Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform. [if mcol is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time] .  register as an individual on the Gov't Gateway Site  note down your details inc the long gateway number given, you might need it later.  then log in to the MCOL Website .  select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box. .  then using the details required from the claimform .  defend all  leave jurisdiction unticked  you DO NOT file a defence at this time [BUT you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ] click thru to the end confirm and exit MCOL. .. get a CCA Request running to the claimant https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/ .. Leave the £1 PO unsigned and uncrossed . get a CPR  31:14  request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant] ... .[use our other CPR letter if the claim is for an OD or Telecom Debt] . https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/ . on BOTH type your name ONLY Do Not sign anything . you DO NOT await the return of ANY paperwork  you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count] ..............  
    • The agreement started 11/02/2019  for 47 monthly hire payments   Threat-o-gram : We are instructed on behalf of Hyundai Capital UK Limited T/a Hyundai Finance Contract Hire.  This is inaccurate, as on my hire agreement it says - Owner Santander Consumer (UK) plc trading as Volvo Car Financial Services. Hyundai must be who this other persons agreement is with.   The only will is: Should you fail to make payment of the outstanding bablnce of £5,000, or alternatively provide realistic payment proposals within the next 30 days, we are instructed to issue County Court proceedings against you for the balance outstanding. Such proceedings will also include claim for costs.   Yes I still have my agreement. 
    • Hi M10,   Compared to MANY other cases we see here, a refund of 80% is a decent offer in the circumstances.   Take it and get yourself a new item.   Far better than Very and Apple each denying responsibility and passing the buck, and you being stuck in the middle for months with no help.
    • thanks for all that.... yes interesting. you handed the car back in nov 2020, how long was the lease agreement for and when did it start?   if you read the threat-o-gram carefully it doesn't say WILL anything. who are stated as DWF's client please ? and have you still your copy of this agreement?    
    • A devaluing currency and hard economic conditions make cryptocurrencies attractive despite the risks. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2850 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

Halifax took me to court august 2010.

I was alleged to owe around 28,000 over 3 accounts but the court case was centered on the credit card debt of 14,000.

Many issues including overdraft charges been incorrectly added, incorrect default notices and irresponsible lending. In my mind and in the defence I was formulating these accounts were certainly intermingled.

Anyway I tried to be reasonable and signed a Tomlin order for 13,000 payable over 60 months on the understanding it was in full and final settlement between me and Halifax. It states in the order "full and final settlement of all claims that either party shall have or may have against the other arising out of the matters in this action."

 

The are saying now that this was just for the credit card and are activatly chasing the overdraft and loan.

The Tomlin payment are been made monthly into the overdraft account.

Halifax whisks these away.

No balances on any of the accounts are been reduced in anyway.

 

So where would we stand legaly.

Can they take me to court for a related issue or would they have to apply for the Tomlin order to be removed first.

The payments been paid for the Tomlin order represent my total disposable income. No more money is available as well they know.

 

I know I have made mistakes in accepting and seeking credit but so has the bank. To lend someone far more than they can pay back and then throw at them charge after charge until they cannot pay for even necessaties should be criminal. And all because I co-own a property that has gone up in value.

 

Any all advice welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It states in the order "full and final settlement of all claims that either party shall have or may have against the other arising out of the matters in this action."

 

In respect of consent orders other than Tomlin orders, where there is no schedule and all of the terms of settlement are included within the order, the terms are ordered by the court.

 

Although the courts have jurisdiction to vary or revoke the terms included in a consent order, they are reluctant to do so, since this would entail interfering with a bargain into which the parties had freely entered. Therefore, a court will vary or revoke a consent order only in limited circumstances. In Weston v Dayman(1) Lord Justice Arden said:

 

"I would accept that the court should accede to an application for variation where it is just to do so, but in my judgement one of the aspects of justice is that a bargain freely made should be upheld. Mr Weston clearly obtained benefits under the order… It may well be that those benefits are not as great as he thought, but that is not a matter for this court. In those circumstances I do not consider it would be right for this court to exercise its discretion to vary the order as sought."

 

The same discretion does not apply in respect of Tomlin orders, since the court is not deemed to have ordered or even approved the terms of the schedule. As Lord Steyn said in Sirius International Insurance Co v FAI General Insurance Ltd: "The settlement contained in the Tomlin order must be construed as a commercial instrument."(2)

 

The court therefore does not have the same procedural powers in respect of the terms included in the schedule to a Tomlin order. Aside from the fact that the parties may apply in the proceedings to court to enforce its terms, the schedule is generally to be treated like any other settlement agreement not attached to an order.

 

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what Andyorch is trying to get at there so I'll have a go. The Tomlin order dealt with "matters in this action". Based on your post that "action" (or claim in the new vocabulary) dealt solely with your credit card debts. Therefore your overdraft is not covered by the order and the creditor can pursue you.

