Ccj Behind My Back Now Natwest Want A Charging Order On My Home

[deviousbank]

Hi all - Can anyone please give me some advise...

 

Having had a CCJ entered against me behind my back by natwest -

They have now - 2 years on - applied for a re-assessment -

Fair enough one might say.

However -

The CCJ was for a joint debt - for that of me and my ex partner some 8 years ago.

Also - the CCJ was only entered in my name

Only I have been making repayments for the last 2 years

And now - they are applying for a charging order against my home -

 

Would I be correct in thinking - that as I have not defaulted on even one payment- that they are unable to apply for a charging order - and also -

that they can not apply for a charging order for the sum of £11,000 - against my home - when this is a joint debt!! -

that only I have been making repayments on!

 

They say in their letter to the court that the reason they want a charging order is that the debt is unsecured and that at my repayment rate - that the debt will take 20 years to repay. (I pay £50/pm)

 

What they dont say in their letter to the court is that this is a joint debt - that I am the only person who is making repayments.

The did actually recently send a letter to my ex partner - to my address !! - which I have passed onto him - however - I dont have a home address for him - so I have no address details to give to the court which I happily would do- come the court date in one months time.

(If i did have his address - I would have given it to the Child support agency !! as Im battling that also.)

I am also heavily pregnant - and this is really stressing me out.

I am a single mother - I work might I add - however - my wages dont even cover my bills !! I rely on tax credits to make ends meat.

 

All advise welcomed!!

Many thanks in anticipation of your help and advise

[tendogs]

Have a look at this and see if it helps, if not, get back.

 

Dogs

[tendogs]

Oops here is the link, sorry, http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/173109-urgent-help-regarding-charging.html

[deviousbank]

Thankyou for the link.- was very informative.

I will write to both the court and Natwest and notify them of my intention

to attend and as to why I dispute their application.

 

Will now look into the case of Mercantile Credit Co Ltd v Ellis 1987

and arm myself with comparrisons to quote.

[deviousbank]

Also, wanted to add - that the documentation I have received from the court is a :

Notice of hearing of application.

Will any decisions be made on the date and time given - or will there be a further hearing?

[tendogs]

They issue an interim charging order following the first hearing then the full job later.

[tendogs]

Good luck with this, it is a matter close to my heart. Get back and let us know what the outcome is.

[deviousbank]

Well, having been to court today, the judge has decided to make the order 'forthwith' as per natwests request ! - a change of the terms of the initial ccj.

However, as I cant magic 11k they have therefore decided to grant natwests application for a charging order!

Even having quoted case law on the above - Even though the Judge herself said the law has not yet changed - but it is going to change to where a charging order can be made even though you havent defaulted on any ccj repayments - so she's granted their application even though the law does not yet allow it!

 

I now have to wait for a new court date where I can only again battle my case - seemingly on deaf ears.

Also, as this is a joint debt - Both natwests snotty solicitor and the judge have said that the debt was 'joint and several' and that they are satisfied by just chasing me for the whole debt. -

I said how can this be fair and just as per the civil procedure rules!!

to no avail.

They again quoted that at my payment rate the debt would take 20 years to repay - and I reminded them that if they bothered to go so far as enforcing payment from the other may i add jointly liable party that the debt would be repayed at the most in 10 years.

But no, they just want a charging order against MY house for the full amount to secure a Joint debt.

The judge then said that she would make a remark on the order that Natwest have said that they are not looking to enforce sale of my property - that the order is for security purposes.

 

So, because I am law abiding , because I had my mail rediredcted tome having moved almost 3 years ago - having kept natwest upto date with my contact details, having made payments myself alone for more than 2 years, now they are lumping me with the whole debt, and should i then not pay like my ex partner - then i will lose my home - unlike my ex who loses nothing!

 

Where is the justice in this land -

I wish this case today had been heard by a magistrates judge - they are 'lay' people - and supposidly use their common sence - as oposed to district judges who in my oppinion have none.

Angry, dissapointed, frustraited, and out of pocket for a joint debt that i didnt even run up, as i had no control over the finances in the domineering relationship i was in at the time.

 

And, to put the cherry on the cake - !!!!!!

The ccj was only entered against myself,

a ccj being for a set sum.

