Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I apologise if I was being unclear. Where it currently stands is that they will have it repair, placing scaffolding in our garden for 5 days. They have moved fast, but we will still have to postpone our contractors, meaning, we won't necessarily have the work done in time for the wedding and therefore will incur additional expenses for either a marquee or a wedding venue. They are vehemently against having any kind of liability in any regard but continue repeating that they are legally entitled to use our garden for their repairs (I believe this is true unless the work can be carried out using a cherry picker). The neighbour seems either indifferent or oblivious to the fact they can't reach all of the side of the roof from the space where they can place the scaffolding. They have asked their roofer of choice about using a cherry picker but the roofer has said it wasn't possible. It's not clear whether the roofer doesn't want to use a cherry picker or whether there is an issue with it. They have told us it is a problem that we are installing a gazebo as it will prevent them to access their roof from our garden in the future?!?  
    • Couldn't agree more, really wanted a true ruling on this just for the knowledge but pretty sure the Judge made some decisions today that he didn't need to?.. maybe they all go this way on the day? We hear back so few post court dates I'm not sure. Each Judge has some level of discretion. Their sol was another Junior not even working at their Firm, so couldn't speak directly for them! that was fortunate I think because if she would have rejected in court better, she might have  been able to force ruling, we are at that point!, everybody there!!, Judge basically said openly that he can see everything for Judgement!!!  but she just said "I can speak to the claimant and find out!" - creating the opportunity for me to accept. I really think the Judge did me a favor today by saying it without saying it. Knowing the rep for the sol couldn't really speak to the idea in the moment. Been to court twice in a fortnight, on both occasions heard 4 times with others and both of my claims, the clerk mention to one or both parties "Letting the Judge know if you want to have a quick chat with each other"! So, it appears there's an expectation of the court that there is one last attempt at settling before going through the door. So, not a Sol tactic, just Court process!. Judge was not happy we hadn't tried to settle outside! We couldn't because she went to the loo and the Judge called us in 10 minutes early! - another reason to stand down to allow that conv to happen. Stars aligned there for me I think. But yeh, if the sol themselves, or someone who can make decisions on the case were in court, I would have received a Judgement against today I think. She was an 'advocate'.. if I recall her intro to me correctly.. So verbal arguments can throw spanners in Court because Plinks dogs outsource their work and send a Junior advocate.
    • that was a good saving on an £8k debt dx
    • Find out how the UK general elections works, how to register to vote, and what to do on voting day.View the full article
    • "We suffer more in imagination than in reality" - really pleased this all happened. Settled by TO, full amount save as to costs and without interest claimed. I consider this a success but feel free to move this thread to wherever it's appropriate. I say it's a success because when I started this journey I was in a position of looking to pay interest on all these accounts, allowing them to default stopped that and so even though I am paying the full amount, it is without a doubt reduced from my position 3 years ago and I feel knowing this outcome was possible, happy to gotten this far, defended myself in person and left with a loan with terms I could only dream of, written into law as interest free! I will make better decisions in the future on other accounts, knowing key stages of this whole process. We had the opportunity to speak in court, Judge (feels like just before a ruling) was clear in such that he 'had all the relevant paperwork to make a judgement'. He wasn't pleased I hadn't settled before Court.. but then stated due to WS and verbal arguments on why I haven't settled, from my WS conclusion as follows: "11. The Defendant was not given ample evidence to prove the debt and therefore was not required to enter settlement negotiations. Should the debt be proved in the future, the Defendant is willing to enter such negotiations with the Claimant. "  He offered to stand down the case to give us chance to settle and that that was for my benefit specifically - their Sols didn't want to, he asked me whether I wanted to proceed to judgement or be given the opportunity to settle. Naturally, I snapped his hand off and we entered negotiations (took about 45 minutes). He added I should get legal advice for matters such as these. They were unwilling to agree to a TO unless it was full amount claimed, plus costs, plus interest. Which I rejected as I felt that was unfair in light of the circumstances and the judges comments, I then countered with full amount minus all costs and interest over 84 months. They accepted that. I believe the Judge wouldn't have been happy if they didn't accept a payment plan for the full amount, at this late stage. The judge was very impressed by my articulate defence and WS (Thanks CAG!) he respected that I was wiling to engage with the process but commented only I  can know whether this debt is mine, but stated that Civil cases were based on balance of probabilities, not without shadow of a doubt, and all he needs to determine is whether the account existed. Verbal arguments aside; he has enough evidence in paperwork for that. He clarified that a copy of a DN and NOA is sufficient proof based on balance of probabilities that they were served. I still disagree, but hey, I'm just me.. It's definitely not strict proof as basically I have to prove the negative (I didn't receive them/they were not served), which is impossible. Overall, a great result I think! BT  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

NRAM got [uncontested] CCJ/CO. £6k PPI on £15k loan! [never reclaimed] now sold debt - help


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3723 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi, the hearing is for summary judgment and I dont know why its at Gateshead

as I stated on the AQ that I was not prepared to

travel the length and breadth of the country to defend myself against the allegations

of third parties (perhaps maybe thats why its at gateshead lol).

