MBNA county court Summons " Help Please

[DizzieDiva2010]

TRACK they have ticked the fast track because the claim is not suitable for the small claims track as there are technical consumer credit act issues involved which are not straight forward and could not be dealt with at a 1 hour hearing for summary judgement.

 

They estimate the hearing trial will take 1 day.

 

They have put that their costs incurred to date are £2000

 

They estimate the overall costs are likely to be £6000

 

This statement above answered by Restons in their latest Allocation Questionaire is the biggest laugh of all, what technical Consumer Credit Act issues involved are there?

If this case gets allocated to the fast track can i appeal against the decision or not?

[gh2008]

They will not get fast track - it will cost them more than they can recover and your offer is fair enough that the DJ may well give YOU punitive dmages against them

 

ALL IMHO of course

 

I would still go with my earlier advice and get your £20 in the post to them TOMORROW!!

 

Show willing .... it will go down very well

These sort of 'battles' are as much about winning the DJ over as who is right or wrong

Make yourself out to be the willing victim and them to be the bullies

 

and yes, £20pcm is right in the ball park of acceptable

[manchestman]

I agree with GH, Dizzy. Whatever your decision is as regards the case, do send a payment to Restons asap. My own hearing was adjourned till early December and the judge told us to use the time productively to see if we can come to some sort of agreement before then and I sent my proposals to restart paying the debt at £4 per month. (I too am on benefits and have 6 CC creditors in total.) I told Restons the truth, that I have no disposable income but am still prepared to honour my legal debts and pay 25% of my total income to the 6 creditors to be shared equally amongst them, - meaning Restons/HFC will get £4 at the start of every month. I sent a cheque for £4 and will send another just before the new hearing date, whether they agree to my proposals or not. I have not had a reply from Restons yet, but thought it wise to take the initiative. I am determined to show willing to the judge even though it will take 216 years to pay back the debt!

So, Dizzy, best to send a payment anyway. If Restons refuse to accept it or send it back, well that's their lookout and probably won't go down too well.

[DizzieDiva2010]

Good comments above.. I have sent them a letter and I will ask my sister to write me a cheque as I have not got that facility anymore and I will forward them £20.00.

 

They are purely bullies in my eyes after their pound of flesh. That I have pointed out to them.. I will post up my latest letter to them shortley. One thing I'm sure of is I'm not budging, I'm not being penalised with unfair charges when they are a profitable business with plenty of money which i am not as fortunate to have.

 

Plus all our hard work to give into them now, they can carry on and spit their dummy out of their pram, Iv made my final offer.

[DizzieDiva2010]

Send it off and then it becomes part of your case, if you decide to proceed. I'm sure a DJ would take all means of mediation and settlement into account before considering any verdict.

Beef up that bit about VC being their offer and suggestion not yours

 

Iv sent it off alright along with a second email giving them my opinion on their answers to their last AQ which are ridiculas and they know it, will post it up shortely. They are beginning to annoy me wasting my time when I clearly have far more important things to be getting along with like rebuilding my life, finding a job and regaining my independance financially. This has been going on now since last November. It's simple as far as I'm concerned, setting up a payment plan hasn't been a problem with my other creditors. This is all about Restons getting MBNA a charging order and I will do my upmost to stop them.

[DizzieDiva2010]

Don't worry my email was polite to Miss Tipping in a round about way lol

 

Andyorch especially and others have put alot of time into this case, if they think that I am going to back down now after spending most of this year fighting them then more fool them, whilst I have been fighting this and feeling stressed I could have been seeking work, so there is not a chance now that I have come this far I will fight to the bitter end. So we will see won't we soon how this is going to end????? !!!!!!

Edited November 4, 2010 by DizzieDiva2010

[AndyOrch]

Information for your thread Dizzie:-

 

 

Citizens Advice is deeply concerned about the changes to charging order legislation. CAB evidence already shows that some creditors may use court action and enforcement of court orders inappropriately, and that such use of enforcement can be exacerbated by unsuitable court practice. Increasing numbers of bureaux are reporting that more courts are now making ‘forthwith’ judgments which require immediate payment in full, instead of instalment orders, even where debtors have fully informed the court of their inability to pay large instalments. A ‘forthwith’ judgment means that the debtor is immediately in default of the court order and the creditor is able to take enforcement action. Where the debtor has equity in their home, a charging order will ensure that the debt will be repaid when the property is sold, either by the debtor themselves or following an Order for Sale. This new practice of many county courts and creditors results in very extreme consequences for relatively small debts:

Regards

Andy

[DizzieDiva2010]

I have my ESA appeal tomorrow at 330pm at the Tribrunal! I only got 6 points! I'm applying for voluntry work my representative tomorrow deals with voluntry applicants so I will fill the form out whilst I'm there, hopefully get a place and start getting myself back into the swing of work

[gh2008]

Information for your thread Dizzie:-

 

 

