Nat West business OD & Shoosmiths - HELP

[paulwlton]

Post a few statements before and after the account number and sort code were changed. 

[HP Mum]

Gone through everything again.  Still confused but somethings are a bit clearer:

Ltd Co personal guarantee #1 for 15k end 90's

Ltd Co personal guarantee #2 for 20k start 00's

#2 was supposed to supersede #1 - so total guarantee was 20k.

 

I have just found a letter dated 03.  The manager was extending my overdraft to -£32k to facilitate trading.  It is a formal letter: "the o/d facility made available by the bank to the customer in terms of the confirmation of on demand business o/d facility shall be secured by the following: 1) existing security held by the Bank as follows: Guarantee for £20k and relative interest by ... [me] ..."

So this letter proves the guarantee level was 20k.

 

Another letter from NW - start 04.  They quote the 2 guarantees now.  And thus allege a total guarantee of £35k.  This is convenient (for NW) as the account balance at that time was just under -£35k. 

 

The next 2 letters from NW are from CMS, Telford - end 04.   Both letters were 'formal demands'.

One a demand for repayment of my guarantee liability for £20k - relying on the 00's guarantee.

The other was a demand for repayment of my guarantee liability for £6.5k - relying on the end 90's guarantee

At exact same time, NW switched account to Telford; gave new account # & sort code.   

 

Start 08 - NW sent a statement with the new account # opening balance at end 04, of -£26.5k.   This was the total of the 2 formal demands together.   The interest rate + margin charged from end 04 to start 08 are noted in the statement.  The balance had risen to almost -£33k.

 

Mid 08 - Shoos got involved.

Their successful court claim was for £6.5k.  All the Shoos paperwork since has referred to only this amount.  They refer in recent correspondence to this amount having been claimed under the #1 guarantee of £15k.     

Which is curious.   As the NW '03 letter proved that £15k guarantee has been superseded by £20k guarantee.

Which makes me think that NW/ Shoos got a ccj using an expired/ superseded guarantee???  is that important?

 

NW never litigated using the #2 £20k guarantee.

At the point that NW/Shoos claimed -  there was -£33k alleged total owing.

They only litigated for £6.5k. 

Thus the balance owing was then apx -£26k.

I never understood why they did not litigate on this amount???

But NW did keep sending statements of 'Debit Interest Accrued' for years.   The statements all had the original Ltd Co sort code and account # - NOT the suspense account #.  All showed base rate + 4%.  The interest was applied quarterly. 

I have statements to hand until '14.  (may have later). 

This accrued interest totalled over £26k by '14.   NW never sent any docs to show 'on what amount' the interest was accruing?   If it was the -£26k in 08, it would be way over £50k - but then I guess I shouldn't worry about this now - as surely it must be SB???

 

If NW/ Shoos litigated on the expired /invalid guarantee does that make any difference?

Shoos allege all was done correctly and I must keep paying....

Should I just ignore and not pay?  Or write and state they got the ccj under an expired guarantee and never claimed under the valid guarantee, which is now SB?

Whatever - I am just going to draw a line under this pretty soon....

 

Edited September 12, 2019 by HP Mum

[AndyOrch]

Topic open

[HP Mum]

Another 2 years  have passed and Ive just had letter from shoos.

They write to say they are no longer handling this account for nw.   

They state that nw have passed the account on to 'equivo' - not a sale of debt - which is still legally owned by nw; just  a transfer of admin.  The balance is still owed to nw.

 

Ive made no payments to shoos for years.

 

Is this anything to worry about?

Edited June 7, 2021 by HP Mum

[dx100uk]

new name for the group that own shoosmiths's thats all.

 

 

[dx100uk]

open

 

dx

[HP Mum]

I now understand that Shoos set up a JV with Chartsbridge - a collections and enforcement business.    The JV enterprise is called Equivo and Shoos is the majority owner.    Equivo is apparently designed to be a ‘one-stop shop’ for recoveries-related issues, providing collections, legal and enforcement services...

 

So should I be worried that Equivo now seems to be focusing on my very old account with NW?   

 

Received a letter end Sept asking for my proposal for the repayment of the debt outstanding to their client - NW.   

They refer to the Claim No. which was NW-v-me back in 2008.

** NW successfully got a Judgment against me for £6.5k before I found this site.

 

Apparently NW has informed Equivo that they may be prepared to accept less than the full amount due in settlement - if I make a lump sum payment in the short-term.

No interest is accruing.

 

They say "client would much prefer to enter into a formal arrangement with me that is both reasonable and affordable in line with my current financial circumstances rather than having to consider further enforcement options"

 

They include the usual I&E form

 

Should I just ignore - as usual?

I can't pay anything anyway...

 

[dx100uk]

ship has well sailed with regard to poss enforcement imho.

 

just want mugs to fund their xmas party

 

 

 

[HP Mum]

Ok   Thanks DX.

Its the couple months run up to Christmas that dcas always try to ruin by sending loads of threatening letters out...

Will just ignore