Jump to content


charging order help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5351 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

I need some advice please. I got into a lot of debt a few years back after falling pregnant and hubby losing his business and again hubby lost another job back in April.

 

I have been seeking the advice of the cab since then and they were setting up a DMP with me. All of my creditors have accepted my offers apart from Tesco finance for an original loan of £25k 3 years ago. When I went on maternity leave I asked if I couild reduce my monthly payments to £50 a month and they agreed, it was then very hard for me to make higher payments has oh was unemployed.

Anyway cab offered them £466 per month back in January and they have not answered any correspondence but have now passed it onto company called Incasso whom I spoke to last friday and explained the situation and that my husband has interviews this week and hopefully if he's successful I can offer more payments. but Incasso told me that they are looking for a charging order and said I could either pay £25k now (debt has gone up to £34k now!!) and thats it or £578 per month to stop charging order, or £370 per month if charging order goes through.

 

I think its unfair that they never accepted my origianl offer of £466 and now i'm not sure if I should let it go to court of say i'll pay £578 per month. I can't get to see cab adviser for another week and don't know what to do!!

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

You say they are going for a charging order ? Have they already got a CCJ on this ? Have you requested a copy of your agreements ? Have you sent a SAR to the original creditors to find out how much they have added in excessive charges ? Have you received any default notices ? My feeling is they are being unreasonable in not accepting your offer of repayment....They cannot dictate how much a charging order will be only a judge can do that.....please do have a look at the templates in my signature below.....and do spend some time reading around these forums too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, no ccj on this, i've never missed a months payment just made reduced payments which were originally agreed by them. i haven't requested copies of my agreements as cab have never advised me to, and never heard of SAR!!

I have recieved a default notice yes.

 

thanks i'll have a look at templates and around the forum

 

Also don't want to lose house as debt is in my name soley and house is in joint names and I have a toddler of 2years

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, no ccj on this, i've never missed a months payment just made reduced payments which were originally agreed by them. i haven't requested copies of my agreements as cab have never advised me to, and never heard of SAR!!

I have recieved a default notice yes.

 

thanks i'll have a look at templates and around the forum

 

Also don't want to lose house as debt is in my name soley and house is in joint names and I have a toddler of 2years

 

Ok please try not to panic... without a CCJ they cannot go direct for a charging order. And without a charging order they cannot attempt an order for sale.

 

First thing is to stop talking to them on the phone, letters only from now on, paper trail is valuable evidence and they wont threaten you the same in writing as they do verbally.

 

Next, advise them in writing that you are speaking to CAB and request a 30 day cooling off period, this has been agreed by debt collection agencies with the government so make sure you send it to them in writing, also everything sent needs to be sent recorded delivery. We wouldnt want them to be able to claim it got lost in the post.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As 42Man has suggested get a SAR off to Tesco personal finance and a s78 request off to Inacasso for the agreement.

 

S78 template here, needs to be sent with a £1 postal order, they have 12+2 working days to respond.

 

Sar template here, needs to be sent with a £10 postal order, they have 40days to respond.

 

You are not alone, most of us in these forums either is in debt or has just got out of debt.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but I recieved a county court claim form from them on Saturday, a day after I spoke to them and they said tehy'd give me a week to speak to cab!! can I stop this going to court?

 

I will take your advice and stop talking to them verbally and i'll write requesting cooling off period

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

but I recieved a county court claim form from them on Saturday, a day after I spoke to them and they said tehy'd give me a week to speak to cab!! can I stop this going to court?

 

I will take your advice and stop talking to them verbally and i'll write requesting cooling off period

 

thanks

 

Ok, I'm going to request this gets moved into the legal forum for more help.

 

The cooling off period wont help, now they have initiated court action you HAVE to stick to the timescales. If you are going to defend the claim then you need to Acknowledge it which gives you a further 14 days to add to the original 14 days you have to file a defence.

 

If you do wish to defend the CCA is useless now court proceedings have started, you'll need to file a CPR 31.14 request to the other sides solicitors to get sight of the agreement/default notice/termination letter etc.

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but I recieved a county court claim form from them on Saturday, a day after I spoke to them and they said tehy'd give me a week to speak to cab!! can I stop this going to court?

 

I will take your advice and stop talking to them verbally and i'll write requesting cooling off period

 

thanks

 

Did the claim form have a court stamp on it?, what are the particulars of claim?

 

 

 

Oh and thanks 42Man :-D

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also can you scan / photo the default notice and agreement and termination notice up please (leave the dates on the default notice and termination notice - but remove / edit any personal information or reference numbers)

Link to post
Share on other sites

i've attached everything i've received from tescos / rbs / solicitors re the loan - can't find a default notice, just a letter threatening default. i'm sure i've never recieved one as I copy everything and send to case worker at cab and keep all my copies in a file and could find nothing

 

hope this helps make things a little clearer

 

thanks so much for your advice

Edited by helpmumout
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi helpmumout...