 

Im certainly not going all the way up there,

so I need to get it moved. Any ideas how one goes about requesting this?

 

I also have stumbled upon this thread, and it has provided a possible defence I could persue.

 

 

I think my CCA is atleast unenforcable as there is no statment of my right to cancel:

 

this from (post 9 at bottom of thread)

http://www.reclaimtheright.eu/forum/showthread.php?162851

 

 

There is also the issue of the 'Right to Cancel' which must be present in an outlined box within the signaturelink3.gif page

if an agreement is signed at home.

This is covered by the CCCA 1983 see pages 4 & 5 and must be in the prescribed form.

Link to post
Share on other sites

pers no

 

i would sent the stand PPI let and a spreadsheet.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, the hearing is for summary judgment and I dont know why its at Gateshead as I stated on the AQ that I was not prepared to travel the length and breadth of the country to defend myself against the allegations of third parties (perhaps maybe thats why its at gateshead lol). Speak to the court about getting it moved to your local court.

 

Im certainly not going all the way up there, so I need to get it moved. Any ideas how one goes about requesting this?

 

I also have stumbled upon this thread, and it has provided a possible defence I could persue.

 

 

I think my CCA is atleast unenforcable as there is no statment of my right to cancel: It's a good thread. you'll need to read up A LOT now if you're going to start putting a defence together around this. And start looking into SJ hearing threads. You've got that bridge to cross first. What they're saying is they've seen your defence and it has no reasonable prospect of success, hence the SJ hearing.

 

this from (post 9 at bottom of thread) http://www.reclaimtheright.eu/forum/showthread.php?162851

 

Start reading up on PPI. Put as much info up as you can about yours. if you're going to introduce a c claim at this stage I believe there's a charge.

 

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/ex50_e.pdf

 

M

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hi folks im back!!!!! :-)

 

Im going to be tackling this issue very shortly now that i have the time and energy to devote to it.

 

Can anybody answer this question or share there experiance......

 

Northern Rock succesfully got a judgment as i didnt attend the hearing prefering to stick head in sand.

 

They put a charge on my house

wondering if it would be wise to start poking at the hornets nest by writing to them about the PPI

and then possibly attempting to get the judgment set aside and consequently the charge lifted?

 

Never done anything this complicated before so all input welcome.....

Edited by will lliw
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats correct nobody has chased me yet,

 

im new to this so are you saying this is unusual?

 

Could they know that they have document issues?

 

Dont want to start challenging them though untill i know what might happen re the charge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

im talking to myself again look lol. I just read http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?203298-A-guide-to-Charging-Orders-amp-Orders-for-Sale%281-Viewing%29-nbsp

 

Would it be best to urgently send NR a ppi letter and cca request

as i think about geting the CCJ set a side on the gournds it contains PPI which was misold?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you ever worked out what the PPI claim amount would be and compared it to what the amount of the CCJ was to see what impact it has in reducing the debt?

 

If not it might be an idea to do so in order that you can see exactly how the land lies.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ok good idea,

 

my first action then would be to SAR NR to see how the land lies as you say.

 

But as my thread title says atleast a third of the debt is PPI and related interest i bet.

 

I recall that my request to have this case heard at my local court was rejected

and as i couildnt attend the hearing a judgment was issued against me in my absence..

 

Ive got lots to catch up on here , back soon lol.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Hi all, been a while since last logged in here,

 

just been reading my thread because this one has just crawled out from under the carpet again.

 

Thanks for all your help in the past,

i suffer from depression and have to work hard to keep my head out the sand,

 

thanks for your patience all....

 

Apparently this debt has been sold to Marlin Capital now and

 

there attack dogs, Mortimer Clarke have written stating their client seeks an affordable way for the debt to be repaid.

 

The debt it is now claimed to be in excess of 23K.

 

Im not over worried about Marlin since they are a bulk DCA untill im told otherwise

and I do have a PPI reclaim bomb ive been saving up just for this event,

 

right now just thinking of the best way to deal with this one as my income is low,

im currently on ESA awaiting appeal having been turned down by ATOS,

as such I do not have the funds to pay this and its unlikely i ever will due to sickness.