Citizens Advice is deeply concerned about the changes to charging order legislation. CAB evidence already shows that some creditors may use court action and enforcement of court orders inappropriately, and that such use of enforcement can be exacerbated by unsuitable court practice. Increasing numbers of bureaux are reporting that more courts are now making ‘forthwith’ judgments which require immediate payment in full, instead of instalment orders, even where debtors have fully informed the court of their inability to pay large instalments. A ‘forthwith’ judgment means that the debtor is immediately in default of the court order and the creditor is able to take enforcement action. Where the debtor has equity in their home, a charging order will ensure that the debt will be repaid when the property is sold, either by the debtor themselves or following an Order for Sale. This new practice of many county courts and creditors results in very extreme consequences for relatively small debts:

Regards

Andy

 

How very true Andy

 

I had a forthwith on a £650 debt that I had admitted and asked to pay off @ £10 pcm. I sent them my £10 and they returned it. Took me to Court and got a forthwith, then instructed the High Court Enforcement Officers!!! I ended up making an N245 app - refused !!

So I went to the High Court, appeared same day in front of a Master and he was not happy at all at the £10 being returned granted a Stay of Execution and set a date for a new redetermination telling me to keep sending the £10pcm until the hearing (they all got returned)

 

(Bearing in mind this is over £650 and £10 pcm!!!)

 

Creditor didn't turn up and the Master was furious and the Order was brilliant £10 pcm and if I don't pay they have to apply to the High Court for a lift of the stay before they can then apply for another enforcement order

 

this was all because they refused to accept the £10 payments ..........

[DizzieDiva2010]

Information for your thread Dizzie:-

 

 

Citizens Advice is deeply concerned about the changes to charging order legislation. CAB evidence already shows that some creditors may use court action and enforcement of court orders inappropriately, and that such use of enforcement can be exacerbated by unsuitable court practice. Increasing numbers of bureaux are reporting that more courts are now making ‘forthwith’ judgments which require immediate payment in full, instead of instalment orders, even where debtors have fully informed the court of their inability to pay large instalments. A ‘forthwith’

judgment means that the debtor is immediately in default of the court order and the creditor is able to take enforcement action. Where the debtor has equity in their home, a charging order will ensure that the debt will be repaid when the property is sold, either by the debtor themselves or following an Order for Sale. This new practice of many county courts and creditors results in very extreme consequences for relatively small debts:

Regards

Andy

 

Thanks some useful information above, I also found some yesterday on a CAB website with regards to the Banking Code il try and post that up. I disagree with charging orders being allowed on debts under £20,000.00. I think the lenders should start being more responcible whilst lending and ensure that they only lend to people that can afford to make the payments.

 

Lenders are just as much to blame as the debtor in some case's.

 

How can I start a petition on this issue? I would like to send it to Parliament seriously!

Edited November 4, 2010 by DizzieDiva2010

[gh2008]

Charging Orders are pretty ineffectual as long as there is at least 1 other person on the deeds other than the debtor (and unrelated to that debt).

But it's still not nice.

 

Bailiffs, HCEOs & Statutory Demands can be much more effective in destroying someone's life.......

[DizzieDiva2010]

How very true Andy

 

I had a forthwith on a £650 debt that I had admitted and asked to pay off @ £10 pcm. I sent them my £10 and they returned it. Took me to Court and got a forthwith, then instructed the High Court Enforcement Officers!!! I ended up making an N245 app - refused !!

So I went to the High Court, appeared same day in front of a Master and he was not happy at all at the £10 being returned granted a Stay of Execution and set a date for a new redetermination telling me to keep sending the £10pcm until the hearing (they all got returned)

 

(Bearing in mind this is over £650 and £10 pcm!!!)

 

Creditor didn't turn up and the Master was furious and the Order was brilliant £10 pcm and if I don't pay they have to apply to the High Court for a lift of the stay before they can then apply for another enforcement order

 

this was all because they refused to accept the £10 payments ..........

 

If this happens to me then so be it I will go down the same route. Sometimes we cannot predict what is going to happen in our life and if the unfortunate happens then it does that's life, if a person is willing to pay I disagree entirely with creditors behaviour and it's about time debtors stood up to them because nothing will change or become fairer until we do!

[DizzieDiva2010]

Charging Orders are pretty ineffectual as long as there is at least 1 other person on the deeds other than the debtor (and unrelated to that debt).

But it's still not nice.

 

Bailiffs, HCEOs & Statutory Demands can be much more effective in destroying someone's life.......

 

My ex partner is on my mortgage and he is not party to this debt I have with MBNA so yes that is another reason why I refuse to agree to a voluntry charging order. I have my book on Baliffs bought from Cag.

[DizzieDiva2010]

Charging order or not I'm still not backing down, the Judge agreed at the last hearing that my offer was fair and now that I had a basic bank account he also didn't see why a payment plan couldn't be confirmed, hopefully il get the same Judge, but I can't back down now it's against my religion

[AndyOrch]

VC versus CO

 

A customer may sometimes try and avoid court action by offering to have a charge placed on their property. This acts as a security for the debt and, in effect, is the equivalent of a charging order but without the need for a county court judgment.