I have received 2 letters from a debt recovery agency addressed to my ex partner at my home address -

and , the payments i have made for the last 2 years - it would appear have been for nothing - as the letters state the debt now stands at over £13k!!!!!! over 2 thousand pounds in charges have been added to send 2 letters -

charges added to an amount previously determined by a judge.

I am at my wits end I really am.

Now Natwest will just sit back for the next god knows how long - waiting for me to forget to make a payment - or to make a payment late - so that they can pounce and take my home from underneath me.

 

Who can i turn to for help with this?????????????????????????????????????

Anyone???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

[deviousbank]

also, the judge said that if i want my ex to make repayments to this debt - then it is for me to chase him to make contributuions

this whole matter is past farsical!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[paulwlton]

Firstly I suggest you make a full SAR this will determine whether Natwest are applying post judgment interest. Secondly, Send a CCA section 77 request this will determine whether they are entitled to apply such interest. I take it your account is at Telford?

 

Paul

[deviousbank]

Hi,

The account is indeed held with Telford.

I am going to the charging order hearing this afternoon.

 

It would seem that there is absolutely nothing I can do

(except enter the court - bend over and assume the position )

while I get well and truely shafted.

 

All I can 'respectfully ask' is that they dont enforce any order of sale untill my youngest child is 18. That gives me 17 years and 8 months to get this paid off.

 

I am of the conclusion that there is no justice in this country.

While I , a law abideing citizen , having always advised Natwest of my location, am now 'lumbered' with this very large black cloud over my name and house.

 

In all honesty I wouldnt feel so bad if I had actually got to spend any of this money !!!!!!!! it would be 'a fair cop as such'

but it was spent by my domineering and controling ex partner, who has never advised Natwest of where he lives hence - he has 'escaped this debt in full'

 

If it is a financially viable option then I am fully prepared to pursue my ex partner though the courts to make him contribute to this debt. (total value £12.000 approx)

Thoughts on this and similar experiences most welcomed !!

 

 

Im so angry about all of this

AAaaarrrghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

 

Hopeing for a miricle this afternoon!!!!!!

[deviousbank]

MIRACLES CAN HAPPEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Well, I attended court this afternoon - However, Natwest did not ...

This resulted in the judge striking out Natwest's application for the charging order, and the judge confirmed to me that the land registry will be notified and the interim charging order will also be removed.

 

I am simply to continue making my repayments as per the CCJ.

 

This does not however stop Natwest from re-pursueing this through the courts once again. The judge did say that each case is taken on its merits - so should they re pursue this charging order, then their non appearance today will be taken into account.

 

 

-

I was going to question Aprils interim hearing - where the terms of the CCJ were varied (forthwith) - and the fact that the interim charging order was granted , as I have read on another website ((Having frantically searched the internet this morning looking for a last minute answer to all my prayers-)) that these 2 items should take place at seperate hearings and not at the same time ?! -

- also a few days after the interim hearing I spoke to the court clerk as I had received the interim order through the post - with errors -so I had those ammended - and she at that time informed me that it would be resent to myself and Natwest - she made no mention of my mortgage lender being notified - as it is my understanding that all parties that have an interest in the property should be advised -

 

Will my mortgage lender have been advised about all of this ??

Will this affect me once my fixed term comes to an end and I need a new mortgage deal?

 

 

My next move however will be to seek legal advise re the initial CCJ and the manner in which Natwest ensured I received it !!

 

Absolutely gob smacked.

1 - 0 to the little man!!!!!!!!! (for now anyways)

[DES_1001]

well done

[stripper]

Excellent news:)

Good read first thing in the morning!!

[42man]

Did you ever apply an N244 to set aside the original CCJ ?

[42man]

Removal of CCJ's - Step by step guide to the process

[deviousbank]

Have received a letter from the land registry today ...

shoesmiths on behalf of Natwest have obtained an interim charging order and it has been duely placed upon my property.

its dated the 30th oct - 1st ive heard about it

Ive received no documentation from natwest or the court!!!!!

 

Ive rang the court and they tell me the whole battle is to recommence on the 17th Dec

These people are relentless!! - Just before christmas - Merry Christmas hey !!

 

Ive got a letter from the court dated 12.10.09 saying charging order to be struck off etc - but due to non attendance from either party - I was there!!

