CCJ Help

[Marse]

Hi all

 

Time limit to set aside a Judgement? Isn't the ruling from the time you are first informed that the Judgment is in error?

 

SAR documents opened in 2009:

 

Letters, DN's and letter before action all sent to the incorrect address. Plus an inflated claim.

 

My first knowledge of these facts became manifest in 2009 - not in 1993.

 

 

Marse

[vjohn82]

Vj

 

With respect, isn't the calculation £4443.00 over 48 months at an APR of 22.9%? Have you not calculated £6585.60 over the same variables?

 

 

Marse

 

Got ya...

 

Irrespective, the agreement is enforceable and the Default Notice at the time meets all of the conditions necessary for enforcement purposes.

[Marse]

HI vj

 

Have you time to look at my post 57?

 

I have no problem with the documents being valid, more importantly is where the OC sent them - Post 57 explains, and I can post up the evidence.

 

Regards

 

Marse

[vjohn82]

Ok... so a case can be made that you didn't receive the documents. But that still leaves the documents being fully enforceable. I would predict, in light of the troubles consumers are facing in the courts, that the costs of setting it aside would be ridiculous.

 

I would also imagine the stress of such a case would not be good for you; I know how much it has taken out of me to do it.

 

Unless these CCJ's now affect you I would enjoy spending time with your family who I am sure are better company than us evil caggers ;-)

[Marse]

Hi V

 

I hear what you say, and I will listen.

 

But I have been paying £10 per month on a ficticious CCJ and this amounts to approx £1920 + Interest which is a princely amount and they are chasing me for payment on this nefarious CCJ

 

As said, I will listen to you vj, but I am in dispute with these heathens and they will return

 

Marse

[vjohn82]

Hi V

 

I hear what you say, and I will listen.

 

But I have been paying £10 per month on a ficticious CCJ and this amounts to approx £1920 + Interest which is a princely amount and they are chasing me for payment on this nefarious CCJ

 

As said, I will listen to you vj, but I am in dispute with these heathens and they will return

 

Marse

 

Well paying money on a fictitious CCJ is another matter entirely.

 

The CCJ you mentioned is valid to the extent that it can be; I agree the address details are incorrect etc but that's the way it goes. I have had it done to me when I knew 5% of what I know now. It won't happen again to me...

 

... but we need to put it to rest so to speak.

 

We need to start from the beginning with the payments issue because that is precarious ground for the company that are appropriating court directed funds to another account.

 

Make the payment issue simple and write it down how you see it (forget the issues with addresses etc, it simply confuses matters).

 

Cheers

 

VJ

[Marse]

Hi vj

 

On opening the SAR I found one CCJ and the relevant Statement of Account. This document had a closing balance of £301.33 dated 05/02/1995.

 

There was not one entry transaction for the £10 per month that I had been paying since 1993.

 

There was, however, another Statement of Account where I found the majority of the transactions. There was no agreement or any relevant CCJ.

 

In their accompanying letter which arived after a full investigation the opening paragraph read:

 

"We are currently holding three accounts for you wth three Judgements that were consolidated into one amount." The OC decided to credit the higher valued Judgement and leave the "true" Judgment as unpaid.

 

1: I have since obtained from the dca's solicitor that his client is not holding three Judgements - just the one which is contained in the SAR.

 

The solicitor said that I would have to prove that his client did not hold the necessary Judgement for me to get my money back.

 

vj, I do have this proof, but I will not declare it until you tell me to.

 

Marse

 

PS: In the same letter, this dca has added a further account for a value in excess of £4000: again no agreement, and no CCJ. This account had never been mention at any date prior to the letter. I challenged them, and they state their accounts are correct.

Edited February 16, 2010 by Marse

[vjohn82]

Hi vj

 

On opening the SAR I found one CCJ and the relevant Statement of Account. This document had a closing balance of £301.33 dated 05/02/1995.