 

Ond day i accept I may lose the house especially if the market booms lol

but until that day comes I will fight them there is no equity at present and I think this has kept me in my home for now...

 

.. I wish i could turn back the clock and live my twenties all over again, debt free this time.....

 

A summary of actions so far:

 

2004 Unsecured loan taken with NR for 16K with 6K of unwanted PPI (not yet reclaimed)

2009 Default due to sickness, did not claim on PPI to many hoops to jump through.

2010 Northern rock changes name to NRam

2010 Nram provide copys of CCA complying with SAR. :-(

2010 NRam obtained CCJ, I did not attend as case was not moved locally despite requesting local hearing.

2010 NRam obtained charge on house due to above CCJ.

2013 Marlin capital buy debt and begin to pursue payment.

 

I have yet to write to NRam to claim the PPI back,

didnt want to do that whilst they still held the debt

as worried they might have turned up the heat to collect the debt claimed.

 

Just thinking of my best strategy to proceed here

but a PPI claim to NRAM is imminent now,

 

anybody know how NRam will deal with that claim having sold the debt on,

will they write a cheque to the Debts current owner?

 

Any thoughts welcome even if its a telling off for letting this get so far.....

 

I think my next steps should be to CCA and SAR the attack dogs Mortimer Clarke

to ask them who the hell Marlin capital are since I have no record of them other than this letter today,

 

im sure I didnt receive a NOA from Nram.

 

When thats done I will do the PPI claim letter to NRam,

finally get to let that cat out the bag....

 

Just one more question please, becasue of the PPI mis sold element of this debt is the charge or even CCJ itself devoid at all?

Edited by will lliw
Link to post
Share on other sites

hi will

 

I don't think the ppi element could be used to revoke the ccj/co.

 

as for the cca poss being wrong having ppi etc

the ccj will over rules that now sadly.

 

nram have obv sold the debt

 

now you've never made any payments

so

I think we can assume that the new owners will have to go back to court to get their name sust'd on the CCj/co

they cant enforce it I think.

 

however.

I would suspect the new owners or their dog

no NOTHING about the CCJ/CO

 

so DONT tell them...

 

correct?

 

the letters are just std threat-o-grams?

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply DX100uk and the thread title change, most welcome indeed. :lol:

 

I have not communicated anything to Marlin and dont intend to give anything away to them like that!

 

As far as i'm concerned, right now Ive go no business with Marlin

and they have none with me until A NOA is received from NRam.

They are just bothering me with harassing letters....

 

I think I will write to Marlin telling them to politely sod off and get my PPI claim into NRam pronto.

 

Will be interesting to see how NRam deal with it,

must confess this one gives me the willys a bit being the largest alleged debt i have to deal with..

 

.. Got proper stitched up on that one though no wonder the markets crashed with lenders behaving so wickedly......

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

UPDATE..... Its getting complicated.

 

Received in writing from NRAM, they have agreed that the PPI was front loaded to the loan and missold so the outstanding balance they claim to be around £16K now and not £22K+. :-D Little bit of progress there and some money to add into any offer I might be compelled to make if this loan is still lawfully enforceable that is, i have no idea who owns the note these days...... Read on youlle see.

 

 

So NRAM have offerd a refund of the ppi plus interest but with terms that i'm still considering including they want to change the charging order they obtained on the back of the summary judgment to the new figure above. I'm still researching this but surely NRAM would need a new CCJ judgement and since there can only be one CCJ per loan then i can only imagine there plan is to get the current CCJ with the £22K figure set aside and apply for a new hearing i.e start the process again or is that just wishfull thinking?

 

Further to that there is the question over NRAM actually have any lawfull right to do anything with the alleged outstanding debt now since Marlin claim ownership having claimed to have purchased it from NRAM in late 2013? But NRAM obtained the judgment by default in part because I was unable to travel to the hearing at Gateshead getting on for nearly 4 years ago now. So it gets better, NRAM claim to have disposed of the debt to Marlin, in which case how can NRAM do anything with it since they do not have lawfull title to it anymore and if they do then it proves Marlin are indeed interlopers?

 

This is complex and im sure others have similar storys and experience to share, I would be grateful to hear about them. :| At this point i dont know who has legal title to the alleged debt but I know only NRAM have the right to enforce the charge since its in there name but they sold it to Marlin and as such have been paid off Debt disposed, written off etc, and the CCJ the charge relates to is now invalid being the wrong figure due to NRAM miss selling PPI????

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...