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

Help! Husband's 18year old mortgage debt landed on our doorstep today. I'm terrified.


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4045 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

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 822
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hi guys, well its the 23rd of February and I have just received a letter from the H. They seem to be adopting the short and sweet motif too.

 

They acknowledge receipt of my last letter and advises my OH and me that they

'will liaise directly with the FOS and await contact from them'

they 'thank us for the complaint reference which has been noted on your file'

 

As i say short and ...

 

So pretty standard stuff?

Is liaising directly with the FOS normal?

Does that mean no more letters to us?

Link to post
Share on other sites

While the complaint is with the FOS, they should not make any further demands until a decision has been made.

 

Debbie

 

Agreed. You will have to wait now for the FOS to get back to you. This may take a while, as the FOS receive a massive number of complaints and apparently don't have enough staff to deal with them.

 

As I said before, once the FOS start looking into this, they will work with both sides until a final decision is made.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

So could that be...H bugger off or OH pay!!!!!

 

Well we are hoping for the former and not the latter.

 

Another point to consider is that sometimes the FOS do partially uphold complaints. They might decide that Halifax have made mistakes and should not seek collection this late in the day. I think that is a possibility.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter from the FOS today (27/2/12) laying out what is going to happen...

 

they have asked Bank of Scotland (?) for further information to aid them in their investigation

their adjudicators will begin to look at our case

who will introduce themselves and discuss our complaint in more detail, which should happen within 12 weeks

(does this mean they will call us/me??? I really would prefer this to be done via letter)

they want us to tell them if our circumstances change...

if we experience serious financial difficulties

(isn't that most of the western world at the moment??)

if we experience serious ill health

(does that count for me or just my OH, and why do they want to know?)

if we are threatened with legal action relating to the complaint

if BoS contacts us with an offer

 

They've given us their email and phone numbers and reference number

 

they enclose a factsheet about how they deal with complaints and what happens next....

So is this pretty much run of the mill stuff???

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Halifax/Bank of Scotland (HBOS) now part of Lloyds Banking group.

 

Sounds like a standard letter, just telling you what they will be doing and asking you to contact them, if you have anything you need to tell them. e.g If Halifax contacted you, you would refer it onto the FOS as necessary.

 

As it is a standard letter, it won't be catered for your individual case, but they will know from your complaint that you are dealing on your OH's behalf.

 

I suspect that you now won't hear anything from the FOS, this side of Easter.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Uncle B!

As for me, I wont be seen much this side of Easter either.

Having had all year so far off work, I'm going in for the kidney op next Monday and don't expect to be doing much of anything for at least a week,

then a further 4-6 weeks off work!

what with that and my Dad, 2012 has been a bit of a s*** year so far.

Thanks again...I will get back in touch with any developments.

Edited by perplexedofdorset
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck with the OP !

 

Just buy yourself plenty of chocolate and some DVD box sets, ready for when you need to rest for a few weeks.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Uncle B!

As for me, I wont be seen much this side of Easter either.

Having had all year so far off work, I'm going in for the kidney op next Monday and don't expect to be doing much of anything for at least a week,

then a further 4-6 weeks off work!

what with that and my Dad, 2012 has been a bit of a s*** year so far.

Thanks again...I will get back in touch with any developments.

 

Hi, I hope everthing goes well with the op.

 

Big.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hi there,

Well today my OH and I received a letter from the FOS, explaining that our case has now been assigned to a specific adjudicator,

the reference number has changed and asking us to contact them if any other information comes to light.

 

The adjudicator, a woman, says the time it will take to reach an outcome depends on issues involved and whether they need more information.

 

She notes that I did not supply a phone number or email and urges me to contact her by phone, 'so she may better understand our concerns'...I really don't want to go down this route, Is it essential?

 

Her understanding of our complaint is that

A) we do not believe the H are able to pursue the shortfall as more than SIX years have passed and

B) we are concerned that the H did not act appropriately when attempting to sell the property after possesion...

 

Would you guys agree with those issues??????

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say A needs to be amended to something like - We do not believe that H are complying to the CML code of practice (an organisation which they aspire to belong to). The code stipulates that mortgage shortfalls will not be chased after 6 years without payment or acknowledgement.

 

It is an offence to advertise an affiliation to a code or organisation and then not to comply with that code or code of that organisation. (offence under UTCCR and unfair under MCOBS regulations I think)

 

Basically if they were not CML members then they would be within their rights to chase for up to 12 years. so they are in fact able to chase but shouldn't due to their affiliation with the CML (Council of Mortgage Lenders)

Edited by rdm2006
Link to post
Share on other sites

It may also be worthwhile adding that you would not have taken the mortgage out with them if they had not been members of the CML so saying that they are and not complying with the CML code has caused you to make a financial transaction that you would not have made otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with input made by rdm.

 

Perplexed. Why don't you write down all the points previously made, including the latest input from rdm and then give the adjudicator at the FOS a call. You can send her a letter/email, as a follow up, so they have this in writing.

 

It can be a good idea to build some rapport with the person from the FOS and there is no problem phoning them, as long as you follow up in writing.

 

When you phone them, you can if you wish apologise for not including a phone number as you have been going through some health problems and a bereavement. Then just summarise the issues that you have and advise that you will put in writing.

 

If they ask any questions, it will just be to make sure that they have understood the points you are making. Just stick to the information that you are aware of.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

i notice that no-one has ever suggested checking your hubby's cra file?

 

might be something there might not

 

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

cra file???????

 

I really feel so tired with all this, I don't know that I can phone someone...Am I being a wimp???

 

It scares me, my OH has a wonderful ability to wpe things from his mind, ie first disastrous marriage/wife etc...

Do I really have the information I need?

 

I don't know what to do anymore...

Link to post
Share on other sites

cra file???????

 

I really feel so tired with all this, I don't know that I can phone someone...Am I being a wimp???

 

It scares me, my OH has a wonderful ability to wpe things from his mind, ie first disastrous marriage/wife etc...

Do I really have the information I need?

 

I don't know what to do anymore...

 

CRA - DX is suggesting that your OH gets hold of his credit record from a Credit Reference Agency, to see what is recorded on there. Experian offer a free 30 day trial, as long as he remembers to cancel, to avoid getting into a subscription.

 

I can understand not wanting to phone the FOS and that is your choice. Just write back, acknowledging their letter and advise that you are currently recuperating from an operation, hence not phoning or providing a telephone number.

 

In your letter you can just confirm what you have already submitted and advise that you do not feel that it is correct for a CML member to be chasing for a shortfall debt, 15 years after the house was sold.

 

It is up to the FOS to look into whether it is correct or not for Halifax to be chasing for the debt.

 

Just do that for the minute and perhaps when you or the OH are feeling better, if the FOS need to discuss this on the phone, one of you will feel able to do so.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh Uncle B, what would i do without you??!!

 

I'll try and write that over this weekend, and let you know if i hear back..

 

Do you not think it is slightly suspect that all this started because my OH incurred a parking ticket,

which he believed he had paid correctly (something about a 24 hour period)

which he then ignored because that's what he does and he is so busy working away..

the parking ticket was passed to SS's which he then paid then suddenly this.......

 

???????

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...