Help with an old debtor- CCJ looming!!

[zootscoot]

Are you aware of the costs implications of appealing?

 

An appeal would not be heard by a DJ. What did you put in your amended defence?

[tomterm8]

Are you aware of the costs implications of appealing?

 

An appeal would not be heard by a DJ. What did you put in your amended defence?

 

Hi, Zoot, I've seen a copy of the defence (unfortunatly, Rich told me to keep it confidential, so I can't share it with you).

 

It really wasn't that bad, and should have been accepted IMHO (it might not have necessarily won, but it was arguable) ...

 

I've also suggested to Rich that he really needs to seek some professional help before making the decision to appeal, and that if he does so it might have quite substantial cost implications.

[rich2568]

Hi rich,

 

 

Good luck with the appeal!

 

 

Jeff.

 

Thanks Jeff:wink:

[rich2568]

Are you aware of the costs implications of appealing?

 

An appeal would not be heard by a DJ. What did you put in your amended defence?

 

Yes I`m aware that a DJ will not be dealing with an appeal.

 

I`m not prepared to post the amended defence for obvious confidentiality purposes.

 

The costs are worth it if we can watch the particular DJ who originally threw out my Defence etc.. eventually see red:)

[Blossomandebony]

Hi, Rich,

 

Just read your thread and am gutted that they threw your legitimate defence out!

 

I've had a bad experience with a DJ recently too so I sympathise. Some of them really don't have the faintest clue about Consumer credit Law and aren't even prepared to listen to arguments, it seems to me.

 

If you do decide to appeal, GOOD LUCK!!

[rich2568]

Hi, Rich,

 

Just read your thread and am gutted that they threw your legitimate defence out!

 

I've had a bad experience with a DJ recently too so I sympathise. Some of them really don't have the faintest clue about Consumer credit Law and aren't even prepared to listen to arguments, it seems to me.

 

If you do decide to appeal, GOOD LUCK!!

 

Yeah, Thanks Blossom;)

[minky93]

Hiya Rich

 

I am so sorry!

 

Good Luck!!! & best wishes coming your way for whatever you decide to do......

 

minky xxx

[rich2568]

Thanks Minky- it is most appreciated!!

[caro]

Yes I`m aware that a DJ will not be dealing with an appeal.

 

I`m not prepared to post the amended defence for obvious confidentiality purposes.

 

The costs are worth it if we can watch the particular DJ who originally threw out my Defence etc.. eventually see red:)

 

Have all parties seen the defence now? Is there any reason not to share the information with everyone on CAG, as they have shared information with you? It may help others, as well as giving you a much wider audience to chip in and offer advice and support as you prepare for court.

[rich2568]

In fairness Caro, the case may never get back to court!

 

At the moment they have judgment, so all in all the defence didn`t work. I don`t want to send other C.A.G. members on the wrong path by posting something which may not be entirely helpful to them.

 

I would be happy though to help other members by p.m. if they require so, because it appears at this moment in time their are several DCA`s in disguise within the site:evil:

[B3rty]

Is the lesson to be learnt here the fact that the original defence was not received on time and if it had the outcome may have been different?

 

Berty

[tomterm8]

Is the lesson to be learnt here the fact that the origonal defence was not received on time and if it had the outcome may have been different?

 

Berty

 

No. the original defence was filed and served correctly. what happened in this instance, I fear, is that the original defence became invalid because they sent a credit agreement to the court; and a subsequent amended defence was not submitted within a reasonable time before a strike out hearing. the reasons for this are complicated, and involve the banning of a former member.

 

technically, because the application to amend the defence was not accepted, the original defence was the one Rich lost under.

 

I suspect the judge was angry that Rich had not submitted the application to amend the defence in good time, and because Rich wasn't there in person all the judge heared was the creditors side of the story.

 

90% of the time, if you are not at the trial hearing, you will lose.

