Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes I understand that, my point is why is the account still be reported on 6 years after the default date has passed regardless of the SB date.   The default expired 4th November, Cabot put a query on the account the 7th November so it is still showing in my history, my question is why are they doing it?        
    • You will have to go to court to get an order  and once that is doen then you both have to abide by it. The actual form filling is not complicated and the first court session doesnt actually make any decisions and you will be advised to reach an agreement that can then be set in stone by the court.   the father has a right to "contact", but this is not the same as having the right to demand a particular set of visits, stopovers etc so decide what you want, and how this is practical and then ask that the contact be limited to this. for example if you work your contact will all be gettinmg them up, feeding them, putting them to bed and have no fun time at weekends if has has them then. The courts will do what is in the best interests ogf the child so you need to stop being jealous of their love for their father and dont try and use the system to punish him or the children. If he was abusive or controlling them read up on the serious crimes  act  2015 about controlling and coercive behaviour and see how amny fo the examples fit his behaviour and use that to get the courts to set lterms that  limit that behaviour instead of using the children as the tools.
    • Does anyone know if a person has the right  to use a lay representative in the family division of the county court? the wording of the Lay representatives(right of audience) order 1999 refers to a county court and stage 1 or tier 1 proceedings and Scots law have a form to fill out for such representation but it isnt clear whether the english system has such a clearly defined right of audience. The MoJ mentions it in some discussion papers as though it is hard and fast but in other documents  it is McKenzie Friends who are written about as if they are the only people allowed other than sols/barristers.   reason why lay rep needed is they can speak and the other side cant object where with McKenzie friend they cant speak on behalf of claimant/respondent and the other party can object to that person being present- which will happen  in this particular case. Ultimately it may well be a discretionary power of the judge but dont want to start off with a bad step.
    • It seems as though the solicitoras want to keep hold of this payday and will do anything to churn it ( make money by continuing an action that isnt in the clients interests).   The land registry will have the record of who paid for the property and how so you will be in the clear on that as you didnt just take the place over, you bought it from the estate of the deceased.   now it seems like your mother is struck by regrets/remorse over her inability to take over the property at the time and what tends to happen is that relatives will sit there and say bad things about the person who they see is the beneficiary of their misfortune and then get into a feedback loop, each reinforcing the wrong opinion of the other.   Your attempts to sort things out logically ahs tempered this somewhat so do continue and keep clear of their  lawyers at all costs, they will just keep the meter ticking over and bring the negative thought back to the surface.   your parents will already be about 2 grand a day down on anything the sols have done so try and get them to  look back to the mess that her father's death left them in and amke it clear that at least the house is still in the family and that she has benefitted from that by receiving money at the time that otherwise she wouldnt have got.   If that still causes friction then I would still write to them rather than responding to the solicitor, the lesson they will learn will cost them less and when the sols have moved on to the next client they will have not lost so much of what they still have left.   Ultimately if they do actually issue proceedings you can ask for the claim to be chucked out as having no merit etc by showing how the place was bought. I do struggle to believe that people dont know who their mortgage was with even after all of this time,  same as I find it odd that people suddenly find details for accounts with tens of thousands in that they had forgotten about. You can find out as again it will be in the Land registry entry for most properties that had a mortgage
    • A claim was issued against you on 30/07/2019 Your acknowledgment of service was submitted on 31/07/2019 at 18:14:49 Your acknowledgment of service was received on 01/08/2019 at 08:05:52 Your defence was submitted on 30/08/2019 at 23:17:46 Your defence was received on 02/09/2019 at 01:06:05 DQ sent to you on 27/09/2019 DQ filed by claimant on 27/09/2019 You filed a DQ on 23/10/2019 Your claim was transferred to BIRMINGHAM on 14/11/2019
  • Our picks

eggbound

Bryan Carter offering out of court deal

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3640 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

Had a letter from BC two days before an N1 form sent to my husband. Send a letter to BC requesting all information including all relevent documents, i.e CCA etc, no reply. Put in an embarrassed defence online to Northampton stating that the documentation had not been sent. Then received an allocation questionnaire in the last two days before strike out from Northampton. Filled in the AQ and sent it off and yesterday received a "strike a deal " letter from BC or they will strike out our defence at the hearing adding to costs etc. They also offered to accept £50 a month for a £12000 debt, if we settle out of court. They also offered a Full and Final settlement at over £4000 less and to not enter any judgement, a consent order, the attached letters were not issued from the court although it stated the name of our local court on the top line, it looks formal but definately no identifying numbers on the document, they just typed it out themselves.

