Hi everyone !

went to court yesterday, in connection with a supposedly assigned debt,

took all documents relating to the case, RE: incorrect paperwork from DCA's all related .

OC was Yorkshire Bank PLC whereby after paying 24 payments out of 48,

and because of a mistake made at DHSS was left without benefit for 33 weeks

resulting in an ICO entered by way of a restriction upon my BI in the jointly owned property,

this was registered at the land registry in July 2005,

and although a FCO was granted without my being informed the FCO has never been registered with the Land registry.

At the beginning of 2008 got a letter stating that the Assignor of the debt was

"Phoenix Recoveries (uk) Limited Sarl" - "Marlin Recoveries"

and that the Assignees - Yorkshire /Clydesdale bank

and that the assignees has aquired from the assignors all of the assignors rights in to and under the above detailed account.

Meaning the above named assignees (yorkshire/clydesdale bank) and all amounts owed is now due to them.

The Assignee has appointed Marlin Financial Services to administer the account please contact Marlin Financial Services immediaitely and you shoulld no longer pay the Assignor.

All payments in relation to the account should now be made to Marlin Financial Services, please do not make payments to any other agency you may have been dealing with.

not signed, but stated

Marlin Financial Services

( For and on behalf of the Assignor) **** "phoenix recoveries (UK) Limited SARL (luxembourg)***.

A month later another letter stating the following:

RE: Yorkshire/ clydsdale bank PLc

We are writing to inform you that the above account was assigned to "Phoenix Recoveries (UK) Limited Sarl acting in the name oand on behalf of its compartment "Marlin Recoveries" 2 months previous to this letter which means the effective owners are "Phoenix Recoveries (UK) Limited SARL, who have now appointed Marlin Financial Services as their servicing agent to manage your account on their behalf.

All contact regarding this account should be made to:

Marlin Financial Services

2 The courtyard Beeding Court

Shoreham Road, Upper Beeding

Steyning, West Sussex

BN44 3BJ

all payments since Jan o8 will be forwarded to "Phoenix Recoveries (UK) Limited SARL shortly.

if you read the contents of the above 2 letters it is most confusing as the 1st letter states Phoenix are no longer the assignnees but were the assignors no longer own the debt which has Yorkshire /Clydsdale Bank as the assignees,

but are now saying in letter 2 that the assignees are noe Phoenix recoveries (UK) Limited sarl and are the effective owners since before the 1st letter was wrote although no actual letters of assignment had been properly received as stated by law.

Upon production of the above documents which the claimant had not got

so upon passing them to the judge admittted there were mistakes and discrepancies within some of the paperwork,

I stated I had written to the owners of the debt at their incorrect addressess stating that they should produce the signed agreements between ourselves showing that I did owe them the alleged amount,

and that the claimant now was still using an address not registered to them,

differing from the address registered at Companies House ,

stated that I had had letters to phone their solicitors acting for them and should have conformed with the letters by ringing them and she has not read all the letters but could see there were discrepancies ,

still ordered me to start paying on the debt which I feel has been bought for peanuts but judge stated this did not matter and as interest was still being added daily could I remortgage my property to pay the alleged debtor or could family memebers help me out.

I did have papers relating to the proportionality of the debt stated in the law gazette as they are asking for the sae of the jointly owned property by way of settlement of a solely signed for loan, what do you suggest my nex action should be back in court 6 weeks time.:|

Just bumping this for you Junkimunki. You might want to hit the triangle and ask the site team to move it to Legal Issues

kind regards

Elsa x

Moved to the Legal forum.

still ordered me to start paying on the debt which I feel has been bought for peanuts but judge stated this did not matter and as interest was still being added daily could I remortgage my property to pay the alleged debtor or could family memebers help me out.

Hes obviously is unaware that borrowing to pay debt is a no no and a very irresponsible comment for a District Judge to make.

Whats the next hearing for JM?

Regards

Andy

Moved to the Legal forum.

thanx CBT for the move will post more in the legal forum in a few ticks

still ordered me to start paying on the debt which I feel has been bought for peanuts but judge stated this did not matter and as interest was still being added daily could I remortgage my property to pay the alleged debtor or could family memebers help me out.

 

Hes obviously is unaware that borrowing to pay debt is a no no and a very irresponsible comment for a District Judge to make.

Whats the next hearing for JM?

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

 

Hi and thanx for the concern, andy have been transferred over to the legal issues forum and am grateful for that

will answer your question and give you more information on what has happened to date

and why I am requested back @ court in 6 weeks time,

Have got my fingers crossed hoping that some of you experienced caggers will let me know exactly what the legalities and my rights are as I post more information on my case so far, dont dessert me please follow and advise accordingly most appreciated xx

Hes obviously is unaware that borrowing to pay debt is a no no and a very irresponsible comment for a District Judge to make.