So now Ive got to write to the court telling them the details from the judge was wrong - get that order ammended and hope the newly ammended order stating last times interim charging order was struck out due to natwests non attendance

(the judge said to me at the time that their non attendance will be taken into consideration should this return to court - so i think its imperative i get that resolved asap -and wave the new one around on the 17th)

 

 

......mentally exhausted by this whole thing

[paulwlton]

Was the CCJ obtained on a regulated agreement?

[deviousbank]

Hello,

The CCJ came from 2x overdrafts and 1 x loan.

which may I add still to this date I have not defaulted on.

The CCJ was altered to forthwith in October.

 

As this debt stems from joint backaccounts -

having some understanding of the law in this area I now understand that they can put the whole debt onto me alone (very unfair) by means of this charging order.

 

however - Can they legally origionally have just issued one party to this debt with the ccj and defaults ?

[exasperated]

Hi DB,

What a nightmare, I thought I had been harshly treated when I got my CO but yours is miles worse.

The crux of the matter is as you say can they issue proceedings, ccj etc to one party when clearly this is a joint debt. I am afraid I don't know whether they can or know any case law but surely if they are succesful it can only be for 50% of the debt.

You can pursue your ex through the courts and it seems that is what you need to do if they are succesful in obtaining the CO.

If I were you I would click on the red triangle and ask the site team if they think this thread would be better served in the legal forum as you would benefit from the legal 'caggers' in building your defence

[DeRichleau]

I am so sorry about this deviousbank. It underlines something I have thought for a long time. They go for the easy targets, and as you describe yourself, the law abiding citizens. Some people might be tempted to draw a moral from all of this that might read 'Dont tell them your new address, dont send them any money, dont admit you owe them any money, dont own property but rent,, and never take out a joint loan. Of course this is no help to you.You are in the right place for help and I will take my bleeding heart elswhere. Listen to 42Man he's good!

Edited November 21, 2009 by DeRichleau

[thescorpion]

Hi DB,

What a nightmare, I thought I had been harshly treated when I got my CO but yours is miles worse.

The crux of the matter is as you say can they issue proceedings, ccj etc to one party when clearly this is a joint debt. I am afraid I don't know whether they can or know any case law but surely if they are succesful it can only be for 50% of the debt.

You can pursue your ex through the courts and it seems that is what you need to do if they are succesful in obtaining the CO.

If I were you I would click on the red triangle and ask the site team if they think this thread would be better served in the legal forum as you would benefit from the legal 'caggers' in building your defence

 

Can anyone confirm if Mercantile Credit Co Ltd v Ellis is case law/legal precedent? If it is a legal precedent, I don't understand why the judge has said that each case is on its own merits. I also don't understand why NatWest didn't show up at the hearing. Where is the case being heard?

[supasnooper]

Mercantile Credit v Ellis (1987) is a very important case law.

 

It states that a charging order should only be made if the payments on a judgment are in arrears or you were ordered to pay the judgment in one lump sum immediately (forthwith) and didn't pay.

If you are in this situation and still have an interim charging order made, you MUST go to the hearing and take evidence that you have kept up with the instalments ordered and mention this case to the district judge.

[DeRichleau]

This is just my opinion DB but the best thing I ever did was get out of home ownership. I know all the reasons that are put forward for owning property, and the problems with children especially if they are school age, but this debt is just going to rise. Now they have got a charging order they are going to eat away at your equity until there is little or nothing left, so what is the point? Get it sold give them the money, and keep the rest of the equity for your self. If there is no equity in the property then you have even less to lose, because the debt will eventually exceed any future equity, and you will still end up with nought. This is the problem with equity release schemes as I am sure you know. There is no shame in renting, in fact you may end up with somewhere better. I did. I am in a beautiful little cottage (well goody for me!) I would honestly consider it though. Take a (long) breather, and then decide what you what to do about that Ex. of yours if anything. Sorry if this is not what you want to hear, but the three options are sell up, or a long drawn out expensive court battle, or a rising debt that will leave you out of pocket. I genuinely hope I am wrong, but I dont think I am. Things will get better eventualy.

 

PS. Just read the thread above that arrived as I was typeing this diatribe, and there is some hope there if you want to take the legal route. Best of luck.

DR

[supasnooper]

........and make sure you apply for costs when have to attend on the 17th December as Shoosmiths are being totally vexatious by applying for an Interim Charging Order when a previous Interim Charging Order application has been dismissed.

Edited November 30, 2009 by supasnooper
"previous ICO" came up as Information Commissioners Office.....grrr