Still no sign of any CCA or documentation to support the case, me thinks they havent got any evidence or it is seriously inadequate. The letter had no mention of the AQ which we put to fast track and stated that BC had not responded to our request for the documentation.

What would you do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tell them it is no good, I would also ask that any full and finals were NOT marked 'Without Prejudice'.

 

By accepting an out of court deal you will be putting yourself at a great disadvantage as they will then try to get you to sign a Tomlin Order, and then you will be stuck.

 

BC have NO authority to get a strike out order from the court, they are playing legal games you you.

 

WHATEVER you do DO NOT sign the consent order, it is almost certainly a Tomlin order.

 

I would inform them that you are sending all paperwork to the court and do so, and add a covering letter for the judges attention stating that they are further trying to frustrate the legal process and their case should be stopped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for you speedy reply. Sillygirl1.

The letter sates that "We confirm on a without prejudice basis that we are prepared to accept in full and final settlement...etc.

I will copy the letter and documents and send it to my local court forthwith.

Googling a Tomlin Order..not heard of that term before :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you let us see the letter please. I'd like to see the wording that they use to tell you that they will strike out your defence.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

search tomlin on this site.

 

However, a Tomlin order has to be signed off by the judge. It is not a bad thing if the terms are right and it has been properly considered and discussed


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I will make certain deletions and post it up here asap.

Thank you for your advice so far. I must say it is rather presumptious of BC to consider that without the paperwork we would roll over. The judge will know that they havent played fair, how can I get this struck out? Have BC shot themselves in the foot by not complying with our request for evidence at this late stage, yet trying to make a deal before the judge gets wind of whats going on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Cant put this letter up but this is how it is worded.

 

"We enclose two Consent Orders for your use. Please sign and return to us within ten days the consent order you wish to proceed with (Enclosed is a stampled addressed envelope for your convenience).If we do not hear from you we will apply to the Court to strike out your Defence at hearing which if successful will result in further costs being payable by you."

 

Exact wording.

Nice that they send a SAE!

 

To add

I have sent this letter with their paperwork to my local court

 

I have today received the enclosed from the Claimants solicitors with reference to the above case.

 

I am concerned that Bryan Carter and Co are further trying to frustrate the legal process and request that the case should be struck out as they have not provided the evidence requested on 18/09/2009.

 

I find it intimidating that they are threatening to apply to strike out my defence when they have not provided evidence of this debt and are pressurising me to sign a Tomlin Order under the threat of further expense.

 

Please consider the enclosed correspondence.

 

Yours faithfully,

Edited by eggbound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are out of order, if they ask for the case to be struck out and charges applied to you you counter claim against them for wasted costs and abuse of court process. Its about time the judges started getting a list together of how many cases this company put to court and how many are challenged and lost, let alone how many are put against people's previous addresses...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they have not yet provided any documents to support their claims they trying to pull a fast one by getting you to admit the debt and pay money to them when it would be them who would face the anger of the court for binging a claim without providing paperwork. The wrath of the court would be amplified by the fact that Carters describe themselves as solicitors. I would tell them to bog off and see them in court. I bet they will discontinue before the court date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

In the last 2/3 weeks I have seen 2 or 3 different threads on here where BC have sent this letter. Mine is one of them!

 

Mine : http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/216382-advice-re-county-court.html

 

another : http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/231370-brian-carter-court-claim.html

 

and yours! - I am sure there are more.

 

You have to ask your self that why, IF they have a solid case with all the docs they need, would they want to settle to less than they are entitled to?

 

simple answer is they dont have the docs (more than likely)

 

Keep your eye on mine and the other threads (plus do as ther may be more threads) - I think you will see a pattern forming!

 

regards,

 

Yub

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, you dont give anything like enough detail for any of the experienced people on here to give any sort of guidance on this, ie who is the original creditor? what was in your defence? what was in your AQ?, what is the debt for etc.

 

Having said all that BC is well known on here (type bryan carter into search), ive never seen a case on here where carter has a solid case, hes basically a bottom feeder, which is why im surprised this is for 12k


Please note i have no legal training any advice i give comes from my own experience and from what i have learned on this site

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for your replies.

The creditor is Egg. The Defence was an embarrassed defence as BC have not sent any details. The sum is disguised although it is close - very excessive which cannot be proven, there may be people who browse the forums who would recognise the details if I posted the exact figure.

I sent the AQ stating that we have not had any documents and I have sent the latest letter within the timescale given, which is tomorrow.