Whats the next hearing for JM?

Regards

Andy

Hi Andy ,

firstly the judge was of the female version,

I explained the situation, and brought to the attention that, the address that had been used upon official documents by the despicable DCA,s // supposedly claimants was entirely different to the registered address for that DCA registered at Companies House,

the answer stated by the judge was that companies were allowed to trade from a different address than the registered address,

I stated that I was sorry but after studying literature and a mountain of information that I had sifted through I begged to differ on this occasion.

I stated at no time did I or have I ever seen the Deed Of assignment that was included in the court papers the claimants solicitors had supplied,

and that I was thoroughly disgusted that My OH had been stated as defendant NO2,

when the debt was solely signed by myself and that the ICO charge by way of a Restriction clearly stated as such.

I stated that although I had made numerous requests to the numerous DCA's whereby the Majority of them are interrelated for the signed written agreement and valid documentation of the assigned debt, nothing has ever been produced in verification of the outstanding debt.

Upon doing my own calculations of the amount I myself owed to the Original creditor,

thus a difference of £1796.36 was showing,

after checking Companies House information I myself noticed that the address upon official court docs for the Claimants was incorrect,

after contacting Companies House about using a different address to the one registered with them,

to which it was categorically stated could not and should not be happening,

and that after looking into it further I had come across some very disturbing facts,

hereby the incorrect address they were using was down as being the registered name and office of "Marlin UK 1 Ltd a related company that was dissolved June 2009 and prior to July 2007 had Previously been known as Marlin Europe 111 Ltd, this being the only company that was registered at that address.

I further established that the correct registered address for

MCE Portfolio Ltd is stated as:

MCE Portfolio Ltd

" Marlin House"

16-22 Grafton Road,

Worthing

West Sussex

United Kingdom

BN11 1QP

and that there was a total of 9 separate companies registered at the above address,

with companies house,

I myself am thinking that the reason for the incorrect address being used is to cover up and disguise the fact that surprisingly the solicitors and clients themselves are registered ere along with 7 more companies .

Debt owing as at 2005 was £6000,

but has now escalated to a figure in excess of £12k

which takes into account the added interest amount onto the original amount owing.

all the above information has been requested by Companies House for an investigation .

Admitted owing the debt when asked by judge,

but stated that did not acknowledge the amount owing or the people collecting the alleged debt,

stated that under the law of proportionality they were by law required to state the amount they had paid for the disputed debt,

in relation to the amount being claimed by them.

Can anyone out there tell me that the company involved who had purchased the debt for peanuts in the first place are legally entitled to add interest upon the debt which is actually registered within the CCA 1974 as I am 95 % sure thinking that interest cannot be added as judgement states money owing

thanx

post back soon xx

I have a number of charging orders against the property I live in, thanks to the ex husband! From memory (and I am sure someone can confirm or correct this) once the charging order has been made, interest can only be added to the debt if it is over £4000 and is NOT covered by the CCA.

Hope that's of help.

Here's a good blog on post judgement interest:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/entry.php?191-Post-judgment-interest-on-CCA-regulated-debts

Here's a good blog on post judgement interest:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/entry.php?191-Post-judgment-interest-on-CCA-regulated-debts

Here's a good blog on post judgement interest:

Hi "U.E" hoping you may be able to clarify the situation for me as to whether this load of bloodsucking leeches have the right to actually charge interest on the debt in question which is regulated under the cca 1974 as stated upon my agreement with the original creditor which is the only agreement I have in my possession for the debt, I have never been furnished with the documentation between myself and these corrupt bloodsucking leeches despite requisitioning them on numerous occasions, which has always been ignored as of todays date, have contacted Companies House with the question as to why this corrupt web of DCA's are getting away with fraudulent statements within the letters they are sending out.

An example of this is by way of actually stating upon official court documents an entirely different address to the one registered at Companies House, I did actually raise this point at a court hearing, but was told by the "Female Judge" that it is perfectly legal for them to have a differfent trading address to their registered address, this I stress is not acceptable at all after telephoning Companies House myself and stating my query,I was informed this is definately not allowed and that all documentation whereby this has happened be sent to Companies House for investigation as soon as possible.

An example of this is as follows ::: The Claimants Information registered at Companies House is stated as follows :

MCE Portfolio Limited

Marlin House

16-22 Grafton Road

Worthing

West Sussex

United Kingdom

BN11 1QP

Company No :05892466

And here is information taken from a statement of truth made and signed upon an Official Court Document by a "Richard Mathias" who has stated that his Position or office held is as a Solicitor, and has further stated within his statement of truth that he is a Solicitor within "Mortimer Clarke Solicitors Limited" who are acting on and behalf of the claimants.

