Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi.   Could you let us have the information requested in the forum sticky please? This will help us to advise you. In the meantime don't worry too much about this.     HB  
    • So last August my girlfriend went to Legoland with the kids (4 & 8) and her mum and then went to Pizza Express in Windsor. They parked at Castle Car Park.    They paid to park and went to eat. They were then a few minutes late back. There was already an attendant issuing a ticket. The attendant then waited until my girlfriend was over ten minutes late to issue the ticket despite her being there well within any grace period.   My girlfriend appealed to Ultimate Customer Solutions end of August but did not receive a response (they later said they emailed a rejection which my girlfriend never received until it was resent). Then in August she received the first debt collection letter. Then my girlfriend was advised to respond to UCS requesting an Subject Access Request (SAR) which they have not ever acknowledged or responded to.    So then we thought they had gone away until we received a letter from CSB solicitors (same address as UCS) advising they would be beginning court proceedings against my girlfriend. I told my girlfriend to complain that they haven't responded to any of our requests so she called the number of UCS and was basically accused of being rude to the t*** at the end of the phone. She wasn't but he wasn't very helpful and said they had responded to the appeal and sent it again. This was on the 16th January 2020.    On the 29th Jan this was sent after another chase to the solicitors:   I have reported UK Parkings ltd to the ICO as they are in beach of GDPR having ignored my SAR request. Further to this I was not notified that my initial appeal had been rejected and therefore cannot further appeal in a standard way and therefore I am awaiting further advice for ways to appeal against this unfair PCN.   As it stands should you decide to further contact me in regards to this matter without good cause I shall be seeking legal advice as per my statutory rights.   My girlfriend then received another letter from UCS threatening debt collectors (I told her not to worry about this) and so she wrote to the solicitors asking for an update:   Email dated 21/02/2020 I am writing to you regarding my email sent on 29th January, below. I still have not received a response from you and I left a voicemail for a solicitor to call me from CSB Solicitors, which I have also not received. I would like to speak to a solicitor regarding this PCN.   The solicitor responded via email the following: Dear Madam,   Thank you for your email.   Following your email below, we reverted this matter back to our Client for their instructions. We will only be able to respond more fully once these are received.   At this stage we have no further instructions other than to send out a letter to you dated 16 January 2020.   We hope to be able to respond more fully once these are received.   Yours faithfully,   Solicitor   So UCS are not actually doing anything they should do but nobody we have complained to has actually come back to us so not sure where to take this because I don't have time for court and I would rather just have someone take the (insert appropriate word here) to task on these unbelievably poor practices!   Any advice on next steps?   Thanks    
    • Hi Sneezer and thanks for your Site Donation which is much needed and much appreciated.   The info from the "Solicitor" makes sense if you were complaining about how CRS came to have your contact details. However, this is not relevant to your case. You didn't cancel properly and carried on paying for a gym you didn't use.   For the future, see the Guide here about how to cancel a contract properly and avoid trouble - https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/383678-cancelling-your-gym-agreement-get-it-right/     Come back anytime to update us but don't worry about CRS or anyone else who makes demands. Let us know if you need more for advice and reassurance.    
    • They were communicating with lawyers associated to me too   They can’t serve a SD on your lawyers, only you.   As I said earlier - the lawyer stopped communicating  around the date on the SD they incorrectly served.  And the bank told me the receiver was now handling things and not to deal with them anymore.   The receiver never asked me where I was.  But he did email and I did reply or he did get auto reply.   Since I did have email communication with them - I don't think they could say they did everything possible to find me,  All they had to do was ask!  And then we could have discussed the situation.    It almost is the reverse - they did nothing to try find me.  And if a PI is employed to do surveillance then he must have realised only one person - the wrong one - lived at the  wrong address.   Does anyone have any info re post #26 and #28 above?   The property is being marketed for sale and the receiver is negotiating offers, so there was no reason for me to expect bank/ lawyers to be trying to locate me to serve any papers.      Surely any loss to them has to be proven upon an agreed sale.  It hasn't sold yet,   They may still get a high enough offer to prevent any large debt?  There could then be a different discussion re terms of repayment?   So I was not expecting anyone to be trying to find me!   But this is a bit of a digression from what  should I be doing NOW? Should I send them an SAR?  If they do intend to serve me correctly this would be useful, yes?   I am sure they have added all sorts of unnecessary costs to the debt that could be challenged?   Also there is a question over if they even had a valid notice of assignment?  They would have to produce that in the SAR wouldn't they?   This was a real query for me ages ago but it never got pursued legally.
    • Expect them to bring up every communication and claim that you’ve been dodging them / not providing them with an address to serve to.......
  • Our picks

sequenci

A guide to Charging Orders & Orders for Sale

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1307 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

It's badly worded (and I think wrong, too!), but my understanding was that the £1000 limit was only for CCA debts? With all other debts still not having any minimum threshold to pursue.

