taking old mortgage co. to court - moved to their local court?

[iconoclash]

Lea-HTH - what's with all the shouting (caps) and undertones in your replies?? do tell

[Lea_HTH]

That is mere emphasis, not 'shouting' or 'undertones'. If there was a rolling eye emoticon, it would follow right here -->.:roll:

 

Don't bother responding to me (I won't read it) - you clearly only want platitudes rather than accuracy and I won't waste any more of my time on nonsense.

 

Good luck.

Edited March 14, 2012 by citizenB
rolling eye emoticon added :)

[iconoclash]

So, back to the thread question, I am wondering whether this overcharging can be claimed back as restitution, if anyone has any advice - thanks

[citizenB]

Leah, have added :roll: for you

 

Someone shifts the emoticons around during the night.. I am sure of it !!.. However, if not in those at the side, there is a full library of emoticons when you use the "advanced reply" button

[seanamarts]

maybe this one could come in handy

[iconoclash]

maybe this one could come in handy

for who do you mean?

[dadofholly]

Going back to the start of the thread can you clarify a couple of points.

 

Is this still a live account?

Have you asked the OC what these 'legal charges' are for ?

[iconoclash]

Hi - yes, this is still current.

 

 

It has been moved on a few times but was set up with GMAC originally.

Then sold to Oakwood.

Then sold to MTR.

 

 

The charges were made by Oakwood.

 

 

They are over and above the court order

 

 

I think it should be straightforward to take this back to the judge and ask that this be remedied.

 

 

My only problem is how to word that,

this is why i looked up civil fraud and saw that stuff about

"keeping what one is not entitled to"

 

 

but then also looked at restitution which might bemore applicable as it accounts for 'disorgement',

 

 

that is righting the wrong to the victim even is via a third party.

 

 

All companies have been written to and none will engage with me. thanks.

[dadofholly]

Have you sent any of them an SAR?

 

Are you saying that none of these companies will tell you what these charges are for? If they are stated as legal charges - has any recovery action taken place since the hearing?

 

Unless the charges relate to action taken before the previous court hearing i am not sure that the judges order will be relevant to any 'new' later charges. What was the wording of the court order?

 

If thse companies are refusing to deal with you, you may be better off complaining to the FOS, rather than taking legal action.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I'm getting more confused with every post:der:

[dadofholly]

Hi - to add more info: there have been no more court hearings, these costs are the original ones that the judge threw out, we went through every invoice in the hearing and the figure was set - they have exceeded it. The lender who took the action (and not following mortgage pre-action protocols I might add) is Oakwood Homeloans and they keep giving me the runaround - the litigation stage is my claim fo redress which is ready to go into court as there is nothing else I can do now. Yes, checked with the new lender - they will not entertain anything that was done by others - they say they were given the transfer balance and thats that. I have given them their pre-lit letter and written so many other letters but they refuse to discuss it. Oh and it was a suspended repo order which they got and the next week they capitalised the arrears. I was so displeased with it all as they could have capitalised in the first place of course but in the end had a legal costs bill to me for more than the actual arrears. Ho Hum. So I have to make sure I am not being taken for even more money.

Sounds like civil fraud to me.....

 

Hi Brig - to be honest i think some of the actions of the site team, and other posters, on this thread have been not only uncalled for - but offensive.

 

I believe that the OP may be refering to charges that the OC has added to the account - depsite them being thrown out by the judge - see above that which i have highlighted in red. So the OP may be correct that these charges were before the judge at the hearing, but have been reinstated despite the order.

 

A failure to actually read the posts the op has made - and an arrogant and dimissive attitude by some, 'knowledgeable' posters seems to have exasberated the situation.

 

There appears to be no evidence that the charges referred to are for action after the hearing.

Edited March 15, 2012 by dadofholly

[iconoclash]

Hi - I try to be succinct and just give the relevant details as i know that i have not had any other court action and maybe at fault for assuming that if i havent specifically stated that, some might think it is a possibility but its sort of: 'what it says on the tin'. Plainly this company have had all the same court papers as me, they know the figures, but between their litigation teams and their customer care teams and their computer IT teams, they always manage to get it wrong. I have done SARS et al but cannot get them to refund the overcharges on the legals. Maybe they thought I wouldnt notice if they just stuck with the bills that the solicitors, Wragge & Co, gave them. (I have Wragges invoices) Maybe they already paid those invoices to Wragge and when the judge disallowed some of their claim they found themselves stuck with the costs and simply tried to pass them on to me. I'm guessing here but who knows what goes on in these companies..... I think I will fall on my sword

also, they date back to their court action against me, they tried to add everything and i spotted it, they removed some but not all, i spotted that and asked for the rest of the overcharges to be refunded, they then refunded those but added back in what they had previously been removed and then added some more. sorry, i didnt think it necessary to go into the nitty gritty of their crazy accounting and dont see it helps, just know that they still owe me overcharges that they describe as legal costs and court fees. Hope this helps. thanks.

Edited March 15, 2012 by iconoclash
typo

[dadofholly]

As i said before it is the wording of the judgement that is the crux here - would be worth a complaint to the FOS.

