Weightmans Threatening Charge Before CCJ

[MoneyOne]

Here's the story - I have a client with a debt with Weightmans - they've been on the phone both to the client & myself, and what they've stated (on a recorded call) is that they want £xx or they will go for a charge - they have NOT issued a claim or got a judgement yet - they are just making the threat as though the judgement is a definite.

 

 

They shouldn't be making this threat, should they? Does anyone know of a letter template that would suit this?

 

 

P.S - The debt is still owned by Equidebt - they were CCA'd 03/12/09.

[PGH7447]

Money one are you sure you work for a dmp!!

 

this sounds like a standard threa-o-gram, pay us something or we may take you to court - so what

[Seminole]

They can't get a charging order without a CCJ- you are quite correct. I'd ignore it though as if they don't know the process, there's no point in educating them.

 

It sounds like they've failed to comply with the CCA within the deadline, so send them the account in dispute template letter.

[MoneyOne]

They can't get a charging order without a CCJ- you are quite correct. I'd ignore it though as if they don't know the process, there's no point in educating them.

 

It sounds like they've failed to comply with the CCA within the deadline, so send them the account in dispute template letter.

 

Oh yes - but I was also going to twist the knife by informing them that their recorded & official threat of a Charge before the CCJ had been issued, acknowledged, defended or admitted was... what, abuse of process, or something? In this case, they were using the threat of a charge as a lever to try to get a payment arrangement in place.

[MoneyOne]

Money one are you sure you work for a dmp!!

 

this sounds like a standard threa-o-gram, pay us something or we may take you to court - so what

 

No, it wasn't standard - this was very specific...

[the_shadow]

Its against the OFT debt collection guidance for a creditor or their representatives to claim they can take action that they cannot, the OFT looks at violations in this regards when renewing credit licences etc....

 

I would imagine as weightmans are solicitors its against the SRA code of practice? to claim untruths and a complaint could be made..

 

However in practice they'll probably claim it was a junior employee that made the threat and as such they'll receive training or such like.

 

It might be better to keep it under the hat just in case legal action does take place... then show the judge?

 

edit: and tbh the phrase "go for a charge" could be read as they will start proceedings to obtain a charge as an end product of proceedings just as much as they will apply for an immediate charging order, its ambiguous imvho .

 

S.

[MoneyOne]

Its against the OFT debt collection guidance for a creditor or their representatives to claim they can take action that they cannot, the OFT looks at violations in this regards when renewing credit licences etc....

 

I would imagine as weightmans are solicitors its against the SRA code of practice? to claim untruths and a complaint could be made..

 

However in practice they'll probably claim it was a junior employee that made the threat and as such they'll receive training or such like.

 

It might be better to keep it under the hat just in case legal action does take place... then show the judge?

 

S.

 

Thanks Shadow, I'll monitor this one, then if they go for a claim without providing CCA then we can back things up with this transgression...!

[palomino]

It has just occurred to me : perhaps the wally at Weightmans meant consent order.

[MoneyOne]

It has just occurred to me : perhaps the wally at Weightmans meant consent order.

 

 

Don't think so - they were demanding an amount higher than the clients pro-rata share to them (which they'd seen & acknowledged) with the stated intention of going for a charge should they not get the monies they wanted.

[PriorityOne]

When I was dealing with A&L some years ago, I was told a similar thing on the 'phone.... and I wrote in and said that I'd be more than happy to discuss a variety of breaches under CCA law, the Data Protection Act and others, should they decide to proceed with legal action.

 

A&L later informed me in writing that all legal action was dropped. The solicitors were Shoosmiths...

 

[MoneyOne]

Just spoke to Weightman's - they say no action is pending as they are waiting for the CCA from Equidebt .

 

I'll be waiting with interest...

[MoneyOne]

When I was dealing with A&L some years ago, I was told a similar thing on the 'phone.... and I wrote in and said that I'd be more than happy to discuss a variety of breaches under CCA law, the Data Protection Act and others, should they decide to proceed with legal action.

 

A&L later informed me in writing that all legal action was dropped. The solicitors were Shoosmiths...

 

 

 

Groovy - I'm just composing a similar letter!

[MoneyOne]

Could someone critique my letter?

Name

Address

 

Weightman’s Reference: xxxxxxxx

19th December 2009

Dear sir or madam,

2.2 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

b. leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it

creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors' lack of

knowledge

I write in regards to a complaint under OFT guidelines section 2.2 (b).

You are currently collecting upon an alleged debt for Equidebt. Both myself and my debt management company have received calls from yourselves in which it is stated that I must submit to a voluntary charge on my property, or you will get a charge attached through the court.

This is a threat you cannot be making. There is no claim, there is no judgement, and the outcome would not necessarily be a judgment against me.

You have made a threat that, as solicitors and (I assume) followers of the SRA code of practice, you should not be making.

The calls you made to (my debt management company) were recorded. You have acknowledged receipt of my financial statement, disposable income and pro-rata offer to the alleged debt. During these calls the statement that “you will go for a charge” if I do not agree to your proposal. Again, you should not be making this threat or presenting it as fait accompli.

Please treat this as an official complaint, and send me a copy of your complaints procedure, together with a letter from a relevant authority explaining your position on this point.

You will already be aware that Equidebt are in default of a request to supply a true copy of the CCA.

Yours faithfully,

Mr. Client

[PriorityOne]

I've re-worked it a little...... It must go by rec. delivery, by the way.

 

 

Weightman’s Reference: xxxxxxxx

 

COMPLAINT

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

I refer to a recent telephone conversation, during which your company stated its intention to obtain a Charging Order against my home. In fact, it was stated quite clearly that I must submit to a voluntary charge on my home, or you will obtain a charge attached through the court.

 

Not only is this statement incorrect in its assumption of an automatic right on your part, it also goes directly against OFT Debt Collection Guidelines and is classed as an unfair practice.

 

2.2 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

b. leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it

creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors' lack of

knowledge

 

For your information, a legal request for a copy of an alleged Consumer Credit Agreement (Consumer Credit Act) was made to Equidebt on xx/xx/xx and to date, they have been unable to comply. As such, there is no substance to any claim you may be threatening at this present time and therefore, no chance of you obtaining a County Court Judgement and subsequent Charging Order as an undefended fait accompli. Notwithstanding this, all calls you have made to my debt management company have been recorded.

 

As you have already acknowledged receipt of my financial statement, disposable income and pro-rata offer for an alleged debt, I am quite frankly amazed at having to point out aspects of law to a firm of solicitors who should already be familiar with it. I therefore look forward to your written confirmation that, on this occasion, you have made a genuine mistake. Failure to respond however, will see this complaint escalated to the Solicitors' Regulatory Authority and any other; as I see fit.

 

I await to hear from you in due course. In the meantime, please be aware that the default of a legal request continues and as such, all collection activity should be suspended for as long as the default continues.

 

Yours sincerely/faithfully,

 

Edited December 18, 2009 by PriorityOne

[MoneyOne]

Thanks PriorityOne, I'll copy that one!