 

Just looked through your pdf's...quickly amend as you have left your name and address on the sols letter dated 29th jan!!!:eek:

 

mj:)

__________________

CAG Depends Purely Upon Donations. Please help us to continue helping you, and give what you can - Thank you:grin:

Click to donate

 

Please click my scales, if you feel the need;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I've the default notice is in that file, although it refers the credit owner as a CMS, Kendall court, Telford.

 

Is this one of those router accounts again? It looks dodgy how a 25k debt can jump that much.

 

Anyway to the point in hand.. the default notice was issued on the 25th Nov and gives you after service just 5 days to rectify, this is a breach of CCA1974. You must be given 14 days to rectify under the regulations.

 

 

S.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cheers Freaky.....if i'm correct from what I have read they have terminated the account on the 25th November ???!! And it would seem they issued the default notice on the same day as the termination notice !!! AND the default notice as The Shadow has correctly pointed out has not given you the correct period to remedy !!!!

 

You need to acknowledge receipt of the claim form within 14 days of the date on it.....state that you will defend all (but it may still be too early) to file a defence...!! however the particulars of the claim seem to be non existant !!!

 

You may well find this info here of interest.....try and read this and digest what is being said !!! There are a lot of people who would like a default notice like yours !!! the new regulations state that a default notice MUST give you 14 days to remedy !!! (reporduced courtesy of PT and steven4064)

 

I would like to suggest that, as a matter of course, we advise the user to go for a strike out under CPR 3.4(2)(a) in these cases.

 

The reasoning is simple:

 

Section 87(1) of the CCA 1974 says:

 

87.--(1) Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a default notice) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,--

(a) to terminate the agreement, or

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum....

 

Section 88 says that the DN must be in the prescribed form and the associated regulation say what that form is.

 

Thus, if the DN is not in the prescribed form, it is invalid and, under s87, the lender has no right of action.

 

CPR3.4(2)(a) says that the court may strike out a statement of case if it appears to the court –

 

(a) that the statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing ... the claim

 

THe user should submit a defence based on the same argument but then ask for a strike out with the AQ. That way, there is no need to make an appliaction and shell out £40.

 

The requirement for a valid Default Notice to lawfully Terminate an Account whilst in default

 

1. Notwithstanding the matters pleaded above, the Claimant must under Section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 serve a valid Default Notice before they can demand early payment of sums not yet due under a Regulated Credit Agreement.

 

2. Under the Interpretation Act 1978 Section 7, it states:

 

Where an Act authorises or requires any document to be served by post (whether the expression "serve" or the expressions "give" or "send" or any other expression is used) then, unless the contrary intention appears, the service is deemed to be effected by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting a letter containing the document and, unless the contrary is proved, to have effected at the time at which the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post."

 

2. Practice Direction

Service of Documents - First and Second Class Mail.

 

With effect from 16 April 1985 the Practice Direction issued on 30 July 1968 is hereby revoked and the following is substituted therefore.

1). Under S7 of the Interpretation Act 1978 service by post is deemed to have been effected, unless the contrary has been proved, at the time when the letter would be delivered in the ordinary course of post.

2). To avoid uncertainty as to the date of service it will be taken (subject to proof to the contrary) that delivery in the ordinary course of post was effected:-

(a) in the case of first class mail, on the second working day after posting;

(b) in the case of second class mail, on the fourth working day after posting.

"Working days" are Monday to Friday, excluding any bank holiday.

3). Affidavits of service shall state whether the document was dispatched by first or second class mail. If this information is omitted it will be assumed that second class mail was used.

4). This direction is subject to the special provisions of RSC Order 10, rule 1(3) relating to the service of originating process.

 

8th March 1985

J R BICKFORD SMITH Senior Master

Queen's Bench Division

 

3. Further to point 2 above, CPR rules on service also state the required timescales to be given for serving of documents :-

 

Under CPR 6.26 First class post (or other service which provides for delivery on the next business day) is deemed to be “served” The second day after it was posted, left with, delivered to or collected by the relevant service provider provided that day is a business day.

 

4. The Default notice supplied by the Claimant is dated Friday 3rd August, to allow service in line with the statutory requirements mentioned in points 2 & 3 above, 2 working days were required to allow for 1st Class postage. Thus the Rectify date should be 14 calendar days from Wednesday 8th August, namely Wednesday 22nd August 2007, not the 14 calendar days from the date of the letter as stated in the Default notice which would have been 17th August.

 

5. I therefore put the Claimant to strict proof that any Default Notice sent to me was valid and allowed the statutory 14 clear days to rectify the breach. I also note that to be valid, a Default Notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and Amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237).

 

6. The failure of a Default Notice to be accurate not only invalidates the Default Notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is an unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the Court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119.

 

7. It is submitted that the above Default Notice served s87(1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 failed to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561).