 

As regards legal action - the only thing you need to prove is that they are in breach of a court order.

[caro]

I agree with DOH. The wording on the court order is vital. If there has been more legal work after the hearing then perhaps they can justify it, but if it's all to do with the original hearing then I would say they're on a sticky wicket and would suggest going via the court.

 

But only if you're 100% sure the £7k is to do with the original case.

[iconoclash]

Hi

 

I am having a few problems with issues out of Salford Court Services. I am being told that the defendant to my claim, which is a company, is being listed at their local court.

 

I thought that if an application requires a hearing and the defendant is is an "individual" then it could be heard local

but in my claim the defendant is not an individual, as it is my old mortgage company,

and so I dont know why it is listed some 200 miles from me.

 

 

I have rung Salford and they disagree.

 

 

Dont know what else to do now as I will not get the chance to show the judge that they are pulling a flanker on me

- they are trying to get my (default) judgement against them set aside.

 

 

If they achieve this I will be very cross and would have to start all over again,

and this has been winging round the system since March.

 

 

I just want what they owe me and it is very clear on my claim.

 

 

Any advice please.

Edited June 27, 2012 by iconoclash
typo

[Ganymede]

You will get a chance to ask for the case to be transferred to your local County Court at the Allocation Questionnaire stage.

 

What are the chances of the Defendant getting a set aside? What are their arguments?

[iconoclash]

hi -

 

 

none whatsoever

 

 

- these are legal costs added to my old account over and above what was set by a judge

so it should be very clear in the hearing that they have overcharged me

 

 

- i also have their solicitors invoices from the time and

can easily show how the company that acted for them charged them more than what the court set for me to pay

- so

- the company have tried to pass that on to me despite being in breach of the previous court order.

 

 

I issued my claim, court sent it to them and they ignored it and me,

I wrote to them and rang them but they said it had nothing to do with them as they no longer hold my account

and I'm thinking, so what, what has that got to do with them overcharging me and then adding interest exactly.

 

 

I applied for judgement and got it and now they are backtracking and trying to get it thrown out

- they should surely not be able to

 

 

how can i be at a hearing that is so far from me?

How can a mortgage company be an individual but Salford seem to have it back to front and think that they are?

 

 

- I have written to Salford Court Service and told them that I want it transferred to me

and can only hope now that they do this.

 

 

Thanks for responding.

[iconoclash]

hi - back again - have i read your response too quickly and thinking the hearing will simply be set and then i am stuck with it? whats happens next? they say it is going to be listed shortly, but, if i read you right this time, the hearing would be listed and then they will send me a questionnaire?? thanks

[Ganymede]

It matters not what the bank were charged by their solicitors, that's their problem.

 

Did you actually pay them the overcharged amount and are not claiming it back?

[iconoclash]

hi - they have been paid the full as the money is in their statement of my account and was included in the redemption figures, so I have claimed back what i am owed and got judgement in default which they now seek to set aside- seems straight forward enough to me, except for this business about what court it should be in.....and in this regard the papers from court say:

"1. The matter be transferred to Bradford CC for hearing of the application. (thats their appl. to set aside)

2. Because this Order has been made on the application of a party without notice of the hearing being given, any other parties have the right to apply to have the order set aside, varied or stayed. A party making such an application must send or deliver the application to the court to arrive within seven days of service of this Order. If the application is one which requires a hearing, and

a) the party making the application is the Defendant; and b) the Defendant is an individual, then upon filing of the appl. the claim will be transferred to the Defendant's home court. In all other cases requiring a hearing the claim will be transferred to the preferred court."

 

So, how would you read that please?

Edited June 27, 2012 by iconoclash

[Ganymede]

Ok so I'm guessing your house was repossessed?

 

If they get a set aside they will then file a Defence. You would then be sent the AQ by the Court and that is when you request a transfer to your local Court.

[Ganymede]

Sorry I'm being thick, do you mean the hearing for the set aside?

 

You've written to Salford so wait for their response.

[iconoclash]

hi , yes, tis confusing me for sure, this is the hearing for their set aside request, so i have been worried that would be the end of my claim, but seems i would still get a full hearing - am I right? thanks:-)

[iconoclash]

I have spoken to my local Magistrates Court today to enquire about an application to suspend or cancell a Warrant of Entry.

Apparently they have never heard of this and know of no procedure. ?

Some CPR rules apply equally to Magistrates Court as they do to County Court, I would therefore have thought that this includes pre-action protocols?

The applicant has obtained a warrant with false information and I want to bring this to the attention of the Magistrates and contest. Any ideas? thanks

[iconoclash]

Update on my legal fees charged by Oakwood Homeloans Limited. I took them to court and got judgement against them. I requested a warrant to be enforced by the bailiffs and OHL tried to get my judgment set aside but they were out of time to respond. OHL then said that they had not had the documents and tried all sorts of things until finally realising that I was within my rights to claim back the costs that had been applied. Costs were set by a former court and could not be enhanced by them but it didn't stop them doing it. It took two years of arguing before I went the court route. I now have the final matter of interest that those costs attracted to be resolved.