Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Apologies dx100uk  I did not put the answers in red  Thank you all for your patience. H
    • Which Court have you received the claim from ? Northampton  Name of the Claimant ? Overdales solicitors  How many defendant's  joint or self ?  Self Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to.  13 may 2024 What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? the claim is for the sum of £6163.61due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the consumer credit act 1974 for hsbc uk bank plc. Account 4546384809766042. The defendant faild to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a default notice was served under s 87(1)  of the consumer credit act 1974 which as not been compiled with. The dbt was legally assigned to the Claimant on 23/08/23, notice on which as been given to the defendant.  The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the county courts act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £117.53 the Claimant claims the sum of £6281.14. Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?   Not to my knowledge. Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred?  No Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ?  Online but it was for a smaller amount they kept on increasing this with me asking Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim.  It was assigned to a debt collection agency  Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? yes  Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor?  Yes I also made offers to pay original creditor a smaller amount but was not replied to Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ?  No Why did you cease payments? I was made redundant and got a less paid job I also spent some time on furlough during covid and spent some 3 months on ssp off work. What was the date of your last payment?  May 2021 Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes at the time I communicated with all my creditor's that I was running out of funds to pay the original agreements once my redundancy money ran out that was when my accounts defaulted. I then wrote to all my creditor's with pro rata offers of payments but debt collectors took over the accounts.
    • Just an update for all. I received about a letter every other week, increasing in threat levels. Then I hadn't had one for a about two weeks, then Saturday received a carbon copy of the very first letter they sent me in February. Made me laugh, rinse and repeat. 
    • So, your response was not received by the SCP as you did not send it with a valid stamp. Therefore, from my two option in post #14, the first option is the only one available to you, but you do not have the option of asking to be sentenced at the fixed penalty level as the reason the SCP did not receive your response was down to you. Here's a reminder of what to do: Respond to the SJPN by pleading “Not Guilty” to both charges. In the “Reasons for pleading Not Guilty” box state that you are willing to plead guilty to the speeding charge providing, and only providing, the “Fail to Provide Driver's Details" (FtP) charge is dropped. This is a tried and tested method to deal with your problem and is almost always successful. Before the pandemic it was necessary to attend court to do this "deal" because it needs the agreement of the police prosecutor.. During the pandemic courts made every effort to have as few  people as possible attend and they began doing this deal under the "Single Justice" procedure without the defendant's attendance. Some courts have carried this procedure on whilst others have reverted to a personal attendance being necessary. If you are required to attend, your case will be taken out of the SJ procedure and you will be given a date for a hearing in the normal Magistrates' Court. If that is the way they do it in the area involved you will have to attend, see the prosecutor and offer your "deal" in person. 
    • what device are you using? copy all the questions then come here to this thread and paste them. then answer each question click on red give answers here. when done  hit submit reply bottom right.  
  • 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

Statutory Demand Issue & question


Eshezo
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4848 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 all,

 

I know there is alot on Stat Demands here and I hope I'm not duplicating but I need some advice.

 

I own a Ltd company and with one of the suppliers I also have a personal guarantee for the account.

 

We stopped dealing with this particular supplier some months ago due to bad service and goods consatntly arriving damaged, the company agreed to supply goods in compensation and never did in addition they owe a credit on some other goods.

 

They have been chasing for final payment over the last few months and we have exchange alot of corrispondance with me fully explaining the dispute and even supplying internal names of those that agreed credits etc...

 

so the final account due is still being disputed in regard to the actuall amount payable.

 

The invoices are made up of many small amounts (£30-£150) with a total amount of £4007 (according to them) but this includes £40 charge on each invoice for late payment rather than the late payment charge being calculated on the whole amount, anyway the debt is actually more like £1500 .

 

They have issued a Statutory Demand dated the 18th Nov but delivered on the 27th Nov despite my corrispondance disouting and asking them to look into the queries.

 

On the demand they also say that the company is now in "Compulsory Liquidation" which it isn't and the Statutory demand is issued to me personaly as the guarantor.

 

Shurley if they really don;t want to resolve the queries and believe that they are owed this amount they should persue it through the county court with the company first or atleast issue some type of action on the comany before shoving a Statutory demand on me personally ?

 

I'm planning to have it set aside but still have some questions....

 

1/ The fact that the date is the 18th Nov on the paperwork and the service date was the 27th, can they persue anything further based on the paperwork date , ie should I panic to get the set aside in by Monday ?

 

2/ Any ideas on the view of the court with this, ie are they likley to set it aside or am I in a big deep hole ?

 

I can let anyone have any detailed info if more is required, just post here and I'll put it up.

 

Thanks in advance for anyones advice.

