far the only advice that they have given us is......."This might be difficult because the CCJ is 10 years old"

 

WE TOLD HIM THIS ON DAY ONE!!!!

 

We'll post the breakdown of their bill later just for a laugh! £9.50 for every time that WE called them to ask what's going on.....Close to £200 worth!!!

 

Any comments would be appreciated.

 

D&D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand why they gave you that advice as because judgment was given on admission by the defendant the court would be reluctant to look behind that judgment - especially after such a long time as 10 years.........are you sure you understood correctly?

 

Did they confirm in writing how fees were to be applied?

 

What terms of business did you sign?

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi josie,

 

This is the problem, our case is not easy.

 

The bulk of our indebtedness to the RBS was for an overdraft on a business current account. In Nov 1997 the bank told us that our account numbers were changing because our accounts were being moved from our branch to Edinburgh.

 

It was these "NEW" accounts which were detailed in the CCJ.

 

When we did our SAR in April, it was to calculate exactly how much of our debt was interest & charges[we have not recieved any statements since 1993].Our debt on the CCJ was £58000, we have for the first time been able to calculated that £46000 of this is debt is charges & interest.

 

The bank refused to give us this information prior to the CCJ.

 

But we also discovered in April, the accounts were being referred to as Loan Capital & interest accounts. What they had done, without our knowledge or consent, was to close all our current accounts in June 1996. And open Loan accounts.

 

They also used a guarantee in 1997 from a business loan that had been discharged in 1996, to make it appear on their system & their solicitors that these loans were secured by my parents house.

 

What we want to establish is.

 

Can a bank alter a customers account without there knowldge or consent ?

In using the guarantee. Did they break the law?

 

By not disclosing to us & the courts the true identity of the "NEW" accounts when they applied the CCJ. If the information contained within the CCJ is innaccurate. How does this affect it's validity ?

 

These were the issues which we wanted to raise.

 

Debbie

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi josie,

 

This is the problem, our case is not easy.

 

The bulk of our indebtedness to the RBS was for an overdraft on a business current account. In Nov 1997 the bank told us that our account numbers were changing because our accounts were being moved from our branch to Edinburgh.

 

It was these "NEW" accounts which were detailed in the CCJ.

 

When we did our S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) in April, it was to calculate exactly how much of our debt was interest & charges[we have not recieved any statements since 1993].Our debt on the CCJ was £58000, we have for the first time been able to calculated that £46000 of this is debt is charges & interest.

 

The bank refused to give us this information prior to the CCJ.

 

But we also discovered in April, the accounts were being referred to as Loan Capital & interest accounts. What they had done, without our knowledge or consent, was to close all our current accounts in June 1996. And open Loan accounts.

 

They also used a guarantee in 1997 from a business loan that had been discharged in 1996, to make it appear on their system & their solicitors that these loans were secured by my parents house.

 

What we want to establish is.

 

Can a bank alter a customers account without there knowldge or consent ?

In using the guarantee. Did they break the law?

 

By not disclosing to us & the courts the true identity of the "NEW" accounts when they applied the CCJ. If the information contained within the CCJ is innaccurate. How does this affect it's validity ?

 

These were the issues which we wanted to raise.

 

Debbie

 

 

I would think the only possible course of action is not to make application for set aside but to apply for leave to appeal on the grounds that you have only just discovered that the Particulars of claim were erroneous as debt wasn't current accounts but loans which had not been signed for by you.

 

How much were the loans for before extra interest was added? If they were under the regulated amount a ground of appeal would be that the loans were unenforceable becuase you hadn't signed any agreement and then the courts can rule on enforceability. However ten years is a long time and it will depend on strength of evidence you have available.

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Josie,

 

It was the Solicitor who said we had a case for set a side. But your right, because the CCJ is 10 years old, we always thought this was a difficult route to take. He was fully aware of this from the beginning. At no point did he consider this to be a major issue.

 

What is our case ?

 

This is what we believed a barrister would decide. This is what we paid £1000 to Stephensons for. Our money is gone, used on punative charges, & we still don't have an answer to any of our questions. We still have absolutely no idea what direction our case should take, or whether or not we even have a case. Stephensons want MORE money, so they can continue......but with what. For the last 2 months they have refused to communicate with us.

 

As for the "NEW" loan accounts. No agreements exist for these accounts. In May we asked RBS to provide all documentation in relation to the set up of these accounts. CMS refused, on the grounds that they have already obtained judgement.

 

Despite this happening in 1996, we have retained all origonal letters recieved from the bank. We can prove in court that they did not inform us what was going on. Infact we can now show they were deliberatly withholding vital information from us. We did a SAR on the banks solicitor, the info passed to them differs from what they were telling us.

 

Debbie

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 days or 10 years - it doesn't matter. If you have grounds for setting aside, you have grounds, regardless of the timescale involved. CPR states the Court should consider how quickly the application for a set aside is made, but that would be how quickly after discovering you have grounds for setting aside that you apply. Judgments years old have been set aside before, on the basis that Court papers weren't received, amongst other reasons, which can be seen on this forum.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is far more difficult to get set aside after a long period. If you can put forward potential unenforceability arguments then the appropriate procedure according to Goode & the White book is to ask for leave to appeal though I know set aside of judgments are granted for same if relatively recent.

 

What was the amount that was converted into the so called loan before intertest & charges were put on?

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

are you able to say that the agreement is defective at all?

 

If so you can bring freestanding proceedings to obtain a declaration pursuant to section 142 CCA which would render the judgment useless in anycase

Link to post
Share on other sites

even better if you can do s.142 route as PT says - thats why i wanted to know loan amount

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

are you able to say that the agreement is defective at all?

 

If so you can bring freestanding proceedings to obtain a declaration pursuant to section 142 CCA which would render the judgment useless in anycase

 

Wouldn't that, effectively, be an application to set the Judgment aside though, Paul? I can't see the Court dealing with a s.142 application without wanting to see the original Judgment being set aside first, IMHO. Also, the CCJ is a cause of action on it's own, so getting the s.142 application granted would still mean the CCJ is enforceable via the Court, until it is set aside.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't that, effectively, be an application to set the Judgment aside though, Paul? I can't see the Court dealing with a s.142 application without wanting to see the original Judgment being set aside first, IMHO. Also, the CCJ is a cause of action on it's own, so getting the s.142 application granted would still mean the CCJ is enforceable via the Court, until it is set aside.

 

 

No as PT says a s.142 declaration can be applied for at any time to determine the rights of the parties (i.e. enforceable or not). If court declares actual agreement to be unenforceable then all enforcement proceedings halt.

You may receive different advice to your query as people have different experiences and opinions. Please use your own judgement in deciding whose advice to take.

 

If in doubt seek advice from a qualified insured professional. Any advice I have offered you is done so on an informal basis, without prejudice or liability.

 

If you think I have been helpful PLEASE click the scales

 

court bundles for dummies

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...