Where the property is in joint names, a voluntary legal charge can have advantages over a charging order, but it is a serious step to involve a third party who must be made fully aware of the consequences of their action. If you have already obtained a county court judgment a voluntary legal charge may still be advantageous.

Criteria for considering a voluntary legal charge

 

The Creditor should never suggest to a debtor that he or she should offer to have a charge placed on their property. The initiative must always come from the debtor. A voluntary legal charge may be appropriate where all of the following criteria apply

• the customer’s ability to earn is severely impaired (for example, by illness or old age)
  
• there is sufficient equity in the property to secure the full amount of the debt and any further interest
  
• the customer cannot pay in any other way
  
• there are unlikely to be further debts
  
• the customer holds a clear title to an interest in the property, i.e. there are no occupants in the property with tenancy rights which would undermine our right to enforce the legal charge
  
• any joint owner who is not liable for the debt must be prepared to take independent legal advice and agree in writing to a charge being placed over the whole property
  
• the customer resides in the property and cannot move to a cheaper residence.
  

You should not consider any application for a voluntary legal charge unless all the criteria are met.

[DizzieDiva2010]

Oh dear

 

Now we know what Restons do whilst there being paid to work lol

Edited November 4, 2010 by DizzieDiva2010

[AndyOrch]

Looks like they have already seen 3 guests:lol:

[DizzieDiva2010]

VC versus CO

 

A customer may sometimes try and avoid court action by offering to have a charge placed on their property. This acts as a security for the debt and, in effect, is the equivalent of a charging order but without the need for a county court judgment.

Where the property is in joint names, a voluntary legal charge can have advantages over a charging order, but it is a serious step to involve a third party who must be made fully aware of the consequences of their action. If you have already obtained a county court judgment a voluntary legal charge may still be advantageous.

Criteria for considering a voluntary legal charge

 

The Creditor should never suggest to a debtor that he or she should offer to have a charge placed on their property. The initiative must always come from the debtor. A voluntary legal charge may be appropriate where all of the following criteria apply

• the customer’s ability to earn is severely impaired (for example, by illness or old age)
  
• there is sufficient equity in the property to secure the full amount of the debt and any further interest
  
• the customer cannot pay in any other way
  
• there are unlikely to be further debts
  
• the customer holds a clear title to an interest in the property, i.e. there are no occupants in the property with tenancy rights which would undermine our right to enforce the legal charge
  
• any joint owner who is not liable for the debt must be prepared to take independent legal advice and agree in writing to a charge being placed over the whole property
   
  
• the customer resides in the property and cannot move to a cheaper residence.
  

You should not consider any application for a voluntary legal charge unless all the criteria are met.

 

Good read and I do not fit the above criteria.

[AndyOrch]

But the importance I am pointing out and as suggested yesterday DD the Claimant should never suggest a VC it must come from the debtor.

Any legitimate financial institute would not entertain a VC or even suggest one!!!! More for your argument:wink:

[DizzieDiva2010]

I hope it's an enjoyable read for them I will be back soon lol

[AndyOrch]

Usually is for all when you log on DD:-D

[DizzieDiva2010]

Usually is for all when you log on DD:-D

 

Really I'm pleased I can entertain people to, we all need a laugh at times of dispair or we'l go crazy

[DizzieDiva2010]

But the importance I am pointing out and as suggested yesterday DD the Claimant should never suggest a VC it must come from the debtor.

Any legitimate financial institute would not entertain a VC or even suggest one!!!! More for your argument:wink:

 

Sorry Andy I'm abit slow at times, you should know me by now I need it explained in plain English Something else to put forward to them. Well if you all find me entertaining you'l enjoy my email to them!

 

I think I may start a a new thread on charging orders because they are very common now. My next mission is starting a petition on this issue.

[Chipmeister]

Really I'm pleased I can entertain people to, we all need a laugh at times of dispair or we'l go crazy

 

DD - I love you - you always make me smile, plus your situation helps me plan ahead for what I may have to deal with on my own case. I think you have amazing courage and you're not afraid to stand your ground against these bullies. You go girl!!

 

CM

[DizzieDiva2010]

DD - I love you - you always make me smile, plus your situation helps me plan ahead for what I may have to deal with on my own case. I think you have amazing courage and you're not afraid to stand your ground against these bullies. You go girl!!

 

CM

 

Thank you for your incouraging support.. I have been bullied all through my life in one way or another and that has made me the person i have become today. It makes me smile when i read i have put a smile on someone's face and this forum has kept the fight in me. I can clearly see how many people are troubled by debt and its not always through fault of their own and even if it were my moto is everybody makes mistakes, life is one big lesson. However we got ourselves into debt we all deserve the chance to put it right. Lenders have to take some responcibilty in my opinion. Of course im doing this for me but also to help win the fight for others too. Good luck with your case too.