 

1. So, for the avoidance of doubt, this is the CCJ which is the paperwork you have already produced earlier in the thread?

 

There was not one entry transaction for the £10 per month that I had been paying since 1993.

 

There was, however, another Statement of Account where I found the majority of the transactions. There was no agreement or any relevant CCJ.

 

2. Did this statement of account list a reference number etc?

 

In their accompanying letter which arived after a full investigation the opening paragraph read:

 

"We are currently holding three accounts for you wth three Judgements that were consolidated into one amount." The OC decided to credit the higher valued Judgement and leave the "true" Judgment as unpaid.

 

3. Did they list the CCJ numbers?

I have since obtained from the dca's solicitor that his client is not holding three Judgements - just the one which is contained in the SAR.

 

The solicitor said that I would have to prove that his client did not hold the necessary Judgement for me to get my money back.

 

vj, I do have this proof, but I will not declare it until you tell me to.

 

4. For the time being what is this proof? You do not need to post the document.

 

Marse

 

PS: In the same letter, this dca has added a further account for a value in excess of £4000: again no agreement, and no CCJ. This account had never been mention at any date prior to the letter. I challenged them, and they state their accounts are correct.

 

5. Have they stated an account number?

 

 

Marse,

 

I've put some points in red and numbered them. Just to keep the consistency please respond in those numbered points. This will allow me to keep a track of it.

 

I do suspect there is something going on with this and whilst I usually do not get involved in depth with cases outside of the HFO/TR remit, I think this is too important to leave you to it alone.

 

You have my backing with this and all of my resources.

 

VJ

[Marse]

Hi vj

 

1: Yes

 

2: Yes

 

3: No

 

The letter said that the consolidation occurred on the 13/08/1993: the day of the original CCJ.

 

In the case history of the OC, they returned to the County Court and applied to have the accounts consolidated on the 03/09/1993. No self respecting OC would want to consolidate the accounts twice!!!

 

According to the letter, the OC successfully obtained 3 Judgments which were consolidated into one amount.

 

On the 26/10/1993 the OC returned to the County Court to have the judgement obtained on the 13/08/1993 set aside.

 

If they did succesfully obtain 3 Judgements on the 13/08/1993, for what reason would they place this successful judgement at risk by applying to have the Judgement set aside.

 

In the SAR there was one Judgement: they could never have held three. For completeness, the Court ordered a stay of execution on the payment of my £10 monthly instalment.

 

 

Marse

Edited February 16, 2010 by Marse

[Marse]

Hi vj

 

I missed question 5: the answer to which is, yes

 

Marse

[vjohn82]

1. So, for the avoidance of doubt, this is the CCJ which is the paperwork you have already produced earlier in the thread?

 

1: Yes

 

Ok... PM me the Claim number

2. Did this statement of account list a reference number etc?

 

2: Yes

2. Ok... PM me the ref number and the company name

3. Did they list the CCJ numbers?

 

3: No

 

Ok... have the court given you ANY CCJ numbers that the claimant allege existed at the time?

The letter said that the consolidation occurred on the 13/08/1993: the day of the original CCJ. In the case history of the OC, they returned to the County Court and applied to have the accounts consolidated on the 03/09/1993.

 

We need to ask by what means they requested this consolidation.

 

We need to also be asking why the judgement was entered on the date that they claim the consolidation occurred

No self respecting OC would want to consolidate the accounts twicw!!!

 

No opinions... let's stick to facts ;-)

According to the letter, the OC successfully obtained 3 Judgments which were consolidated into one amount.

 

On the 26/10/1993 the OC returned to the County Court to have the judgement obtained on the 13/08/1993 set aside.

 

So they applied to have the original CCJ set aside; this means they must have attempted to "split the claim" which is unlawful under s.35 of the County Courts Act 1984

In the SAR there was one Judgement: they could never have held three.

 

Can you PM me all of the documents included in this SAR?