I am pretty certain that BC do not have paperwork and await the judge to strike this out on that basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm, same original creditor as my thread / case - and simular high amount. Keep an eye on my thread and i will do likewise yourse as they seem to be very very simular -

 

i will send you PM,

 

regards,

 

YUB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latest,

Sent the letter and consent orders to the court within the dealdine of the AQ.

Today received another letter dated a day after that letter which obviously didnt give us time to reply, even if we wanted to!

 

We thank you for your communication(?) regarding this account

We have referred the matter to our client and will revert to you as soon as we are in receipt of instructions.

In the meantime we confirm that we have placed the account on hold.

How very odd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The latest letter will be in response to your CPR request for information. I received exactly the same letter after sending them my CPR requests.

 

Do not be fooled though - nothing is on hold and the case is obviously still ongoing with the courts until such time you hear from the court that is stayed or struck out.

 

regards,

 

yub

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Yub,

 

This is the second of such letters.

We had an identical one when we asked for the CCA.

I know nothing is on hold but think BC has his knickers in a twist again.

I wonder what the judge will make of the "agree to the £50 or we will go for strike out of your defence" letter which I sent with the Consent orders?

I sent all the correspondence to the court, including the first "on hold" letter.

Still havent had any paperwork , isnt it too late for BC to produce them now after the AQ deadline? Surely that doesnt give us any time to examine them if they DO show up!:mad:

Eggbound

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A letter from the court District Judge arrived today stating that they noted the letter from the claimants solicitors, which I posted to the court on receipt, which refers to the out of court deal with a threat of striking out the defence etc. Carters have been ordered to submit their AQ in a week or the case will be struck out.

Heres hoping!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well done - let's hope Carter is too busy opening his Christmas CCA requests to get it done in time.


“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well today received a package with a copy of his AQ which hopefully wont arrive in time with the Christmas post as it was dated 18th.

In the package was a signed CCA copy dated 2001. A stack of printed off statements, which we have never received by post . A BLANK default notice which is contestable as there is no evidence that we received , no date just a computer print out.

Surely this is not playing the game as he sent this all to the court first without ever sending us any evidence so that we could have contested it before it reached this stage.

He already went beyond the original AQ date of 26 Nov.

I have read other posts of people who also received the paperwork but BC then issued a notice of discontinuence.

Heres plodding on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Can you post a copy of the 'agreement'? If it's Egg from 2001, it will be full of holes and probably an application.

 

2. Do the statements show unfair charges? what period do they cover?

 

3. What is the wording on the DN? Can you post it up?


“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Donkey,

I will ty to get to the scanner later.

The Agreement is a photocopy which looks doctored because there are lines around the signature boxes, as if they have been placed on top of the page then scanned!

The Default notice is simply a letter template with no name address dated or signature.

I cannot see how this rubbish can be accepted by any judge!

Thank you for your kind help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Agreement has no figures or approved limits on the first page and no account number apart from a handwritten one on the top, which could have been written recently.If this is the case then it is not a true copy.I must find the one that was sent to us to compare.

Why would the account number be scralled on the top of the document ?

The signature which looks placed on top of the second page and scanned is on a separate page and stapled to the said agreement letter.

Is this why BC was holding out on sending it to us. He did tick that these documents had been sent to us but he left out the date that we received them.

The court knows that at the time of our submission of our AQ we had not received any paperwork.

BC has left this all to the last minute and ticked small claims track. reason given The claim is for simple debt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Others will need to offer an opinion but if they cant offer a genuine copy of the default notice with proof of postage I would say you have very good grounds for a strike out as Default must be issued prior to them issuing a claim

 

Furthermore, have they shownj legal title in the way of a NOA to actually them any legal rights?


omnia praesumuntur legitime facta donec probetur in contrarium

 

 

Please note: I am not a member of the legal profession, all advice given is purely my opinion, if in doubt consult a professional

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/show-post/post-2657280.html

 

The agreement is identical to this one posted on the link above.Except for a scralled account number and the strange markings around the signature boxes on page 2.

The default notice is just a template letter with no information at all.

If the judge doesnt throw it out what happens next?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the 'agreement' have your details on it, ie. your address etc? The comparison with anything sent previously will be interesting.

 

Also bump ncf's query about a notice of assignment (if the debt has been sold).


“The industry is rotten to the core, whether it is in-house recovery and collection, or where agents are used, or where the debt has been sold.” Andrew Mackinley MP, House of Commons, 22 April 2009

 

If a Cagger helps you, click their star. Better still, make a donation however small, so that CAG can continue to help others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...