They will make her bankrupt for 4000 pounds, help please.

[babybear39]

Might be contempt of court...

[beaconsman]

i took the stat demand into court with the affidavit, pointed out the error, the usher just told my wife to sign as received on the 18th nov, i said we cant as we disdnt receive it, but, the guy who delivered it, put a hand written note in our letterbox...so that is proof is it not?

[beaconsman]

dont understand, contempt of court on whose part?

[babybear39]

The statement the process server made stating that he served on a different day.

[beaconsman]

hi, i know its late n all, but just got a letter not off hamiltons, but off loveus...states.."We refer to your request for a copy of your original credit agreement in accordance with te provisions of the section 77 (1) and /or 78 (1) of the consumer credit act 1974".

"This account from which the above amount relates is due to a bank acc ..any requirment to supply a copy of the agreement is exempt for current bank accounts..." this is a different account to the other thing..

On that front, hearing is 29th dec..what should we do to present eveidence in court?..was going away for xmas but cant now due to the hearing..the judge as seen the affidavit...and marked 15 mins hearing on it...advice please thanks.......

[count orlok]

I thought you said this was in relation to a credity card, not a bank account?

[citizenB]

Beaconsman, we need to know for sure what type of account this is.

 

If a current account is the amount they are claiming to do with overdraft charges ?

 

If it IS a credit card, then it would appear the DCA / solicitor is attempting to be misleading.

[miziwizzi]

OP is now talking about 2 things I think. First is a new thing a bank it seems.

 

QUOTE:

hi, i know its late n all, but just got a letter not off hamiltons, but off loveus...states.."We refer to your request for a copy of your original credit agreement in accordance with te provisions of the section 77 (1) and /or 78 (1) of the consumer credit act 1974".

"This account from which the above amount relates is due to a bank acc ..any requirment to supply a copy of the agreement is exempt for current bank accounts..." this is a different account to the other thing..

 

Followed by original problem.

[beaconsman]

hi, no, the stat demand is for a ccard..they sent two letters with two different account numbers, one they say they canot get the cca as it is a bank acc...this one (ccard) they have asked for more time but it court is tomorrow, we have a letter to pick up that is to be signed for but will b too later for us as we will be in town tomorrow morning..also need to know what should do today fr my wife s she will be going in, i have to look after my daughter and dont want her near the court..we have the cca and sar req letters, so my wife can state that we havent reicieved them yet..if ever..what else can i do to pusuade the judge?..will the other sde turn up?..

[babybear39]

You need to prepare a schedule of costs and ask the judge to look at them tomorrow as you were unable to guarantee delivery due to Xmas post

 

Here's an example of costs for an SD case:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/204078-capquest-issue-bankruptcy-notification-6.html#post2276998

[beaconsman]

Hi, our afffidavit is on the thread, i included the costs on this, do we have to make another one for tomorrow..is it a good thing if the other side fail to turn up?..we hope thatit gets set aside, if it does (fingers crossed) what would be our next step, also the cca hasnt turned up yet either.

[babybear39]

I'll flag your thread for urgent help as I'm getting out of my depth here and I don't want to give you the wrong advice for tomorrow...

[beaconsman]

ok thanks, this has really spoilt our xmas as we have been worrying throughout, plus my wife is 6 weeks pregnant as we confirmed last week.

[bobcatman]

subbing

[beaconsman]

hi all, just getting ready to go to the court, have no idea of what to do now as havend had any responses into the set aside process at court, all we have is the fact that they havent complied with the cca or sar, so we can say the alleged debt is in dispute..an offer of payment was made but they refused, snce then, my wife has been pursuing if they are entitled to collect the debt in the first place...if we win, do they pay us costsas stated previously in our affidavit?..just off to get changed

thanks al for the help, will post this afternoon...

[citizenB]

sorry beaconsman, only just seen this.

 

Good luck for today. I have my fingers crossed for you. Please report back as soon as you can:)

[beaconsman]

we lost. £4000 charging order and £50 a month repayment...as for the court case referred to in our affidavit, judge didnt want to know...we have until feb to put a claim forward or settle, my wife is pregnant so we r settling, end of case. other side did turn up, bought out reams of letters which we havent received....judge basically said to settle as if it went to court, wife would be made to go bankcrupt..due to her profession, we cant do this...they r using this against her as wel and the barstards know it...we have no cca prrof, nothing, yet the judge went with them,,,sucks big time....

[Seminole]

Looking back through this thread I thought this was a hearing to set aside a stat demand for a credit card debt? Was it something else as I don't see how a charging order can have been granted in these circumstances?

[beaconsman]

it was a credit card and yes, they can have a charging order put on...

[Seminole]

it was a credit card and yes, they can have a charging order put on...

 

I'm still confused. One of the defences to a stat demand is to offer security by way of a charge over a property. Is this what you did or did the judge impose a charging order? Did you sign something agreeing to a charge?

[beaconsman]

judge said to do this....she said we would lose it went further...not being funny, but they can bully us into thinking we have the upper hand, please please, dont take all the advice on here as gospel, i did, used everyhting that was sent to me but int he end it turned out [pretty useless as the judge didnt want to know half of the affidavit....refuse to lose the house over bankruptcy for 4grand, face it they won...

 

Thanks to all who gave advice on this matter, we will be in touch with them to agree to a charging order...and repayment plan.

[lilly white]

there is somthing not right here.

 

did the judge refuse to set this a side and on what grounds

[beaconsman]

case is adjourned until 2nd febr as we send a witness statement in, but if we fail, then they can go ahead and make my wife bankrupt, due to her proefession, we cannot allow this, so are settling witha charging order..and repayment. Unlike others, we cannot afford to take a massive risk on our property, nearly lost our first house, not losing this one...for noone..

[Bazooka Boo]

Definitely doesn't ring true here? Something is amiss?

[lilly white]

ok the creditor has agreed for a charge on the property plus a repayment plan.

 

that s kind of them......... however i do undestand your position but i must say it would not be my position.

 

they have not provided a cca if this is right they cant enforce.

 

what sort of judge did you have for gods sake.

 

Mrs Thompson went on to say that she had an alternative case which was to the effect that assuming Barclays had failed to produce a s78 copy, the Court had power to order them to do so by way of an injunction. And if they subsequently produce a copy of the signed application form, the issue of an IEA can be looked at then. And if they do not, then the Court should at least make a declaration at common-law, not under si42, that the agreement is permanently unenforceable and not merely unenforceable for the duration of a s78 breach as s78 (6) provides. I do not think that such an alternative argument assists Mrs Thompson. First I have to deal with the principal claim being made now, as to an IEA which is the focus of the applications. Second, the question as to the appropriateness of such an injunction is an open one: paragraph 16 of the judgment of HHJ Brown QC in Rankine (supra) suggests that it may be but that question did not arise directly for that decision there. Third, it ignores the fact that if a proper case of IEA is mounted, disclosure will take place and of course at that point, if not earlier when the bank makes its defence, it is going to have to disclose the documents relevant to that agreement, whether it had to disclose them at the earlier s78 stage or not. Finally, I do not see that a permanent declaration of the kind mentioned by Mrs Thompson would be appropriate when s78 (6) expressly says that the agreement will be enforceable for so long as the breach persists. If it does, the agreement remains unenforceable. If at some later stage it is cured it is difficult to see why the creditor should not then be entitled to enforce.