Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • the debt is statute barred. no to mediation.  
    • Just to clarify the position regarding the question as to whether a bailiff is legally permitted to seize a vehicle that is far in excess of the amount of debt requested.   In this case, the council tax debt at the time of the Notice of Enforcement was £500. Unfortunately, instead of contacting the company to enter into a payment arrangement,  the matter was left and had resulted in a bailiff making a personal visit and the debt has now increased to around £750. From your initial post, your car could be worth approx £5,000.    Vehicles are of course a preferred asset to seize. However, the legal position is that if the bailiff is able to gain 'peaceful entry' into your home and by doing so, is able to seize sufficient goods to clear the debt and bailiff fees, then he should not touch the car. If however, he is unable to gain entry....OR....there are not sufficient goods in the property to cover the debt.....then he is legally permitted to remove (and sell the vehicle).    You need to be aware that a £5,000 car would likely raise significantly less than this when sold. Enforcement agents sales are generally auction sales (usually online). Because it would not be likely that the vehicle is sold with a V5C (Log Book) or service history, this would affect its sales price. From any sale, the enforcement company would need to deduct approx 14 days of storage fees (this could be up to £40 PER DAY). Auctioneers fees would also be deducted.         
    • Yes the next step I think is a letter of claim. If you are not familiar with them already then please read up on this forum the steps involve taking a small claim in the County Court. It's not difficult but it's worth knowing the steps in advance so that you will be confident. Draft a particulars of claim and post it here. Keep it short and sweet
    • Hi. Many thanks for your continued help. I will follow the advice and not get involved with phone calls, email only. The house was repossessed by the mortgage company Southern Pacific not Central Trust, but they did try some years earlier. They seemed to be taking it in turns at one point. I don't remember saying the debt had been sold to them or anyone else, as far as I am aware the house covered the mortgage, I have never heard from them. I just don't understand the figures or the terminology they used to explain the costs, find it baffling and far from clear.
    • Merged witness and draft defence, deleting some paragraphs.. still too long?   1. I understand that the Claimant obtained a Default Judgment against me as the Defendant on 10 November 2021. However, the claim had not been served at my current address. Therefore, I was not aware of the County Court Judgment until I received a notification that it had been entered on my credit report. 2. On learning of the County Court Judgement on 15 November 2021, I immediately contacted County Court Business Centre to find out details of the Default Judgment. It was only at this point that I discovered that Capquest Investments Limited was the Claimant and that the judgment was regarding monies owed on an alleged credit agreement. On 17 November I received a copy of the judgment from the County Court Business Centre by Email. 3. I now know that the judgment was served at an old address (xxx). However, I moved to a new address on 8 January 2021 with my tenancy at the old address ending 5 February 2021. In support of this I can provide confirmation of two (2) Council Tax bills for my current address (xx) and previous address. See [EVIDENCE A and B] 4. On 12 September 2018, the Claimant wrote to the Defendant clearly stating that following a request from the Defendant for a copy of the signed Consumer Credit Agreement with the original creditor, that one did not exist. I had no reason to believe this situation has changed to date and, the Claimant having already written to my new address reporting of default sums notice under the the Consumer Credit Act 1974 did, purposefully, use an old address to gain a Default Judgement. See [EVIDENCE C] 5. I suggest the Claimant did not make reasonable enquiries as to my current address before pursuing the court order especially considering they had good reason to believe they did not hold my current contact details. As stated in the Civil Procedure Rules CPR 6.9(3) where a Claimant has reason to believe that the address of the Defendant referred is an address at which the Defendant no longer resides or carries on business, the Claimant must take reasonable steps to ascertain the address of the Defendant’s current residence or place of business. At the time of the County Court Judgment, my credit file showed my current address so I was there to be found by a simple trace. See [EVIDENCE D]. 6. The Claimant sent a letter dated 27 October 2021 to my current address which I received on 9 November 2021. This equates to only twelve (12) working days between the Claimant filing the claim and producing this letter. I must question why the Claimant would use two different addresses in such a short space of time if there was any doubt I no longer resided at the address they had on record. See [EVIDENCE E]. 7. On the basis provided above I would suggest that the Claimant did not fulfil their duty to use the Defendant’s current address when bringing the claim. 8. Considering the above, I as the Defendant was unable to defend this claim properly. I thus believe that the Default Judgement against me was issued incorrectly and thus should be set aside. 9. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 10. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had an agreement in the past with Shop Direct Finance Company Limited but I do not recognise the account number referred to by the Claimant.  11. Paragraph 2 is noted but not admitted. The Claimant would not be aware of any alleged breach or in a position to plead such fact as an assignee as the Defendant did not enter into any agreement with the Claimant and is therefore put to strict proof to verify the alleged statement of its particulars. 12. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Splitting loan debt


thebloodster
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2285 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. I was wondering if someone may be able to advise with a query regarding a loan debt.

 

A work colleague is currently goin through a divorce and they have a £23000 loan between them. Now my friend is thinking of getting a loan for half the debt and i said that is just goin to cost a lot more as its more interest for her.

 

I asked whether she has spoke to the loan company and she said it wasnt possible to split it but to me that seems very strange. Surely they will have come across this before and yeh maybe there would be an admin fee but surely it is possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

It isnt possible to split an agreement once it has been executed...the debt is joint and several and was lent on the basis of that as per the terms and conditions..

 

It would be unwise for your friend to seek further borrowings to extinguish her half of the debt as she will still remain liable should the ex decide to default at a later stage.

 

The only option is:-

 

Come to an agreement with the ex as to who will be liable after divorce and get this sealed by the their solicitors who in turn can request a court order to that effect within the the terms of the divorce settlement arrangements.

 

Once that order has been sealed by the court the terms supersede the original agreement ...should it ever be required later in life.

 

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

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...