 

 

Points in blue are things you need to do.

[Marse]

Hi vj

 

This is going to take some time: can I do this in a piecemeal fashion? If so, I can start now with the easier options.

 

The contents of the SAR is huge but I will do it

 

 

On a more personal issue, I believe I read something in your threads about an illness and I did not attach that illness to you. Can I ask about your illness? I am concerned.

 

 

Marse

[diddydicky]

Hi diddydickey

 

I signed an agreement that was hand written. The salesman asked me to sign an agreement that required typing. He told me that it would be typed and that he would post it to me

 

The deposit was in the form of part exchanged car. The deal was exchange a car in any condition and receive £1000. I did not have a vehicle to exchange. The salesman said that he could find one in the yard.

 

This is the point when the CAB told me of the fraud. The car that I "allegedly" exchange was a d-reg Montego - the car that I was buying was a F-reg Nissan. Why would I purchase a F-reg when I had a d-Reg?

 

The Default Notice:

 

To remedy the breach I had until 4th November - the date of the letter was 21st October - not three months.

 

When I purchased the car I was residing at the matrimonial home in the Midlands (1989). In 1991 I relocated to London. The CAB informed the OC on a number of occasions that I did not reside at the matrimonial home. I also provided them with my address and a telephone contact number. (I do have the copies of all the relevant letters.)

 

The OC sent all letters to the incorrect address, despite the fact that they had been informed otherwise.

 

I did not find out these facts until 2009 when I received the SAR.

 

 

Regards

 

 

Marse

 

i hate to be the bearer of bad news- but it seems to me that you and the salesman were involved in a conspiracy to defraud the finance company, you were clearly complicit in the deception

 

As i said to you before i would stop digging and let sleeping dogs lie if i were you

[vjohn82]

...

Edited February 17, 2010 by vjohn82

[vjohn82]

i hate to be the bearer of bad news- but it seems to me that you and the salesman were involved in a conspiracy to defraud the finance company, you were clearly complicit in the deception

 

As i said to you before i would stop digging and let sleeping dogs lie if i were you

 

Could you elaborate diddy? I have heard other cases where this seems to be a common practice.

[Marse]

Hi diddydicky,

 

How could I have been complicit?

 

I knew nothing about the exchange until I opened the SAR in 2009?

 

At the meeting, the salesman asked a load of questions and wrote down on what appeared to be an agreement. He asked me how much I could afford per month and I told him.

 

He then phoned the Finance Company and informed them of my status, he then told me that I had been accepted. He gave me the written agreement and I signed that and one that he was going to have typed. He told me to return the following day to pick up the car and the agreement.

 

Next day, he told me that he had found a "banger" that I could part exchange.

 

As far as I was concerned, the deal had been approved by the Finance House and it would cost me £137.20 per month for the next 48 months.

 

Probably a bit "green" but not complicit in the fraud. The CAB informed me that the dealer just happened to be in their database and told me to report the issue to the police and hire a solicitor.

 

 

Marse

[vjohn82]

Next day, he told me that he had found a "banger" that I could part exchange.

 

As far as I was concerned, the deal had been approved by the Finance House and it would cost me £137.20 per month for the next 48 months.

 

Probably a bit "green" but not complicit in the fraud.

 

Ignorance of the law is not a defence unfortunately.

 

This has placed you in a very precarious position and your credibility, based on your posts, looks suspect to others reading in.

 

You posted this:

 

"How could I have been complicit? I knew nothing about the exchange until I opened the SAR in 2009?"

But in a previous post you wrote:

 

"The deposit was in the form of part exchanged car. The deal was exchange a car in any condition and receive £1000. I did not have a vehicle to exchange. The salesman said that he could find one in the yard."

It seems you clearly knew about the exchange.

[diddydicky]

Hi diddydicky,

 

How could I have been complicit?

 

I knew nothing about the exchange until I opened the SAR in 2009?

