Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • nothing you can do can product against the very rare judge lottery syndrome.
    • not sure why you added the blue line I've highlighted? that's no in the we gave you.   as for your question... PRAC's roboclaim computer knows when the account was taken out, after all it raised the claim and checked everything carefully first before issuing the request via northants bulk courts equally inept roboclaim computer... 
    • I've been researching in preparation of compiling my particularised defence/WS.    I'm none too happy that some judges still seem to be siding with DCAs and seemingly brushing aside anything that we have assumed to be "necessary" for DCAs to have a winning case.    Reading a recent "summary" from another poster (another thread with case similar to mine - very old, illegible application form, no default notice, reliance on their own software to prove it was ever sent) and the judgment made in favour of the DCA and even suggesting that there was no "agreement with the DCA, they simply owned the debt, not the agreement"  Makes me very nervous.    Especially if cases like this will be judged on "probability" - the probability that if I signed the original application form, then I must have taken out the credit card and racked up the alleged debt as shown in statements enclosed in their WS (and dated some ten years later).   Is it ok to post some "evidence" I've found from elsewhere?    This is in line with my fears that regardless of how hard one tries to rebut the "lack of evidence" produced by DCAs for chasing these very old "alleged" debts, it does appear to come down to the luck of what judge you get on the day and how much they can be swayed by the DCA solicitor.    A quick Google search produced the following - from one case - this related to a credit agreement - which resulted in someone being made bankrupt - that person appealed the bankruptcy order on the grounds of defective credit agreement and default notice and this was the appeal judge's decision:   The necessary formalities for the entry into the regulated consumer credit agreement (which related to the debt in issue) were not complied with; The default notice served in respect of that credit agreement was defective.   The First Ground The Appellant argued that she did not receive the terms and conditions when she entered into the credit agreement and, accordingly, section 61 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (“CCA”) had not been complied with and the agreement could not be enforced. The agreement had been entered in 1995 and, whilst it had provided a microfiche copy of the front page of the application, the Respondent had been unable to provide a copy of the terms.   Despite the terms not being produced, the District Judge had found that, in the circumstances, it was very likely that such terms existed and would have been provided to the Appellant when she entered into the Agreement. Mr Justice Mann held that this was a finding that the District Judge was entitled to make.   Further, Mr Justice Mann found that it was implicit from the District Judge’s findings that she considered that the terms and conditions not only existed but had been subscribed to by the Appellant’s signature and, consequently, the requirements of section 61 CCA were fulfilled. Mr Justice Mann held that this was also a justifiable finding which should not be interfered with on appeal.   The Second Ground The Appellant also argued that the default notice upon which the Respondent relied did not comply with the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notice) Regulations 1989 because it stated the full balance of the account rather than the total of the missed payments. The Respondent argued that, as a result of the missed payments, it was contractually entitled to the entire balance subject to the service of the appropriate notice, a requirement which was fulfilled by the default notice itself and, consequently, the sum required to remedy the breach was the entire amount.   Mr Justice Mann agreed with the Respondent and the District Judge, holding that: “If by the time the default notice is served circumstances have arisen which entitle the lender to recover not merely sums which might be regarded as arrears, by which I assume is meant accumulated minimum payments, but also the whole of the sum, then they are entitled to claim that sum, and the sum to require to remedy the breach for non-payment of that sum is the payment of the whole sum due. The bank is not confined, at that stage, to claiming merely the amount of arrears if it has an accrued contractual right to have the whole of the sum.”   Do judgments like these not mean that a lot of what you guys do on here (and for which I and many others are VERY grateful) somewhat redundant. What is happening to judges just accepting "well, the terms must have been there if you signed it" -    Feeling quite nervous now.
    • we know it wasn't done to avoid enforcement we understand completely. but that doesn't take from away the fact that it happened   you can't appeal the pcn's on the basis that 'it was not his vehicle to levy upon'. the law clearly states otherwise.          
    • here is a question for you, is yu house divided up into a retail/business area  and domestic area for business rates purposes? If not why on earth are you paying business water rates? ceertainly not for tax purposes as you can claim any legit expense without having to reclassify your home as a business premises. i would be stopping this nonsense and goping back to whatever water supplier is the domestic one for your area. there is stuff all they can do to get the £40 from you whan you do that.
  • Our picks

hallowitch

can a company close down and restart the following day to avoid being taken to court

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 960 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

If you are self-employed and you are owed money from a company (construction) for an unpaid invoice and you start court proceeding's can they close the company down before it gets to the court date and if they can is their any way of stopping them doing this

 

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you are self-employed and you are owed money from a company (construction) for an unpaid invoice and you start court proceeding's can they close the company down before it gets to the court date and if they can is their any way of stopping them doing this

 

 

Thanks

 

Think Companies house have a process for this, where they stop the company being closed down in this way to avoid debts.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have started a legal action then you can inform CH that the company is liquidating to avoid its respionsibilities and that the assest the comapny have shoudl be ringfenced to protect the rights of existing creditors and other interested parties such as yourself. If this is agreed then the director of the company become individually liable so their personal assets may be considereddf to settle any debts.