 

However, I note you say that you included in your defence issues relating to the overdraft so did the claim deal solely with the credit cards or did it mention the overdraft?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm even more confused what asokn is trying to get at also, If the initial P.o.C pleaded all the debts ie CC/Loan and O/D then your TO is an agreement to all " "Full and final settlement of all claims "

 

Regards

 

Andy

Edited by Andyorch

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, but *if* is the operative word. Basically, did the claim include the overdraft or not? If it did then it is dealt with in the TO if not then it is not and the creditor can issue a fresh claim in relation to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the responses.

 

original poc's:

 

The claimants claim is for 14k presently due pursuant to a credit agreement entered into by the parties, full particulars of which have been supplied hithero.

By an agreement dated 07/03 the defendant has an account number CDE with the claimant. The defendant has delayed or failed to adhere to the terms of the default notice issued by the claimant under the consumer credit act 1974. The balance due as of 0// on said account is:

14k

 

The card number they supplied was for an old card that had migrated to a new number so the account claimed for was at best fudged.

 

1. The point I would pursue is that to atchieve settlement their barrister assured me this was for full and final settlement of all issues between the parties at court

2. The overdraft was entirely due to Halifax charging me a erroneous £90 charge (which they have never explained) and this compounded to a 2k overdraft which caused the defaults on the Loan and credit cards as I was deprived of funds.

 

How can a lender act in a way on one account so as to force a default on another account?

 

Bottom line is I am paying all I can to the Tomlin order and there is nothing left in the pot.

Halifax are well aware of this having rejected my application for hardship on the overdraft.

 

original thread:

G v Bank of Scotland ***Reduced Settlement via Tomlin Order***

Edited by freethemice
thread added
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it seems you settled the credit card claim by TO. The overdraft however wasn't part of the claim and so can be pursued separately.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you type out verbatim the precise wording of the Tomlin Order and Schedule Freethemice?

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

the tomlin order forbids that and other eyes do peruse these forums.

 

I am quite happy to carry on as if the overdraft is outside the Tomlin order.

There is the little issue over the £90 charge which sparked the spiral of charges.

There is the 2 letters I have from Halifax stating explicitly that these bank charges were a genuine estimate of bank expenses incurred to deal with unpaid items ect. Directly against what they said in the high court.

There is also the fact that the £217 for the Tomlin order has been paid monthly into the overdraft account and it magically disappears a fortnight later. They seem to write some weird internal check to a diferent account. The money vanishes but no balance is reduced loan/card or overdraft and no statement issued.

I thing they could get in a fair tangle in court with the above.

How can the account be closed if money is still going in and out?

How can it be a credit account when no interest or charges are added or have been for the past 2 years?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...

I was paying instalments into the current (overdraft) account and the other side was happily taking these payments and whisking them away until Sept of this year.

I was still been chased though by DCA'a over the overdraft.

I think one of my letters about the current account asking "How can it be a credit account when no interest or charges are added or have been for the past 2 years?" must have spooked them though as they have now closed the current account and sent me a cheque back for £217 as "overpayment"

I believe despite the refund they are still intent on claiming the £2000 alleged to be owed (fees built upon fees built upon an eroneous £90 charge that was never explained)

 

Thing is now I am reluctant to remake payments as they insist future payments go to the credit card account and I am still pritty insistent the overdraft formed part of the oringal Tomlin order as I would have used the £2000 overdraft as a set off defence as well as claiming they deprived me of fund on this account so preventing me making contractual payments and causing the default in the first instance.

 

Quite clearly if they unlawfully deprived me of funds in account A I could not pay account B as demanded.

 

If I do make payments to the new account as requested the Dca's will still pursue me for the overdraft. The Tomlin Order represents my entire free money for debt management. They do not seem to acknowledge this or even care.

 

If I do not it will go back to court and I am unsure of what will happen.

 

Advice please ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

ftm

 

Community care judgment may assist.... http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2010/959.html

 

Is this.....'It states in the order "full and final settlement of all claims that either party shall have or may have against the other arising out of the matters in this action." within the order or the schedule attached to the order?

 

Is there an express provision to vary within the order or schedule?

 

If not currently up to date on payments I would suggest you correct immediately, if the other side returned Septembers payment it will look a little foolish attempting to enforce the schedule.

 

Was an account number/sort code not established and agreed for payments at the outset, have the other side provided details for an account having now terminated the current/overdraft facility?

 

Assuming Halifax instructed sols in the case they should be sensible enough to provide banking details

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 6 months later...

The other side has provided account details to pay the Tomlin order but the number was wrong.

I made sure I paid the arrears and got the court costs and something for my time.

 

The agreement is continuing.

 

Only problem I have now is I get no statements and have no idea how much I have paid off.

Makes it very hard to manage as my payments go to my ex who pays out of her bank account (I do not have one) so I do not know if she is paying or not.

 

Are they still legally obliged to send statements or does the Tomlin order stop this need?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the debt has not been assigned and still with the OC then you should get your annual statement and Notice of Arrears CCA2006 Amendments.A Tomlin Order does not eradicate the need for accountancy...request one.

 

Regards

 

Andy

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 The National Consumer Service

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...