 

rgds

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good evening,

 

In answer to your questions

1/ The 18 days run from the date of service, it would be sensible to put in your set aside statement that it came into your hand on the 27th.

2/ The insolvency courts are not a short cut to settle a dispute, this the function of a County Court. Insolvency judges hate this kind of thing and I would urge you to put in a claim for your costs. The standard litigant in person rate is £9.25 per hour but I have seen, on this forum, the self employed and directors claiming their professional rate £80/ hour or so and the judge agreeing, especially if the claim is vexacious.

IMO if the invoices were made out to your limited co. and it is still trading you have a complete defence, more so if the account is disputed and you have a paper trail.

Lastly, I worked for a company that included a personal guarentee as part of the account opening process, howeve the co;s solicitors were certain that it would not hold up in court. It was quite useful though to twist the arm of slow payers.

Martin g

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for that, I'm planning to put the set aside foward next week.

 

Could you expand on the personal guarantee part where you say the Co didn;t think it would stand up anyway ?

 

It's very frustrating that they have taken this avaenue because I do have a good paper trail of letters and responses that just do not address the issue.

 

rgds Shaun

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good Morning,

The co. I worked for put the statement in as part of the signature box to open the account. their solicitors felt that it should be a separate, discreet box/ statement with it's own signature so that the applicant was fully aware of the commitment.

Without seeing the document you signed I would not like to comment.

However, the only thing that you have to demonstrate to the judge is that a " triable issue" exists and that the SD is an abuse of process because the case should be put before a county court judge who can assess the case and order full disclosure of all the documents/ invoices/ statements/ return notes/ etc.

Put " a triable issue exists" a few times in your statement.

You need to put the claimant to strict proof that your co. is in liquidation and demand from them full details of how they established this "fact", this is the reason they have issued an SD so they need to put up or shut up. Obviously a letter from your bank or accountant or even a bank statement or VAT demand would prove you are still trading.

Lastly the £40 charge is a unfair penalty and would not be upheld by a court, a further "triable issue" and for this reason alone the sum claimed will be incorrect and should negate the SD.

Martin g

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI, I was in a similar situation to you a couple of years ago.

 

What marting says above is correct. As the company is still trading and the debt is disputed then they should not be using the insolvency process, this is from Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch):-

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2007/1998.html

 

[27] So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).

 

In addition, it is definitely a triallable issue as to whether or not you are a consumer and so the UTCCR and UCTA applies to you. In my case the judge said that this is an argument he hears regularly in the county court and so is clearly a triallable issue:-

 

First of all, UTCCR and the relevant bit of UCTA only applies if you are acting as a consumer. A consumer is basically defined as anybody who isn't in business connected with the contract. I said that my business or profession was not that of being a guarantor (I don't go round providing guarantees to people for a living) and that this guarantee was just a personal matter between me and the company. As a result UCTA and UTCCR applies. Actually there is a lot of case law in this area, look for example at R & B Customs Brokers Company Ltd v United Dominions Trust Ltd [1987] EWCA Civ 3, [1988] 1 WLR 321, [1988] 1 All ER 847

 

See these two links for some details about my experiences:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?137495-Statutory-Demand-and-set-aside-application&p=1481216&viewfull=1#post1481216

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?137495-Statutory-Demand-and-set-aside-application&p=1485773&viewfull=1#post1485773

 

It may also make a difference whether you signed as a director of the company or not. However as I didn't sign the gurantee in my capacity as a director I didn't look into this angle

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the help, I've prepared the set aside documents so I'll let you know the outcome.

 

The solicitors has to be mad !, I sent them a letter earlier this week pointing out the abuse of process and refering them to over 7 other letters of communication with all the disute facts between the companies asking them to withdraw the Demand or admit that it was issued in error. I told them that if they didn;t withdraw it I would apply to have it set aside and also for costs, they say in black and white that it was not issued in error and that they could not guarantee what further action they would take.

 

I think the court will love this one because it's clear that rather than try to settle the dispute they are completly abusing the process by issue me as the guarantor a stat demand.

 

Thank goodness for paper trails.....and if there is one piece of advice I can give anyone it's keep all your corrispondance and special deliver letters etc... because in this instance without it all it could be very difficult.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Martin, I've attached the draft of my set aside response, if anyone has suggestions for additions or wording I would appriciate it. The document here is an attachement to forms 6.4 & 6.5.

 

I've removed the actuall company names from a privacy perspective.

 

rgds

stat dec response for forum.doc

Edited by Eshezo
Link to post
Share on other sites

From what you have said and it was me it seems that there is a substantial dispute.....I would fight it

 

Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch)

 

So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collection where there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).

 

And this one as well..

