In my experience RMA is all mouth and no trousers. Lots of abuse, cod-legal bulldust etc. but they don't actually do anything. I would just ignore them.

The Banking Code no longer exists. It was replaced by the Lending Code last November. It will come as no surprise that the new Lending Code disclaims any validity in relation to making complaints to such bodies as the Financial Ombudsman Service. Look at the introduction point 5 here - http://www.lendingstandardsboard.org.uk/docs/lendingcode.pdf.

As far as engaging goes we have been doing this for about two years. They have argued, prevaricated, lied and actually prevented us from making repayments. There is a corporate culture of mendacity, duplicity, aggression and bullying - which has got them precisely nowhere.

H&P : many thanks for looking that up. Nagasis : no, that is the response they would give if the matter went that far. They are just getting in first.

If you have a County Court Judgment then the court has ordered you to pay a certain amount (£400?) at a rate of £5/month. That is what you must pay - and only that. You can either ignore them, or write a suitably robust response. Just keep on sending payments as ordered by the court.

Yes, the name and address on this reconstituted copy are correct. There were no accompanying terms and conditions - all that was enclosed was the page uploaded as above. The accompanying letters contains this paragraph - "With reference to CPR Pre-action Protocol 4.6©, regarding the Signed Application form, we have conducted a reasonable search, and at the time of the request, the document cannot be located. It was in our control but is no longer in our possession therefore, a reconstituted application is enclosed." I've no idea what CPR Pre-action Protocol 4.6© is or says - can someone enlighten me?

From what you describe this is just an idle threat. Someone above has suggested applying for a set aside with costs. Sounds like a good time to supplement your income .

A proper letter and sent by recorded delivery.

If you do not want calls to 'someone else's' phone then that someone else (in this case your fiance) has to write to them requesting them to stop.

For your interest and amusement. (Note that the name and address have been blanked out.) http://i837.photobucket.com/albums/zz299/palomino00/CAG/Agreement.jpg The interesting point is that any purported agreement was with HSBC, not Midland, and would have happened many years after the takeover. Back to the drawing board ...

Very good points! I understand (must check this out though) that a creditors' petition for bankruptcy costs the petitioner around £1600. And then, as cbj says, that creditor will receive a proportion of the available funds. Hence is out of pocket by the balance of the debt and by the cost of the petition. For this reason any creditor considering this course of action will have done their homework to ensure that you have sufficient funds for all creditors to be paid out in full.

Ensure you keep that tape very, very safe.

To be honest I couldn't do what I wanted to do. I would be banged up for false imprisonment. Sad but true.

I've just popped into this thread and I'm mightily confused. Learn Direct organise training - they don't lend money. However they might be a front for a loan company. This isn't clear from the OP's first post. And where does the 'home Learning College' fit in? Is this the organisation that actually does the training? Do they lend money themselves? Or are they the ones fronting for a loan company? The question therefore is who thinks you owe them money? Who has instructed Apex? Insofar as Apex are ignoring letters this is all adding to the evidence for yourself if this ever gets to court. I hope all your letters are being sent by recorded delivery. One last point : did you ever advise Learn Direct directly of your wife's medical conditions? You only say you advised Apex.

I would be dubious about the BUPA payments. BUPA might be highly desirable but it's not essential - there is always the NHS to fall back on. If you had some medical condition that only BUPA could provide then maybe you could swing it. But that's a huge hoop to jump through. (But in that case BUPA would probably cease cover anyway).

Regarding the bankruptcy there are two pertinent dates - when youare declared bankrupt and when the bakruptcy was discharged. Between those two dates you are bankrupt. Once you are discharged you are no longer bankrupt. These dates do not happen together. These days it is common (but not universal) to be bankrupt for one year. As to the purported insolvency you've done exactly the right thing. 17 months is more than long enough to separate solvency and bankruptcy. But you might still have to provide some evidence as I noted earlier.

One small point : county court claims can only be made against UK addresses. This might explain part of the problem.

I see. But we're still confused. Do you mean that she was declared bankrupt in 2006 and discharged in 2007? If this is the case then the bankruptcy occurred only 5 months after the money was paid out, and I'm not surprised the OR is on the case. Unfortunately timing is important on this matter.

No it's not - it doesn't cost anything to issue a Statutory Demand (other than postage). You must pay court fees to have claim issued in the County Court.

Not half as much as he is ...

These doorstep collectors are not bailiffs and have no right of entry, and no right at all to take any property. I would (but then I'm like that ...) invite them in, locking the door behind them. Then I would ask to see copies of all his personal ID, his authority from the creditor etc. Then I would ask him to produce any documentation that might allow him to demand payments of any sort. I would get very aggressive and not let him go on his way for some time.

Are you sure the year is right? You first post says she was declared bankrupt on Oct 2007. Well done with the letters.

Asking for a copy of any agreement is a good idea. However, how about a different strategy. Wait until the SD is served on you and then have it set aside on the grounds that the matter is under dispute. If the SD is set aside then it will be quite some time before Capquest try it on again. In the meantime I would formally complain to the OFT about this as it is clearly in breach of their Debt Collection Guidance - http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf. The specific clause you want is 2.6 h.

Forget about the slander - it doesn't apply in this situation. Has your mum's bankruptcy been discharged? I don't think this has been asked before, however it does seem a long time for a bankruptcy to last without being discharged. If not then the OR is still dealing with the matter and this might explain what is happening. There is pongy whiff about all of this. Why hasn't your mum been kept informed of what is happening? Why did Farleys suddenly demand money with no explanation? Their highly arrogant attitude is unfortunately typical of many solicitors. I would lodge a formal complaint about the actions of the Official Receiver in not explaining things. I would lodge a formal complaint with Farleys about their high-handed and confrontational attitude which has exacerbated the matter, causing considerable distress to yourselves. I would also ask Farleys on what basis they believe your mum to have been insolvent at the time she made the gifts. If you need to prove your mum wasn't insolvent then I guess that she has to show that the debts included in her bankruptcy weren't delinquent 15 months earlier. You'll need all your bank statements, credit card statements etc. etc. to show that everything was up-to-date. Unfortunately lawyers and judges expect everybody to be dishonest. It's horrible, nasty and unfair, but it's life unfortunately.

Sorry that no-one has been able to help since you first posted. I can't really help either, however I would suggest a course of action. I would expect that the executor of the estate could make the claims you mention. Are you the executor? I would expect that you would have the equivalent of Power of Attorney over your late father's affairs, however you will need to confirm this with a solicitor. I would also expect that you would be obliged to recover any monies due to the estate.