 

 

And if you look here

 

 

http://www.northampton.gov.uk/info/200028/council-tax/96/council-tax-recovery-of-non-payment/8

 

 

this council is laying out it's case to the contrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just had a long phone conversation with National Debt Line and realise that the document

from the House Of Commons library is super confusing. Utility companies CAN apply for an order for sale once they have obtained a charge order. I therefore recommend that anyone reading a document from the House Of Commons Library just take it with a pinch of salt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You really don't need to worry about orders for sale. Less than .2% of charging orders end up with orders being granted - and that's generally for business-related charges rather than consumer-related debts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite right Sequenci!

 

 

The trouble is a lot of "official" information regarding CO's fail to highlight the rarity of OFS, especially for consumer debt.

 

 

Hence, the tabloid scare headlines when the £1000 threshold was introduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that sequenci. I have been worrying myself stupid for the last two years after my water supplier obtained a charge order for £1870 against my house. I was afraid that I would end up living on the streets. However, once a year the water supplier send me a reminder stating that they may take enforcement action if I don't repay the debt. Does that mean that they could obtain an order for sale and I would be living on the streets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The juxstaposition of Charging Orders and Orders For Sale is the prior is extremely easy to obtain, whereas, the latter is extremely difficult to obtain. Judges have virtually no discretion in granting CO's but they have absolute discretion in granting Orders For Sale.

 

 

If your house is your family or sole residence then, no, you won't get an OFS made against you for the amount owed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting when you read the statute - it implies that a court should have a fair amount of jurisdiction:

 

(Charging Orders Act 1979)

 

(5)In deciding whether to make a charging order the court shall consider all the circumstances of the case and, in particular, any evidence before it as to—

(a)the personal circumstances of the debtor, and

(b)whether any other creditor of the debtor would be likely to be unduly prejudiced by the making of the order.

 

I guess there is a far stricter test when it comes to sale orders - and quite rightly so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for that sequenci. I have been worrying myself stupid for the last two years after my water supplier obtained a charge order for £1870 against my house. I was afraid that I would end up living on the streets. However, once a year the water supplier send me a reminder stating that they may take enforcement action if I don't repay the debt. Does that mean that they could obtain an order for sale and I would be living on the streets?

 

Unlikely. If the property is jointly owned and you have children it would be impossible anyway - as there is statute pretty much preventing it. Even regardless, I don't think any judge worth their salt would allow an order for sale for such a small amount of money (in the grand scheme of things).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's interesting when you read the statute - it implies that a court should have a fair amount of jurisdiction:

 

(Charging Orders Act 1979)

 

(5)In deciding whether to make a charging order the court shall consider all the circumstances of the case and, in particular, any evidence before it as to—

(a)the personal circumstances of the debtor, and

(b)whether any other creditor of the debtor would be likely to be unduly prejudiced by the making of the order.

 

I guess there is a far stricter test when it comes to sale orders - and quite rightly so.

 

 

I agree and it does make you wonder why there is virtually no resistance from Judges in granting CO's given the above??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess there isn't a massive amount of prejudice in relation to the granting of a charge compared to losing your home.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All my children are now adults and live elsewhere. The house is in my name only. My wife disappeared just over two years ago to live with another man. I guess that if the charge order doesn't kill me the impending divorce will. Either way I guess I will end up living on the streets.

Edited by chiefmegawatty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the house is in your name only, then the CO will be deducted from your sale proceeds if and when you sell. But (and I'm not diminishing your problems) it does seem a "manageable" amount? Many people on this site have CO's against them for amounts far in excess of your order amount which they have no way of discharging without selling up.

 

 

But as Sequenci has stated, OFS are a rarity and there is strong caselaw opposing such if the house is your primary residence. But I would look to see if there is interest accruing on the debt as it's usually 8% and will stack up if you don't discharge the debt in a reasonable time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply. I have discovered that interest can only be added to charge orders over £5000 so no problem there. The house is my only and primary residence which raises another question in my mind. I own a large plot of land in Wiltshire which is on the land registry in my name. The plot is worth about £30,000. I assume that the water supplier and the county court failed to secure the charge order on my land and stuck it against my house so they could threaten me with being homeless. They could have obtained a charge order

on my land and then obtained an order for sale without having to threaten me with being homeless. I therefore consider water suppliers and County Court Judges to be evil people who want house owners to live on the streets. They had the choice of sticking the charge order on my house or on my land. They chose my house just to be nasty when I have another asset that would easily cover the debt many times over and could be sold without causing distress. Should I ever meet a County Court Judge in public I would be tempted to punch him in the face for being a house owner hating nasty person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Irrelevant and argumentative posts removed...please lets keep this civil and on track.