 

8. For a Creditor to be entitled to terminate a regulated Credit Agreement where there is a breach, demand repayment in full or take any legal action to recover any monies due under the Agreement, a creditor must serve a Default Notice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states:

 

Section 87. Need for Default Notice

 

(1) Service of a notice on the Debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a "Default Notice ") is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the Debtor or hirer of a regulated Agreement -

 

(a) to terminate the Agreement, or

 

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum, or

 

© to recover possession of any goods or land, or

 

(d) to treat any right conferred on the Debtor or hirer by the Agreement as terminated, restricted or deferred, or

 

(e) to enforce any security.

 

9. The Act also sets out via Section 88(1), that the Default Notice must be in the prescribed form, as below:

 

Section 88. Contents and effect of Default Notice

 

(1) The Default Notice must be in the prescribed form…

 

10. The wording must make it clear that no variation is acceptable. Therefore it cannot be dispensed with as a De Minimus issue.

 

11. I note that the regulations do not allow any variation in the form of these statements and therefore it is suggested that where the statements are not as laid down in the regulations the Default Notice is rendered invalid as a consequence.

 

12. In the case of Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co - [1998] All ER (D) 339 in the Court of Appeal, the Court addressed in some detail the issue of the contents of a Default Notice and should the notice fail to comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) it would render the Default Notice invalid I quote the comment of KENNEDY LJ: "This statute was plainly enacted to protect consumers, most of whom are likely to be individuals" the judgment appears to confirm the consumer credit legislation made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as plainly enacted and set out to offer protection to the consumer. Therefore it is suggested that the failure of the Claimant to set out the Default Notice in accordance with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) could unduly prejudice me as it failed to allow the required time to remedy the alleged default.

 

13. The Claimant’s failure to issue a valid Default Notice must surely prevent a right of action and would make any termination of the Agreement unlawful, as statute provides the procedure that must be followed. Since the Claimant has failed to adhere to statutory procedure it is averred that the Claimant does not have a right of action, and can never now have a right of action having terminated the Agreement unlawfully.

 

14. Furthermore, the Arrears Total outlined cannot be accurate, as the Balance on the Account was at least partly comprised of Unlawful Charges plus additional Charges and Interest added unlawfully whilst the Account was in Dispute. Therefore, the Arrears claimed cannot be accurate, as they are themselves calculated using a Total that was itself inaccurate.

 

15. This is at all times an Agreement Regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. There is no provision in the Act that allows a large financial institution to terminate an Agreement that is in alleged default or breach simply by giving notice to the Consumer. Section 98(6) makes that quite clear. The Creditor must follow the steps outlined in Section 87 and Section 88 if they are to lawfully Default and Terminate, and enjoy the benefits of Section 87.

 

16. Finally, an invalid Default Notice cannot be remedied by simply issuing a new Default Notice. The Claimant may not serve a second effective default notice in prescribed form post-termination of the agreement. Any such second default notice will necessarily state a date by when I would be required to comply after which in default the agreement would terminate. The second default notice would therefore contain the fiction that the agreement endured when that cannot be the case, as it was terminated on XX/XX/XX. Terminating an Agreement on the back of a defective Default Notice, simply confirms the undeniable truth that Termination of the agreement by the Claimant was carried out in circumstances which then prohibited them from enjoying the benefits of Section 87, namely the opportunity to seek early Payment of a sum that was, prior to Termination, only payable in the future.

The Claimant respectfully requests that an order may be made as follows:

 

1. That the Claimant's statement of case is struck out pursuant to rule 3.4(2)(a) of the Civil Procedure Rules

as the Calimant's statement of case discloses no reasonable grounds for bringing the claim.

 

The claim is for the early repayment (ie before the full term of the allleged agreement between the Claimant and the Defendant) of a sum of money consequent on a breach of the alleged agreement by the Defendant. The Claimant is only entitled to file such a claim after first having served a defeult noitice under section 87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and in accordance with s88 of the Act.

 

Inter alia, the regulations made by the Sectratary of State related to s88 concerning default notices require that a period of 14 clear days be given to the Defendant to remedy the default before enforcement action (including filing a claim) may be started.

The default notice supplied by the Claimant in response to the order of the Court dated date is dated Friday 3 August 2008 and says "To remedy this breach, payment due on your account of £xxx must be received within fourteen calendar days from the date of this default notice", ie by Wendesday 17 August. Under CPR Part 6.2, a letter is deemed served on the second day after it was posted, provided that day is a business day. That means that a default notice posted on Friday 3 August would be deemed served on Tuesday 7 August and 14 clear days from then is Tuesday 21 August. Therefore the default notice does not comply with the regulations in respect of giving the Defendant the statutory length of time to remedy the default.

The failure of the default notice to comply with the regulations made by the Secretary of State invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255), is an unlawful rescission of contract and prevents the Court from enforcing any alleged debt (Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119).

The invalidity of the default notice means that the Claimant has no right of action in this case. On this basis, I respectfully ask the Court to strike out the Claimant's statement of case.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...