Jump to content


HFC/weightmans Marbles Card CO and it's Assignment to Phoenix


tedney
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 662 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

Well my thought would be, assuming the Charge is backed up by a Court Order then it stays with the OC.

 

If, by voluntary you mean an Agreement only, not a Court Case, then not so sure.

 

OK, thanks, letter states

 

"We give you notice that the above named Assignee has acquired from the above named Assignor

all of the Assignor's rights in relation to your above detailed account

and any charging order / voluntary charge registered by the Assignor in respect of the debt due under that account.

 

This means that the creditor under your above account (and the beneficiiary of any charge registered against your property)

is now PHOENIX RECOVERIES (UK) LIMITED s.a.r.l. (my capitals) and

 

all amounts due under the account are due to Phoenix.

 

The balance currently owed is £incorrect (monies added, in any event was not as shown on charging document).

 

Under the terms of the assignment, Phoenix is now the data controller of your personal data

contained in the records of the account (as defined in the data protection act 1998.

 

Phoenix has the same rights and obligations as the Assignor to give information to CRA's. ..

 

... Phoenix will comply with any request for a copy of the presonal info.......

 

....please send £10 to us (solicitor).

 

Charge was unfortunately, (pre finding CAG), agreed voluntarily.

 

Looking at recent posts on other threads, there may be two issues (or more?)

 

1. The OC using a SD to force Voluntarily Charge and

2. Can charge be transferred to DCA?

 

Following receipt of that letter (nearly 2 years ago now)

I made an SAR to OC which made no mention of assignement, but was marked as "charged off"

 

I have been reading the issues surrounding Phoenix on some other threads, not sure of up to date thoughts on that though.

 

Apart from letter from solicitor who acted for OC and also for Phoenix

 

I have had nothing from OC in respect of the charge.

 

Any thoughts/help would be welcome.

Edited by tedney
removed emoticon put in by mistake!
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

OK, you say that the original SAR contained no documentation referring to the VC. That to me is very interesting because how are they going to prove it existed should they want to act on it?

 

Personally I have not had dealings with Phoenix so would not be able to say if the letter you have received (mentioning VC) is actually just a standard template letter they send out.

 

I am presuming there have never been any CCJ's or Court Orders, so can you tell me what the debt was for, and how long ago so that we can decide the best course of action.

 

Hopefully you have not acknowledged anything to Phoenix either over the 'phone or in writing so that we have a clear playing field.

Every journey begins with a single step :):)

 

Please note: I have no qualifications in this area - my advice is learned from the wonderful members of this Forum. Thanks to you all for your help.

 

If you have found my post helpful please leave a short message by clicking the star to the left of my profile - Thank You

 

The only person entitled to your Personal Finance details is a Judge not a DCA

 

Move all banking activity to another banking group if you have a dispute - your funds can be used to offset debts within the same group.

Be careful with Banking details (card/account numbers) as these can be used to take unauthorised payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

phoenix eh, i had a few friends have letters from them, all of which had no address on them, just a phone number.

Complaint to companies house sent them packing lol, just make sure they put their address on the top of the letters.

question everything!

Link to post
Share on other sites

these fools are based in luxemburg so are they entilted to carry out this threat

PGH7447

 

 

Getting There Slowly

---------

 

Advice is given freely but is in no way meant to be taken as Gospel:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

Having read some other threads, and recently receiving some other information too. Does anyone have an up to date on Phoenix please?

Edited by tedney
typos
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

UPDATE

Just found this on the OFT web site. http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/press_release_attachments/HFC-requirements.pdf

 

As my situation was before this ruling, but encompassed some of the items mentioned, large increase in sum owed, unreasonable behaviour (not responding to and denying receipt of "signed for" letters, etc. Can I use this to remove charge. Any Thoughts welcome. Thanks t

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hello everyone!

On looking through posts generally, and specifically reading Brigadier2JCS's post no. 14 on here

:http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/fowthread.php?431146-Grandfather-had-died-but-has-debts-what-to-do

it prompted me to ask a question.

 

Facts: I have a charge in favour of a card provider on my house (debt incurred in my name, house in joint name with OH)

Charge was made before I found this site, and in response to SD and bankruptcy threats.

 

I was paying off regular amounts before charge, and after DN and have continued to pay monthly amounts, not missing any.

 

Payments are made directly to the card provider.

 

Since the charge, debt has been "assigned" twice,

but I only have a solicitors word for this, nothing from the OC.

The charge is showing on the Land Registry site as being in favour of the OC.

 

My question is:

As the debt has been "assigned",

in order for the charge to be effective,

shouldn't the Land Registry details reflect the alleged current owner of the debt?

 

Surely a third party cannot claim a charge in this way?

 

Any advice and/or help welcome.

 

Thanks. t

Link to post
Share on other sites

you cant have a CO on a joint home?

only a restriction.?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone!

On looking through posts generally, and specifically reading Brigadier2JCS's post no. 14 on here:http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/fowthread.php?431146-Grandfather-had-died-but-has-debts-what-to-do it prompted me to ask a question.

