Barclays / Woolwich Mortgages / TLT Solicitors

[PeterT1953]

Lea, many thanks again for your help.

 

She went to the court this afternoon, and I went with her as moral support. With a statement for the court, which she handed to the Usher. She was not called and did not see the judge at all. He simply sent a message saying that he was "adjourning the case indefinitely" and that in due course she would receive the papers from the court confirming the decision.

 

So not sure where she stands right now, to be honest? It looks as though the Woolwich may have got an adjournemnt with liberty to restore? No doubt time will tell.

 

Is there anything she should be doing now - apart from continuing to make the agreed payments of course.

[Lea_HTH]

Lea, many thanks again for your help.

 

She went to the court this afternoon, and I went with her as moral support. With a statement for the court, which she handed to the Usher. She was not called and did not see the judge at all. He simply sent a message saying that he was "adjourning the case indefinitely" and that in due course she would receive the papers from the court confirming the decision.

 

So not sure where she stands right now, to be honest? It looks as though the Woolwich may have got an adjournemnt with liberty to restore? No doubt time will tell.

 

Is there anything she should be doing now - apart from continuing to make the agreed payments of course.

 

Once the court sends the paperwork, check it thoroughly. If it makes no reference to liberty to restore, then it has not been granted. If it does make reference to it, then I would suggest your friend write to the court, point out what she presumably said in her statement as per our discussions in this thread, and request that there be no LtR.

 

But, having said that, from the message sent back to you, the case has been adjourned generally, which means nothing further is going to happen at this time and if they do wish to restore the hearing they will have to start again from the beginning. I very much doubt anything further will occur, but do read the paperwork from the court thoroughly when it arrives just to double check.

[PeterT1953]

Thank you very much Lea. That does help to clarify things quite a lot. So the devil will be in the detail!

 

This whole experience has been quite an eye opener for me! I had not realised quite how mendacious some of the bank litigation deaptments could be.

[PeterT1953]

She has received a copy of the court order, which says "adjourned generally with liberty to restore before 31st March 2012, when claim will be struck out".

 

So not a disaster (I hope) but not quite what she asked for.

 

I would like to say a huge thank you to Lea and Ell-enn for your help and support in this.

[Lea_HTH]

She has received a copy of the court order, which says "adjourned generally with liberty to restore before 31st March 2012, when claim will be struck out".

 

So not a disaster (I hope) but not quite what she asked for.

 

I would like to say a huge thank you to Lea and Ell-enn for your help and support in this.

 

You're welcome - I do hope your friend has been grateful to you for all your help too...she's lucky to have you.

 

It's not what she wanted, admittedly, but it's not all doom and gloom either as the judge clearly recognised that another year would be too long and decided on six months instead. That's a plus. It sounds as if your friend will manage to stick to the agreement in any case and come March the liberty to restore will be gone. Watch out for the mortgagee playing the same card again in January or Feb though, they may well think they can gain another 6 m LTR and if they do try that, you really do need to attend the court and object in the strongest terms - and make a counterclaim for costs arising out of defending action that clearly need not be brought.

 

In the meantime, hopefully your friend can relax and enjoy her home.

[PeterT1953]

Thank you again Lea.

 

The same thought had crossed my mind, that they try the same strategy again, and try to bring the case back to court before the 31st March.

 

It is strange, but reviewing the correspondence and phone logs, it does give the strong impression that it is quite "personal", and that they are rather miffed that they did not get possession of her property, or a suspended order first time round. One of their representatives even suggested that debtors need to be punished. If so, it is extremely odd that an international banking group could be conducting a personal battle with a single lady.

 

But that is by the by. She still feels uncomfortable, but is concentrating on making some money and getting this problem laid to rest by clearing the arrears.

 

Thanks again for your help Lea.

[Lea_HTH]

Thank you again Lea.

 

The same thought had crossed my mind, that they try the same strategy again, and try to bring the case back to court before the 31st March.

 

It is strange, but reviewing the correspondence and phone logs, it does give the strong impression that it is quite "personal", and that they are rather miffed that they did not get possession of her property, or a suspended order first time round. One of their representatives even suggested that debtors need to be punished. If so, it is extremely odd that an international banking group could be conducting a personal battle with a single lady.

 

But that is by the by. She still feels uncomfortable, but is concentrating on making some money and getting this problem laid to rest by clearing the arrears.

 

Thanks again for your help Lea.

 

Trust me, it isn't personal. It obviously feels like that as to you, and your friend, it IS personal, but the staff making those phone calls don't care one way or the other. They are employed to do a job, which includes mercilessly chasing after arrears on the accounts, some of them behave as if it is their money, but it's a method of doing the job - it really isn't personal to any one individual debtor. Most debtors feel this way - you just have to read the threads on here to find that out.

 

That aside, as I said previously, if they do instigate proceedings again before March your friend must insist on a hearing before the judge and put in a counterclaim for the cost of defending the action again. They really should not keep using the justice system as a stick to beat someone who got into difficulties but made an arrangement and stuck to it rigidly. That is not what the courts are there for and they will take a dim view of a claimant who does this repeatedly.