 

Rich did have good reason not to be there, but all the judge knew was a small part of the reason. I suspect if he had the full story, he wouldn't have been so quick to have the hearing without Rich's attendance.

[rich2568]

Just to clarify a couple of things.

 

Firstly, what I meant by pm`ing members to assist them-- what I meant is that I will pm members, but not with my amended defence as I feel it is only suited to my case.

 

Also, in response to tomterms quotes. I had the credit agreement in my possession and included the non- validity of it in my amended defence. Just because the claimant sent it in to the court to see, this really wasn`t the issue here. The agreement was never an agreement- just an extended application! Also what is a strike-out hearing as I thought it was a hearing for summary judgment? Did the judge already have the inclination to strike out my case before I turned up?(or not in this case).

 

Finally I`m not sure where `the banning of a former member`merges into my case? There surely can`t be any involvement by Laiste for the judges decision -surely? She helped me immensely throughout the thread and I was proud to have her on my side, I wouldn`t of done it any other way!!

[tomterm8]

Hi, Rich.

 

Just to clarify a couple of things.

...

 

Also, in response to tomterms quotes. I had the credit agreement in my possession and included the non- validity of it in my amended defence. Just because the claimant sent it in to the court to see, this really wasn`t the issue here. The agreement was never an agreement- just an extended application! Also what is a strike-out hearing as I thought it was a hearing for summary judgment? Did the judge already have the inclination to strike out my case before I turned up?(or not in this case).

strike-out hearing = summary judgement hearing. A summary judgement hearing is where they decide if there is any case to answer.

 

Finally I`m not sure where `the banning of a former member`merges into my case? There surely can`t be any involvement by Laiste for the judges decision -surely? She helped me immensely throughout the thread and I was proud to have her on my side, I wouldn`t of done it any other way!!

 

I wasn't criticising Laiste, Rich. However, i certainly thought you were getting the help you needed from her, and didn't realise she had been banned until your court case was imminent.

 

[Moneydownthedrain]

Hi, Rich.

I just been reading the threads and its clear to me that you are criticising Laiste and I can only say from past experience that Laiste has been a God send to me. Her advice, freely given has cleared a very large amount of my debt and when I next have to go to court, I know she will be in my corner, if nothing else she gives me the bottle to fight, instead of just rolling over. It is a great pity that her advice is no longer available to everyone on this site.

MONEYDOWNTHEDRAIN

[tomterm8]

I wasn't criticising Laiste, Rich.

 

I just been reading the threads and its clear to me that you are criticising Laiste

 

I hope that clarifies matters.

[Moneydownthedrain]

Quote "and a subsequent amended defence was not submitted within a reasonable time before a strike out hearing. the reasons for this are complicated, and involve the banning of a former member"

 

You can say what you want Tomterm, but it doesn’t change the facts, you WERE levelling unfounded criticisms at Laiste, and you weren’t in the slightest bit subtle about it, you then proceeded to back-peddle for England, in a bid to retract your comments and failed gloriously!

 

Don’t flatter yourself, or insult my intelligence that you have clarified anything in respect of the remarks you made. You deliberately made comments that insinuated that the reason Rich lost his case was because of Laiste. Furthermore, you were intentionally vague about how this apparently happened, by stating the reasons were “complicated”, how very convenient! You clearly didn’t want to bother us lesser mortals on here, with the actual details, and I have to say, I can see the difficulty you would have faced in attempting to help us all understand just how exactly Laiste’s banning had anything at all to do with the Judgment obtained against Rich! However, it is clear from your comments that you either believe and/or have evidence to substantiate what you are saying, and I am very interested to know what correlation there is between Laiste’s banning and Rich’s Judgment. So, why don’t you explain to me in as much detail as is required, just what exactly the connection between the two are.

 

I look forward to reading your explanation and I give you my word that I will try to keep my apparent dyslexia and inability to understand under control…..I tell you what, we will come back to your vile, disgusting and libellous remarks made at lunchtime, a little later! Oh, did you think I hadn’t seen the post? Well fortunately for you, I read every single word….before you deleted, or were instructed to delete, all evidence of the message! Luckily, I have a copy of the post, which will be helpful when I take advice in respect of the site's and your personal liability for the remarks.