Facts: I have a charge in favour of a card provider on my house (debt incurred in my name, house in joint name with OH) Charge was made before I found this site, and in response to SD and bankruptcy threats.

I was paying off regular amounts before charge, and after DN and have continued to pay monthly amounts, not missing any. Payments are made directly to the card provider. Since the charge, debt has been "assigned" twice, but I only have a solicitors word for this, nothing from the OC. The charge is showing on the Land Registry site as being in favour of the OC.

My question is: As the debt has been "assigned", in order for the charge to be effective, shouldn't the Land Registry details reflect the alleged current owner of the debt? Surely a third party cannot claim a charge in this way? Any advice and/or help welcome. Thanks. t

 

 

 

You would be wise to check your credit ref. files to see who is registered as the owner of the debt.

 

 

The debt may have been "assigned" to a 3rd party for collection/management only.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

These debt purchase companies, one of which claims to have been assigned the debt which is the subject of the Charging Order, can be a bit slow on the uptake.

 

However, their failure to update the Land Registry has no legal effect on the Order itself, even though it would be normal to request the Court to vary the judgement in favour of the new assignee, and then update the LR. If the previous assignee was paid accidentally then they would be obliged to pass the money to the new assignee.

 

It isn't quite correct to say that a CO cannot be made on jointly-owned property. It can, but it's unusual to request one because obtaining a Sale Order would be virtually impossible (the other joint owner has a right not to be disturbed).

 

If you jointly sell the property in the future then the CO will have to be satisfied from the OP's share of equity in the house, with the joint owner remaining unaffected. However, if the OP's equity is insufficient then the beneficiary of the CO could theoretically block the sale, so their permission should be sought beforehand.

 

If the debt is repaid before any sale then the CO should be removed and the LR record updated to its previous, unrestricted state.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

how old is the debt the CO concerns

 

 

ever looked at PPI/PENALTY charges reclaiming to reduce whats owed?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You would be wise to check your credit ref. files to see who is registered as the owner of the debt.

 

The debt may have been "assigned" to a 3rd party for collection/management only.

 

Debt not showing on files anymore, as over the time limit.

 

Last statement received was from 2nd assignee, though statement shows all payments which are being made to OC,

who the charge is registered to.

 

I have had letters from same solicitors,

who have acted for OC as well as allegedly 1st and 2nd assignees saying words to the effect that "

all benefits/conditions of debt now passed on to assignees, who now own the debt"

 

I could look up exact wording if you think that relevant.

 

Indeed at one stage this one debt was being reported to the CRA's as three by the various parties!

 

Last "assignment" was made some considerable time ago, more than 1 year anyway.

 

Incidentally, the debt was shown as "satisfied" by the OC, when it was being reported to the CRA's.

Link to post
Share on other sites

These debt purchase companies, one of which claims to have been assigned the debt which is the subject of the Charging Order, can be a bit slow on the uptake.

 

However, their failure to update the Land Registry has no legal effect on the Order itself, even though it would be normal to request the Court to vary the judgement in favour of the new assignee, and then update the LR. If the previous assignee was paid accidentally then they would be obliged to pass the money to the new assignee.

 

It isn't quite correct to say that a CO cannot be made on jointly-owned property. It can, but it's unusual to request one because obtaining a Sale Order would be virtually impossible (the other joint owner has a right not to be disturbed).

 

If you jointly sell the property in the future then the CO will have to be satisfied from the OP's share of equity in the house, with the joint owner remaining unaffected. However, if the OP's equity is insufficient then the beneficiary of the CO could theoretically block the sale, so their permission should be sought beforehand.

 

If the debt is repaid before any sale then the CO should be removed and the LR record updated to its previous, unrestricted state.

 

Thanks for this, when it comes to sale, I will have to find an efficient solictor/conveyancer. Thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

how old is the debt the CO concerns

 

 

ever looked at PPI/PENALTY charges reclaiming to reduce whats owed?

 

 

dx

 

Debt dates from 2007. No PPI, tried for charges but refused, have not pursued this yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Debt not showing on files anymore, as over the time limit. Last statement received was from 2nd assignee, though statement shows all payments which are being made to OC, who the charge is registered to. I have had letters from same solicitors, who have acted for OC as well as allegedly 1st and 2nd assignees saying words to the effect that " all benefits/conditions of debt now passed on to assignees, who now own the debt" I could look up exact wording if you think that relevant. Indeed at one stage this one debt was being reported to the CRA's as three by the various parties!

Last "assignment" was made some considerable time ago, more than 1 year anyway. Incidentally, the debt was shown as "satisfied" by the OC, when it was being reported to the CRA's.

 

 

Sight of these assignment may be very informative!

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sight of these assignment may be very informative!

 

Thanks, what would be the best way to obtain please? From the OC or their solicitor (who also acts for the assignees)?

 

Would I need to see both 1st and 2nd assignments?

 

I seem to remember reading on other threads on here that OC's (and presumably their agents/solicitors) refuse to provide or are very reluctant to provide actual copies of assignments to debtors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is slightly incorrect. A CO cannot be placed on a jointly owned property. It would be a Restriction and permission would not be needed to sell. Also, although most people would satisfy the CO from the debtors share of the equity, not doing so would not prevent the sale if done properly and you have a good conveyancer who knows the law in this area. The creditor just needs to be notified, it's all about timing.

 

There's plenty of info on this on CAG if you read around this issue. Plenty of people have sold property without paying the restriction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

These debt purchase companies, one of which claims to have been assigned the debt which is the subject of the Charging Order, can be a bit slow on the uptake.

 

However, their failure to update the Land Registry has no legal effect on the Order itself, even though it would be normal to request the Court to vary the judgement in favour of the new assignee, and then update the LR. If the previous assignee was paid accidentally then they would be obliged to pass the money to the new assignee.

 

It isn't quite correct to say that a CO cannot be made on jointly-owned property. It can, but it's unusual to request one because obtaining a Sale Order would be virtually impossible (the other joint owner has a right not to be disturbed).

 

If you jointly sell the property in the future then the CO will have to be satisfied from the OP's share of equity in the house, with the joint owner remaining unaffected. However, if the OP's equity is insufficient then the beneficiary of the CO could theoretically block the sale, so their permission should be sought beforehand.

 

If the debt is repaid before any sale then the CO should be removed and the LR record updated to its previous, unrestricted state.

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for confirming my thought

 

tedney

 

what was the original credit and who with

 

who got the CO against you

and did they get an CCJ first.

 

name names tell us dates

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is slightly incorrect. A CO cannot be placed on a jointly owned property. It would be a Restriction and permission would not be needed to sell. Also, although most people would satisfy the CO from the debtors share of the equity, not doing so would not prevent the sale if done properly and you have a good conveyancer who knows the law in this area. The creditor just needs to be notified, it's all about timing.

 

There's plenty of info on this on CAG if you read around this issue. Plenty of people have sold property without paying the restriction.

 

Thanks for this. However, the phrase on the Land Register is: "Charge dated ** *** 2007 in favour of HFC Bank Limited"

Would this still be described as a "restriction" please? Thx t

 

what was the original credit and who with who got the CO against you

and did they get an CCJ first.

dx

Hello dx

The OC is Marbles, their solicitor, Weightmans, pushed for charging order by consent, which was granted in 2007 without a CCJ. Debt was over £9K. Wish I had known about CAG then. t

Link to post
Share on other sites

oh god not hfc/weightmans.

 

you got done over there for sure.

 

did you ever send HFC an SAR

to get all the statements

 

I bet 50%+ of that debt was PPI and unlawful PENALTY charges

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since 2003, when the law changed, only a restriction can be registered for a sole debt when property is jointly owned. Post exactly what the land registry entry says in full.

 

 

 

Thanks for this. However, the phrase on the Land Register is: "Charge dated ** *** 2007 in favour of HFC Bank Limited"

Would this still be described as a "restriction" please? Thx t

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since 2003, when the law changed, only a restriction can be registered for a sole debt when property is jointly owned. Post exactly what the land registry entry says in full.

 

Here is the exact entry: Charges Register This register contains any charges and other matters that affect the land.

6. (15.06.2007) Charge dated 19 April 2007 in favour of HFC Bank Limited.

 

3 of first 5 entries pertain to matters concerning access rights over the property, and 2 concerning the original mortgage and the change of name of bank for the mortgage, not connected with entry number 6 stated above.

 

Thanks t

 

oh god not hfc/weightmans.

you got done over there for sure.

Y

did you ever send HFC an SAR

to get all the statements

 

I bet 50%+ of that debt was PPI and unlawful PENALTY charges

 

Hello dx

You are not wrong with your first statement.

 

W. did not respond to signed for letters,

denied receipt of signed for letters,

changed deadlines arbitrarily,

even though I had complied with initial deadline.

 

Tried to add in excess of £1500 to the debt.

All this was BC = (before CAG)!

 

Yes, I had statements anyway,

but I did SAR HFC

 

interestingly they were showing payments I made on the account even after the alleged "first assignment"

 

No PPI, some charges which they refused to reimburse

 

got their "we think they are lawful" response"

 

That was a few years ago now,

 

I have not pursued. t

Link to post
Share on other sites

A restriction would start by saying "No disposition of the registered estate......."

 

Did your partner sign anything agreeing to a CO?

 

 

 

 

 

Hello dx

The OC is Marbles, their solicitor, Weightmans, pushed for charging order by consent, which was granted in 2007 without a CCJ. Debt was over £9K. Wish I had known about CAG then. t

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear,

 

then you've been had.

 

Bet they didn't explain the difference between CO and Restrictions.

 

They've made this into a joint debt, very devious of them.

 

I'd try and have it removed if possible.

 

Have you still got a copy of what you both signed.

 

Wat did it say?

 

Yes, debt was in my name.
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...