Arrow Not Accepting Payments on CCJ

[Chickenlegs]

Andyorch, in an earlier Thread you say that it costs £55 to transfer the case to my local Court, but when I telephoned the Court they just said to send an email and request it. There was no mention of a fee! Have I done it wrong?

 

CL

[AndyOrch]

Is it the case that if I don't let them know of my other creditors now then I can't mention them at the Hearing? I am really worried about all this paperwork that I have received - I just want to do things right. I hope you don't mind me asking you these questions.

 

They are suppose to check if other creditors are at the table...before the changes of 2012 Section 1(5) of the Charging Orders Act 1979 provides as follows: ‘In deciding whether to make a charging order the court shall consider all the circumstances of the case and, in particular, any evidence before it as to (a) the personal circumstances of the debtor, and (b) whether any other creditor of the debtor would be likely to be unduly prejudiced by the making of the order.’

 

A debtor who is insolvent in asset terms but is making pro rata payments from his surplus income to his creditors will often seek to argue that it is unfair that one creditor should effectively be able to barge to the front of the queue. That, on the face of it, is an attractive argument. Why, after all, should a creditor who refrains from taking proceedings because he is already receiving a fair instalment payment be disadvantaged by his forbearance? Is such a creditor not ‘unduly prejudiced’ by the making of the order?

 

However, there is clear authority that this is not a permissible approach for the court to take.

As Lord Denning observed in Pritchard v Westminster Bank [1969] 1 All ER 999: ‘The general principle when there is no insolvency is that the person who gets in first gets the fruits of his diligence.’

 

When there is an ‘insolvency’, of course, the House of Lords – in the well-known case of Roberts Petroleum v Bernard Kenny [1983] 1 All ER 564 – held that the liquidation of a company in the period after the order nisi was a sufficient reason for refusing to make the order absolute.

 

 

Since 2012 Section 94 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 was brought into force on 17 May 2012. The Act incorporates a new section 3A into the Charging Orders Act 1979 and has given the Lord Chancellor the power

to make regulations providing that:-

 

charging orders may not be imposed to secure an amount below a certain threshold; and

charging orders may not be enforced by orders for sale if the amount in question is below £1,000. This will only apply to debts regulated by the Consumer Credit Act. Indications at the current time are that this change will be introduced in December 2012.

 

The Second Change

Section 93 of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 will come into force on 1 October 2012. The amendments allow an application for a charging order to be made in cases where the debtor has not defaulted on payment of an instalment judgment.

CL

 

Andyorch, in an earlier Thread you say that it costs £55 to transfer the case to my local Court, but when I telephoned the Court they just said to send an email and request it. There was no mention of a fee! Have I done it wrong? It is normal to make application wit a fee ...however different courts will give different advice.

 

CL

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Chickenlegs]

Hello everyone,

 

All you legal bods out there I have a question for you:

 

Is a DCA allowed to obtain a CO on half a house without notifying the owner/owners?

 

rgds

CL

[renegadeimp]

Can you give more info please. Including which DCA. Once a CCJ is granted, a CO can be applied for at any time. Although its normally a Restriction K i think. Instead of a proper charge. Many DCA's like to pull this trick.

[Chickenlegs]

DCA is Restons for Arrow Global.

Have been paying a CCJ regularly since 2013.

 

Had a letter from Restons offering a reduced sum to 'partially' pay off the debt, but the total sum they quoted I didn't agree with.

I sent a letter back querying the total.

 

They replied that they had put a CO on my half of the house in 2015 which had cost them £236 and they had put that sum onto the total.

No-one had notified me that there was a CO on the house!

Surely at least the Land Registry should have let me and my husband know?

 

rgds

CL

[renegadeimp]

Oldest trick in the book. Its likely the debt wasnt enforceable, and they cash cowed you, and called your bluff and got a CCJ.

 

Have you checked the land registry?

[AndyOrch]

Even if you had known there would be very little you could have done to object.....but you should have been informed by the Judgment Claimant and the LR.

 

BTW £150 to apply the charging order not £236.

 

Andy

[Chickenlegs]

Hi renagadeimp,

 

No, haven't checked the Land Registry - don't know how to! Restons say if I pay their 'offer' (which is only £1,000 off the total) they will lift the CO from the house! Do you think they would do that or is it lies?

 

CL

[Chickenlegs]

Hi Andyorch,

 

£150!!! But they say £236!! Is there anything I can do to get the extra £86 back?

 

CL

[dx100uk]

you say this is a jointly owned home but only your debt?

so its a restriction k then..no wonder they are offering settlement!!

[renegadeimp]

Check the registry first, then get the breakdown. restriction k, you can basically laugh at. The restriction basically means all they have to be is informed on a sale. Nothing else. Not even a payment.

[dx100uk]

thought I recgonised the story

threads merged chicken

please keep to one thread per debt

make life so mush easier!!

to advise upon

[dx100uk]

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?486055-Arrow-Not-Accepting-Payments-on-CCJ-CO-old-MBNA-card

is your other thread now

 

dx

[Chickenlegs]

dx many thanks for sorting out the different threads!

 

rgds

CL

[dx100uk]

:yo: