Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • 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

very old B+B mortgage shortfall CCJ - order to attend court - help!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2351 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

  • Replies 252
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

email to me as usual

 

sounds like they are stuffed

 

time to ignore them

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

I only have an iPad so can only take photo's.

 

Not to worry.

 

But is this record of examination filled in with your personal details ? Was this a process you took part in, where they look at your financial position to pay the judgement ?

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

dx100 I will forward you a copy of the letter from B&B,

they have sent me a copy of the record of examination which I filled in at the court, did you want a photo of that aswel??

 

Unclebulgaria the record of examination was done at the court, me and my ex had to attend.

 

 

It was like an income and expenditure, at the end of the form I had to make an offer of payment.

 

 

There is a claim number in the top right hand corner and it says in the left hand corner that the judgement creditor is B&B.

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes all please

 

 

IMHO no copy nor record of judgement = bugger off B&B.

its outside 6yrs anyway not enforceable

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

oh dear in their own words

they don't have a copy of the judgement

and

they state its outside 6yrs and unenforced

tough IMHO they are trying to spoof you.

 

 

minded to write back and tell them as much too.

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

Do you think it's a good idea to contact the court to find out exactly when they obtained this CCJ that way I'll know if it's still enforceable?

 

I'm thinking of composing a letter setting out all differant amounts they said I've owed over the years, stating that this has been going on way to long, etc.....good or bad idea???

 

Could they have got the judgement at the address that was repossessed?

If they had there would have been no way of me defending it as I wasn't there.

 

All this is taking its toll on me now, I've had enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's probably the whole idea

Make you give in and pay

 

Personally I'd now ignore them

Until/unless anything from a court lands on your mat

 

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

why do you think they can do that?

 

its passed its time for enforcement.

 

they cant just out of the blue do that

it would have to go back to court

and you and he would be notified of that and be able to contest it.

 

looking at the whole situation.

DMS have obviously bought the old B&B portfolio

and are masquerading as B&B to scare you into paying

because you probably got spoofed in 2009 when there was no need to pay

and they're hoping you'll fall for the trick again.

 

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

I've just rang the court as I'm now getting myself worked up.

The original judgement was in 2005 for mortgage shortfall.

The judgement was transferred to Bradford in 2009.

It is still enforceable which means they can send AOE or bailiffs or put a charge on my house if I owned it.

She advised me to go to CAB as soon as possible.......I'm gutted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just rang the court as I'm now getting myself worked up.

The original judgement was in 2005 for mortgage shortfall.

The judgement was transferred to Bradford in 2009.

It is still enforceable which means they can send AOE or bailiffs or put a charge on my house if I owned it.

She advised me to go to CAB as soon as possible.......I'm gutted.

 

But only if they seek the courts approval ...as the judgment is over 6 years old (assuming they have never executed it since 2005)

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 OTHER

 

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

ta-da pennys dropped yet..

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

Somehow I don't think it ever will dx :/

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just rang the court as I'm now getting myself worked up.

The original judgement was in 2005 for mortgage shortfall.

The judgement was transferred to Bradford in 2009.

It is still enforceable which means they can send AOE or bailiffs or put a charge on my house if I owned it.

She advised me to go to CAB as soon as possible.......I'm gutted.

 

County Court staff are not really allowed to comment on whether it is enforceable. They can only really tell you about what has happened and Court processes.

 

Whoever had this debt when you stopped paying this 4 years ago should have gone back to court to seek further enforcement or certainly before 6 years had passed from 2009, when the court last dealt with it.

 

If you are still in touch with your ex or can contact them, it would be better for you to both sing from the same hymn sheet. If your ex was also aware that payment had stopped 4 years ago and the debt owner had not gone back to court regarding enforcement since 2009, that there is doubt that the debt can still be enforced. Or it would need the debt owner to make a new court application. At least your ex would then know to watch out for any post.

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 am still in contact with my ex, and he is agreeing we stick together.

 

 

Nobody else has ever had this debt other than B&B,

I have no idea why it was moved to Bradford courts,

I wasn't made aware of this.

 

I'm getting the vibe from the posts I shud sit tight and see what happens ???

 

 

Thanks everyone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

nope they were sold off years ago.

 

sadly they can use the 'name'

 

which appears to be quite a clever ruse by this lot.

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

Just done a bit of digging and found that B&B collapsed between 2008-2009 and was bought by Santander which I sort of knew. So this might explaine why my CCJ was transferred to Bradford court. If B&B sold the debt do they sell the CCJ that's attached?

Link to post
Share on other sites

well the 'buyer' certainly assumes all rights.

but the history of ownership of your particular 'debt' might not be all the straight forward

[and remember this is a std debt now NOT a mortgage]

and that shows in the fact they cant

[or might be more correct to say 'wont']

produce a copy of the CCJ

because its not in their name ie they were NOT the original claimant.

 

 

were they to produce this and they have not

[which is obviously the case]

had themselves substituted as the claimant at a later hearing

[which you'd know about and they'd be documentation to prove it]

they'd be up the creek without a paddle.

 

 

which is why i'm saying let this run now.

 

 

this debt is exactly the same as a dca

[which in this instance UKAR are acting as one as there is NO MORTGAGE only a possible shortfall CCJ]

chasing a debt whereby they say we have a CCJ

we want payment

 

 

you scratch the surface and you find

it wasn't the DCA that got the CCJ

it was the original creditor

and enforcement is out of time.

 

 

this is what andyorch is eluding too in post 138.

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

No in reply to divadeb, the mortgage book was retained and managed by the government agency UK Asset Resolution

 

They are now preparing the mortgage book for sale, probably to th US company Cerebus Capital

and this may explain why this is rearing its head again

 

Personally I think you have been done over from day one by B&B and with intense research

there are numerous complaints you could persue

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 

 

 

Any help I am able to give is from my own experience only. Should you have any doubt you should contact a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think there is a bit of confusion here.

 

B&B business was split after the financial crisis. Some of their business including debts is held by UK Asset Resolution, which is an arms length body set up by government. These are the people chasing your debt and they own it. They will have legal title to the debt and can take relevant court actions. Whether they can still enforce the debt, as a court has not dealt with it since 2009 is another matter.

 

Santander were only sold some of the B&B business such as current accounts and branches. Not mortgage debts after repossession.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...