 

HHJ Peter Coulson QC sets out in Jacob v Vockrodt [2007] EWHC 2403 (QB) when petitioning is an abuse of process that could involve the tort of malicious presentation of a bankruptcy petition.

 

The key parts of the judgement on abuse of process are:

 

Mr. Davies relied on the well-known passage in the judgment of Harman J in Re a Company [1983] BCLC 492 in which he said:

 

 

"First, it is trite law that the Companies Court is not and should not be used as (despite the methods in fact often adopted) a debt-collecting court. The proper remedy for debt collecting is an execution upon a judgment, a distress, a garnishee order or some such procedure. On a petition in the Companies Court, in contrast with an ordinary action there is not a true lis between the petitioner and the company which they can deal with as they will. The true position is that a creditor petitioning the Companies Court is invoking a class right (see Re Crigglestone v. Coal Co. [1986] 2 Ch 327) and his petition must be governed by whether he is truly invoking that right on behalf of himself and all others of his class rateably, or whether he has some private purpose in view. It has long been an order that a petition presented for the purpose of putting pressure on the company is not properly presented: see Re a Company [1894] 2 Ch. 349 and, in a slightly different context, Re Bellador Silk Ltd. [1965] 1 All ER 667."

It is, of course, right that a bankruptcy petition must not be utilised where the petitioner knows that the debt is the subject of a bona fide dispute, but chooses to proceed with the petition in any event, so as to put illegitimate pressure on the other party to pay the debt. But the authorities cited above cannot be taken as authority for any wider principle or proposition. In my judgment, the correct approach to the facts, in a situation where the petition has failed and it is subsequently suggested that the presentation was malicious, was that applied in Partizan Ltd v OJ Kilkenny & Co Ltd [1998] 1 BCLC 157 by Rimer J, when he concluded at page 173:

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi All, thought I would give an update and ending to what the outcome was.

 

I issude the set aside paperwork and a date of the 26th Jan was given for the hearing. The solicitor involved wrote to me and said they would contest the set aside application and included a long defence with costs that they were claiming of an additional £1300 !.

 

So when I arrived at the court their barrister wanted to talk prior to the case and he sat and said well despite his instructions he felt that he had little in the way of defence !, I couldn't believe he was actually say that to me .

 

We went into court and the Judge simply asked if there was a dispute on the amount to which the reply from the barrister was yes there seems to be... with that the judge basically bollocked him for even trying to use a Statutory demmand and said it was being set aside.

 

I had applied for costs along the lines of advice from you guys and they were awarded.

 

So thanks for your help everything 110% won and costs aswell.

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent news, very well done !! The sooner companies learn not to abuse the insolvency service by issuing statutory demands the better !! I think they hoped you might see the demand and panic and pay up !! What was their 'defence' can you posrt it up here ? (minus the personal details of course)..

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a situation very much along these lines and need some advice...long story cut short...I had to sign a personal guarantee for a supplier. I was the sole Director of the Company that I had to sign the PG for. This was is May 2010 and although I had paid supplier 20k for goods, which I had been forced into doing or I would have been put on stop, I had queries and issues over many invoices and other matters. The supplier in question is a worldwide corporation and had integrated a lot of other businesses into it over the previous years and were in turmoil, ie IT crashes, redundancies, relocations and basically headless chicken syndrome. These queries where there are some email trails and a lot of verbal communications were never sorted out and I was also at a stage where I was talking about selling my business to them. Sadly in early October my health failed me and I had for want of a better expression a ''nervous breakdown'' and was after some very odd behaviour!! seen by my GP and then local mental health team...Again long bit cut short, over the next couple of months on orders from GP and consultant psychiatrist I had to rest and let everything fall apart around me for the sake of my family and health.... Then the lawyers started....winding up petition for company and statutory demand against me....Despite five letters from NHS professionals including a consultant and GP advising that any stress could have a serious and detrimental affect on my health, they have failed to even acknowledge this and just pushed ahead. I let the Ltd company be wound up and have advisors dealing with that, however, I have to fight the stat demand as otherwise they will issue bankruptcy proceedings against me....The reason I let the Ltd co go is because I was too ill to fight it and had made the lawyers aware of this....I filed application to set aside stat demand and have hearing next month....I did advise claimants lawyers day before filing that I intended to defend and gave them reasons. Short reply from them was that they felt I had no grounds.

I am interested in case law or UTCA etc so if I do go to court I can mince any clever barrister to bits...I can prove my claims to illness and am happy to privately share anything with anyone on here who can or will help.

Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Eshezo,

I'm pleased to see that you have won, it sounds like a very comprehensive victory.

Have you had your costs from the other side yet, writing the cheque will really hurt them, and if not don't forget that you can put the Court baliffs in to collect the sum due.

 

Martin g

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...