 

Regards

 

Andy


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for your reply. I have discovered that interest can only be added to charge orders over £5000 so no problem there. The house is my only and primary residence which raises another question in my mind. I own a large plot of land in Wiltshire which is on the land registry in my name. The plot is worth about £30,000. I assume that the water supplier and the county court failed to secure the charge order on my land and stuck it against my house so they could threaten me with being homeless. They could have obtained a charge order

on my land and then obtained an order for sale without having to threaten me with being homeless. I therefore consider water suppliers and County Court Judges to be evil people who want house owners to live on the streets. They had the choice of sticking the charge order on my house or on my land. They chose my house just to be nasty when I have another asset that would easily cover the debt many times over and could be sold without causing distress. Should I ever meet a County Court Judge in public I would be tempted to punch him in the face for being a house owner hating nasty person.

 

 

 

 

Can't you sell the land yourself to settle your debts?

 

Were they aware you owned this land?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't ask about selling the land Ganymede! I had the gall to suggest that and my posts were deleted overnight :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't ask about selling the land Ganymede! I had the gall to suggest that and my posts were deleted overnight :-)

 

Yes but its the way you suggested it ...perhaps try a more diplomatic approach in future.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I suppose I could sell the land to pay the charge order on my house. I assume that the water supply company and the county court judge must have known that I owned land. When they searched the land registry to see if I owned anything to slap a charge order on they would have found my house and my land as they are both on the land registry. Therefore I assume that the courts enforce charge orders deliberately to make house owners homeless despite there being an alternative when the house owner has other assets. I have learned that county court judges won't allow charge orders on house owners who have little equity in their house. I therefore conclude that the judges despise people who have worked hard for decades and bought their house outright. Being an outright house and land owner it's not surprising that I consider county court judges to be evil nasty people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Court have nothing to do with what property is charged. They wouldn't know or care about your land, it's not the Courts concern and is the Claimant's choice but they probably didn't know about your land either unless you told them beforehand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is unlikely that anyone has searched the land registry by name. I doubt anyone knows about this piece of land. Its actually very difficult to search the land registry to find out what property people own without a court order specifically authorising the search. Please refer to http://www.landregistry.gov.uk/public/can-i-search-against-a-persons-name-to-find-out-what-properties-they-own.

 

The judge will not have done any searches. The judge's job is just to decide the application. He would have had no idea you had other land. If you would have preferred them to get a CO over the land instead of your house, you could have offered this during the legal proceedings.

 

I doubt the water company know either. As the land is vacant, the water company would have no problem getting an order for sale if it knows where the land is !!.


PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HI, Have a pending money claim court case and if lost expect creditor to stick in a charging order. As debt in my sole name, will wife's beneficial interest in any equity be maintained or will all the equity go to creditor ? Also following directions questionnaire now stayed to 19th Feb, any idea timescale to transfer to local county court & actual court date ( may sell home if we can prior to court).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HI, Have a pending money claim court case and if lost expect creditor to stick in a charging order. As debt in my sole name, will wife's beneficial interest in any equity be maintained or will all the equity go to creditor ? Also following directions questionnaire now stayed to 19th Feb, any idea timescale to transfer to local county court & actual court date ( may sell home if we can prior to court).

 

 

 

The Charging Order will be registered in the form of a Restriction against your beneficial interest in the property only, not you wife's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you steampowered for your reply. Very interesting indeed. I therefore assume that my water supplier searched the land registry using my home address to see if I owned the property. When they discovered that I owned my house, they put the debt in my name even though the water account was in my wife's name, then applied to the court for a CCJ against me and then a charge order. I do wonder why the water supplier didn't obtain a CCJ against my wife because she was the only earner at the time. They could then apply for an attachment to earnings against my wife and recovered the debt by now. Instead they seem to be happy to wait years for their money. Very strange in my opinion. I did phone my water supply company and asked them why they took the action against me rather than against my wife. They said that they weren't prepared to discuss this any further.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think it's stranger you let them take you to court for a debt your wife owed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently for debts from domestic services which arent under the consumer credit act, the creditor can take anyone to court who was living in the property at the time. This applies even though the other occupant is unemployed and receiving no benefit payments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1307 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...