The Claimants Information that has been included and documented, by "Richard Mathias"(solicitor) and by way of a statement of truth signed and documented by a "Mr Charlie Hooker Meehan" who further states that he is a Litigation Assistant at....

"Mortimer Clarke Solicitors"

3rd Floor

16-22 Grafton Road

Worthing

West Sussex

BN11 1QP

and states further that the claimants:

MCE Portfolio limited

The Courtyard

Beeding Court

Steyning

BN44 3TN

further states within his statement of truth, that the facts in the witness statements are true, and that he is authorised by the claimants to make this statement of truth upon their behalf.

signed and dated accordingly.

Surely the statement of truth made and signed by Richard Mathias (Solicitor) should not be allowed and should warrant some kind of legal reprimand as HE HIMSELF AND HIS SUPPOSEDLY FIRM OF SOLICITORS ARE REGISTERED AT THE SAME REGISTERED ADDRESS AS "MCE PORTFOLIO LIMITED" ACCORDING TO INFORMATION AT COMPANIES HOUSE, HOW CAN THIS BE LEGAL, THE INFORMATION REGARDING THE STATEMENT OF TRUTH IS TAKEN FROM AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT :: N208 CLAIM FORM (CPR Part 8) and have proceeded to actually have the cheek and audacity to actually charge me for their illegal and incorrect statements made by way of costs on these documents, and have even stated untrue statements within a Deed of Assignment" in my possession which quite clearly states the following : This deed of Assignment made ** **** 2011 Between ;

1) Phoenix Recoveries UK Limited S.a.r.l. incorporated and registered in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (company No : B123426) whose registered office is at 11-13 Boulevard de la Foire 5th Floor, L-1528 Luxembourg acting in the name and on behalf of its compartment

"Potomac Recoveries" (the Assignor)...............

2) MCE Portfolio Limited incorporated and registered in England (registered No: 05892466) whose registered office is at ..........

The Courtyard

Shoreham Road

Upper Beeding

Steyning

West Sussex

BN44 3TN (the Assignee)

Now this deed witnesseth as follows:

In the case of the Assignee;

Chief Legal Officer

Marlin House

16-22 Grafton Road

Worthing

West Sussex

BN11 1QP

Email : to which information registered at Companies House states.....

Marlin Capital Europe Limited

Marlin House

16-22 Grafton Road

Worthing

West Sussex

United Kingdom

BN11 1QP

Company No: 04623224 status active : date of Incorporation 20/12/2002.... previous names .... No previous name information has been recorded over the last 20 years ... could go on and on and on as I have more discrepancies relating to documentation at Companies house which I am aquiring and sending to them for immediate investigation ... but the statement included within the deed of assignment which states the following >>> No 6 .. Governing Law ... This Assignment shall be Governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales .... unable to read the rest... Surely with all the above info the Judge will have to listen to me instead of stating " I know there are errors with some of the paperwork I have not read all the papers" and then stated that I pay an amount each week to the solicitors acting for claimant although I had stated that I do not owe the claimants anything at all, a court hearing was affixed for 6 weeks, hopefully with all the incorrect info I will have my day in court after all .......................................

The statement relating to the Interest is as follows ...

The Claimant is entitled to claim interest under the Charging Orders Act 1979 pursuant to Section 3 (4) of the Act they are entitled to claim interest at the equitable rate of 8% per annum. but have stated just before the above statement that interest is accruing at a daily rate of £1.71 sorry can someone more experienced let me know if the statemnts relating to the interest is correct as I am unable to decide what the law does state as far as interest is concerned, I truly Hope and pray that with the rest of the incorrect and misleading not to mention illegal information I have , RE these bloodsucking cretins that I will stop them menacing and preying upon the general public once and for all, and also make them pay £££££££££££ for my time trouble inconvenience and dedication to overturn the tables on them...........

I'm not sure what you want Companies House to investigate?

It is perfectly legal to have more than one company registered at the same address so the solicitors have done nothing wrong.

I would also agree with the DJ that the Claimant can use a trading address to be served upon and does not have to be the registered office.

I understand you are upset at what is happening but feel it could be more productive if you focused your energies elsewhere.

Many companies have their registered office

for service of documents and the company secretary

at either their solicitors of accountants offices it's

common practice.

I agree..this one aspect is bogging you down unfortunately. You need to concentrate on the basics, and we need to know these in order to help, such as:

Original CCJ Particulars of Claim, verbatim

What you have done/received in respect of documentation ie the agreement, the default notice, the statement of account. Any PPI?? Any charges???

Did you acknowledge the original claim or was judgement by default?

What precisely is the purpose of the next hearing?

Clearly you are upset by all this but its very confusing for others to read and advise without the basic background. A brief concise bulleted record of events would help immensely.

Re interest, under a CCA regulated agreement interest is based upon what is contained in the agreement, if anything.

Elsa x