However, it is bloody difficult to enforce the debt is they do a runner and put everything n the mother's name. You have to be very presistent and these people know all the wrangles so will stretch the matter out and make it too expensive to pursue.

3 decades ago commercial debt was collected in a rather different way that involved cars full of large people and as this is not an acceptable option these days the chancers will continue their games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks for the reply's its not for me I belong to a FB page for construction workers and it would appear this company is starting to get well known for not paying there are 4/5 on this site alone that are owed money one person being owed 11k

 

 

I have pointed them to this site as they seem to think its going cost about 5k to take him to court (using a solicitor) and they think their is no point because they will just shut down and start again hopefully they will take my advice and Join here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not very good at research but I've been having a google and I don't think this company has any assets because another firm seems to own all their assets (floating charge )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This happens everyday.

Open a ltd company, pile up thousand of pounds in debt, then close the company down and reopen next day with a different name.

To prevent closure of a ltd company, the creditor should know that they're closing down and check with companies house, but usually when they get around to do it, the 90 days have passed and the company is defunct.

There are directors who have been doing this for 20/30 years and still get away with it.

Used car dealers are the most prolific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

before these lads throw good money after bad would anyone be able to read and explain this floating charge to me I have the charge no registered at company's house

 

Thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
before these lads throw good money after bad would anyone be able to read and explain this floating charge to me I have the charge no registered at company's house

 

Thanks

 

https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/0-107-5773?__lrTS=20170419145345838&transitionType=Default&contextData=(sc.Default)&firstPage=true&bhcp=1

 

Seems to be a legal way of avoiding assets being taken.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read something like that on another site and that's what I thought but you would think there would be something in the agreement that they must keep their company sound and debt free I did read the agreement but didn't understand it

 

they were know for trying/not paying subbies occasionally before this floating agreement but it looks like in last 2 yrs they just don't give one word is getting around and I believe they are finding it hard to get subbies to do the work but that doesn't help the 5 blokes(the ones that I know of) they shafted or the blokes that don't know its a toss up if they pay you or not

 

Its not as if its a few ££££ 1 bloke owed 11k and another owed 8k so taking a bit hit for these blokes I cant believe they can legally get away with this its shocked me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is shocking.

As a rule of thumb, I only deal with tradesmen without a ltd company and before handing money over I check on the land registry that they are homeowners (£3 cost).

This doesn't give me a cast iron guarantee that they will not run away, but at least if they do I could put a charge on their property via the courts.

With a ltd company you are literally giving money to a ghost entity that can disappear next day and nobody would be responsible for debts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, it is shocking.

As a rule of thumb, I only deal with tradesmen without a ltd company and before handing money over I check on the land registry that they are homeowners (£3 cost).

This doesn't give me a cast iron guarantee that they will not run away, but at least if they do I could put a charge on their property via the courts.

With a ltd company you are literally giving money to a ghost entity that can disappear next day and nobody would be responsible for debts.

 

I thought that Trading Standards had brought a few cases to court, where companies were using various ways of avoiding debts in this way ? That there had been some criminal convictions, where directors had basically committed fraud, as they had no intention of paying contractors or supplying services to customers. If you set out to deliberately cause a financial loss to another party and gain as a result, then that surely is fraud.

 

Perhaps the legal bods on CAG might be aware of evidence needed For Trading Standards/Police to at least be interested in investigating.


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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought that Trading Standards had brought a few cases to court, where companies were using various ways of avoiding debts in this way ? That there had been some criminal convictions, where directors had basically committed fraud, as they had no intention of paying contractors or supplying services to customers. If you set out to deliberately cause a financial loss to another party and gain as a result, then that surely is fraud.

 

Perhaps the legal bods on CAG might be aware of evidence needed For Trading Standards/Police to at least be interested in investigating.

 

All well and good, but the contractors still didn't get their money because these directors are very careful to have no assets in their name.

Who cares that they are convicted?

They still have the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I thought that Trading Standards had brought a few cases to court, where companies were using various ways of avoiding debts in this way ? That there had been some criminal convictions, where directors had basically committed fraud, as they had no intention of paying contractors or supplying services to customers. If you set out to deliberately cause a financial loss to another party and gain as a result, then that surely is fraud.

 

Perhaps the legal bods on CAG might be aware of evidence needed For Trading Standards/Police to at least be interested in investigating.

 

when another bloke posted last night saying that they owe a bloke working beside him 8k I wondered if it was fraud as their seems to be a pattern forming here they all seem to be owing about 8k (one claiming 11k)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...