 

At the meeting, the salesman asked a load of questions and wrote down on what appeared to be an agreement. He asked me how much I could afford per month and I told him.

 

He then phoned the Finance Company and informed them of my status, he then told me that I had been accepted. He gave me the written agreement and I signed that and one that he was going to have typed. He told me to return the following day to pick up the car and the agreement.

 

Next day, he told me that he had found a "banger" that I could part exchange.

 

As far as I was concerned, the deal had been approved by the Finance House and it would cost me £137.20 per month for the next 48 months.

 

Probably a bit "green" but not complicit in the fraud. The CAB informed me that the dealer just happened to be in their database and told me to report the issue to the police and hire a solicitor.

 

 

Marse

 

if a person says to you "lets do something dishonest" (lets pretend you had a car to trade in) and you agree to that suggestion- however reluctantly- then you are complicit in that act

 

the finance company would argue (successfully) that they would not have loaned you 100% of the purchase price of the car

 

you (both) therefore acted together to defraud the finance company hence the conspiracy

 

it was also common with mortgages (falsyfying the income etc) - believe me - it is a criminal offence and you don't want to go there willingly

[vjohn82]

If this was ever raised in any proceedings Marse then a civil matter quickly escalates into a criminal one whether you were aware of the duplicity or not.

 

Where civil litigation is "balance of probabilities" the criminal side tends to deal in absolutes. Did you take part in the deception; yes, you were the only other party to it.

[diddydicky]

Hi diddydicky,

 

How could I have been complicit?

 

I knew nothing about the exchange until I opened the SAR in 2009?

 

At the meeting, the salesman asked a load of questions and wrote down on what appeared to be an agreement. He asked me how much I could afford per month and I told him.

 

He then phoned the Finance Company and informed them of my status, he then told me that I had been accepted. He gave me the written agreement and I signed that and one that he was going to have typed. He told me to return the following day to pick up the car and the agreement.

 

Next day, he told me that he had found a "banger" that I could part exchange.

 

As far as I was concerned, the deal had been approved by the Finance House and it would cost me £137.20 per month for the next 48 months.

 

Probably a bit "green" but not complicit in the fraud. The CAB informed me that the dealer just happened to be in their database and told me to report the issue to the police and hire a solicitor.

 

 

Marse

 

marse, i mean no disrespect but i am a man of the world- you knew exactly what was going on!!

[Marse]

Hi vj,

 

No, no, no!

 

The first part occurs in the salesman's office in 1993. He asks, have you got a car that you can part exchange as we have an offer of £1000 off the purchase. I reply, no I have not. He then replies, don't worry we can, perhaps, find one in the yard.

 

Fast forward to 2009 when I open the SAR, I find a suspect agreement that depicts an allowance of an amount in excess of £3000. I had not seen the typed agreement until that day.

 

Also in the SAR, I find the actual exchange note for the Montego. I have even written to the DVLA asking for evidence that I might be the keeper of the vehicle in that time period. Unfortunately, I sent a cheque for £2.50 - it should have been £5.00 - if you want, I can post that up.

 

The misunderstanding is down to me: poor sentence construction!

 

 

Marse

 

PS: I have just checked: this is clearly explained in Post 42 and highlighted in bold font.

Edited February 17, 2010 by Marse

[Marse]

Hi all

 

As I am asking for help, I would not tell a lie to the person who is helping me.

 

diddydicky,

 

A man of the World you may be, but you are so wrong in your assertion, as stated see my post 42

 

vj,

 

In this particular issue, please accept that I am not lying to you. My fault lies in a not too good sentence construction - and on that particular post, I was hurrying to complete the posr for you.

 

 

Marse

[diddydicky]

Hi all

 

As I am asking for help, I would not tell a lie to the person who is helping me.

 

diddydicky,

 

A man of the World you may be, but you are so wrong in your assertion, as stated see my post 42

 

vj,

 

In this particular issue, lease accept that I am not lying to you. My fault lies in a not too good sentence construction - and on that particular post, I was hurrying to complete the posr for you.