 

Looking forward to hearing from you!

MDTD.

[tomterm8]

For your information, the post refered to was moderated. i was neither instructed, neither did i take it down.

 

If you intend to take any action, i suggest you PM me with the name of your Lawyer. Otherwise, I have no interest in you or replying to you further. I am putting you on ignore.

[rich2568]

Here`s an update.

 

Enforcement action now being taken bearing in mind that Judgment was given due to me not attending the Summary Judgment hearing!

 

Hearing for an interim Charging Order now scheduled.

 

Any input for my case to present to the judge giving multiple reasons why this should not happen-- then please provide your input-- it would be appreciated!!

 

Is it correct also that my partner should receive a letter from the Land Registry advising her of the following and I quote:-

 

"You are a registered proprietor and :- RESTRICTION- No disposition of the registered estate is to be registered without a certificate signed by the applicant for registration that written notice of the disposition was given to XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX being the person with the benefit of an interim charging order made by the County Court etc. etc.. The applicant states that the Court has made a charging order against this property in case number XXXXXXX"

 

So I suppose it is now up to my partner to write to the L.Registry with her objections especially as she is not owing any money to the applicant- right?

 

Also it is interesting what the L.Registry are stating- I quote:-

 

"There are very few circumstances in which someone would be able successfully to object to such an application.

 

For instance, an objection on the following basis would NOT prevent completion of the application

- that you are already negotiating with the applicant as to how to pay/paying in instalments. The court order is still valid.

- that you do not agree with the order or that you owe money to the applicant. You may still be able to apply to the court to cancel the order but it is still valid.

 

If the Court order is made against a person who owns the property with you and not you personally then the above still applies. The Court order only affects the interest in the property of that person but the applicant may still make this application."

 

Any assistance in this case would be gratefullly appreciated- I do have a few notes already that I have towards an argument against the Judge making a full and final C/Order!!!

[make them aktiv runners]

Is it correct also that my partner should receive a letter from the Land Registry advising her of the following and I quote:-

 

"You are a registered proprietor and :- RESTRICTION- No disposition of the registered estate is to be registered without a certificate signed by the applicant for registration that written notice of the disposition was given to XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX being the person with the benefit of an interim charging order made by the County Court etc. etc.. The applicant states that the Court has made a charging order against this property in case number XXXXXXX"

 

So I suppose it is now up to my partner to write to the L.Registry with her objections especially as she is not owing any money to the applicant- right?

 

It is a legal requirement for your partner to be informed. Basically it is just making her aware (just in case you did not tell her) that there are certain requirements to be met before a sale can complete. It does affect her share in the property in any way.

[rich2568]

bumping it. Free solicitors?? May need one- fast!

[caro]

Would you like to elaborate Rich. What's the problem? A quick update on where you are and what you need at the moment would help.

[rich2568]

Enforcement action now being taken bearing in mind that Judgment was given due to me not attending the Summary Judgment hearing!

 

Hearing for an interim Charging Order now scheduled for Mon

 

Any input please for my case to present to the judge giving multiple reasons why this C/o should not happen-- then please provide your input-- it would be appreciated!!

 

Or as i have stated- free solicitors anyone??

[aBitofaPickle]

I've read the history of your case with interest. As I fear I am starting on the same path, although not as far as CCJ yet. I have just received a similar CCA from ARC chasing an Egg debt. I am grateful for the leg work already done and hope I can put it to good use.

Good luck with your case.

[caro]

Many solicitors will give a free initial consultation, so you might try that route.

 

Was there a good reason not to attend the hearing? As I'm on my lunchbreak I don't have time to read the whole thread. What kind of things have you come up with so far? If I can see what you're aiming at it's easier to give a useful reply.