 

 

Marse

 

i'm not sitting in judgement on you marse- i am playing devils advocate to try and help you - along with the benefit of many years as a copper

 

so lets NOT fast forward to 2009- lets stay at the start

 

Car finance deals are signed on the dealers premises as a rule and not sent through the post- so i very much doubt that you signed a blank agreement in the dealers office

 

the car you bought cost 7938- the trade in allowance for the "old banger" was 3495.

 

where did you think the 3495 had come from if not from a "phantom" trade in?

 

the false details of your residence/employment etc are another part of the conspiracy and your protestations that you signed it blank and it was filled in later would fall on deaf ears

 

clearly the value of the nissan was hyped up to twice the real price in order to get you onto the finance, which as i said earlier would never have been granted at 100%

 

you said the dealer told you the next day that he had used the banger for the trade in- not that you only "discovered it" in 2009

 

every bone in my body is telling me that you would not stand a cat in hells chance of convicing ANY right minded person that you were not aware of what was going on- and that you might in the process of chasing this impossible dream- drop yourself right in the sh*t

 

Marse, you are 71 with a failing heart

 

it will fail a hell of a lot quicker if you embark on this (mis) adventure

Edited February 17, 2010 by diddydicky

[Marse]

diddydicky

 

The car that I allegedly traded in in 1993 was a d-Reg montego, that exchage note is in the SAR

 

The car that I purchased was a f-Reg nissan sunny. Why am I trading in a car that is 2 years older than the car that I am purchasing - when I haven't got 3000 pennies?

 

On visiting the dealers initially, the first salesman told me that I could not get credit. The second salesman phoned me with a deal.

 

As soon as I saw the exchange note in the SAR, I wrote to the DVLA for confirmation that I was not the keeper. In this connection, I have already challenged the dca's solicitor on this point and they too, are writing to the DVLA.

 

The CAB on seeing this told me the dealer was being fraudulent. I can tell you this, the CAB informed me that the signature on the agreement who signed on behalf of the owner, had also signed other agreements ranging from Devon, Birmingham, Liverpool, and Glasgow. Hence they told me that what had happened was fraudulent.

 

A person who is complicit in something like this, does not write to the DVLA for clarification and challenge the opposing dca's solicitor.

 

When I informed him of this, he said that he would report me to the Court's as a vexatious (something).

 

No, diddydicky, the salesman told my ex-Wife that the typed agreement would be posted. About three months thereafter, the dealership went out of business.

 

Marse

Edited February 17, 2010 by Marse

[diddydicky]

diddydicky

 

The car that I allegedly traded in in 1993 was a d-Reg montego, that exchage note is in the SAR

 

The car that I purchased was a f-Reg nissan sunny. Why am I trading in a car that is 2 years older than the car that I am purchasing - when I haven't got 3000 pennies?

 

On visiting the dealers initially, the first salesman told me that I could not get credit. The second salesman phoned me with a deal.

 

As soon as I saw the exchange note in the SAR, I wrote to the DVLA for confirmation that I was not the keeper. In this connection, I have already challenged the dca's solicitor on this point and they too, are writing to the DVLA.

 

The CAB on seeing this told me the dealer was being fraudulent. I can tell you this, the CAB informed me that the signature on the agreement who signed on behalf of the owner, had also signed other agreements ranging from Devon, Birmingham, Liverpool, and Glasgow. Hence they told me that what had happened was fraudulent.

 

A person who is complicit in something like this, does not write to the DVLA for clarification and challenge the opposing dca's solicitor.

 

When I informed him of this, he said that he would report me to the Court's as a vexatious (something).

 

No, diddydicky, the salesman told my ex-Wife that the typed agreement would be posted. About three months thereafter, the dealership went out of business.

 

Marse

 

well i wish you luck- you have my advice!!