N244 lodged. Let's see what happens next...

Thanks. That is my plan. Something short and to point but factually correct and not half truths scattered with the occasional lie!! I am still keen to know of follow up action as otherwise what is to stop them doing this to others.

Thanks! I'm applying to set aside today but wanted to know if there are any implications for the bank and their solicitors for including prejudiced information to support their claim that there is an admission of an outstanding debt, which there isn't. And for knowingly including factually incorrect information?

I have now seen a copy of the application for lifting of stay and judgment the witness statement within contains outright lies and the inclusion of prejudiced information that was marked in correspondence 'without prejudice'. Can anyone confirm what the penalty for entering false information into proceedings is, is it covered under any criminal statute or common law? Also, is entering prejudiced information punishable too, or is that just a telling off from judge? Many thanks in advance

But the bank told me they wouldn't apply for judgment without first giving me an opportunity to defend? Also, after the original 28 days to submit defence had elapsed (I.e. while the review of complaint was ongoing) and then after 6 months had elapsed and claim was stayed do I even have the right to just submit a defence or is permission required? So you are confirming that neither the court or claimant are required in any way to inform me that an application for lifting a stay or for judgment in default are required to be provided to defendant? How so? Looks like £255 then to have this set aside as there is no outstanding debt!!!!

These rotters have applied for and received a judgment in default despite the claim being stayed (for over 2 years) and me not receiving a copy of the bank's application for the stay to be lifted or for default judgment. The stay automatically occurred because despite me not filing a defence the bank did not file for a judgment in default. The bank actually took out the claim against me despite there being an ongoing formal complaint raised be me in relation to the matter. The bank admitted that the claim should not have been pursued with the complaint ongoing and most importantly two recorded voice calls (with bank and their solicitors) I expressed my concerns about me not submitting a defence as I was awaiting the outcome of the complaint and then the bank submitting an application for a judgement as no defence was filed. In both recordings they said they wouldn't do this and that they would afford me 2 weeks to submit a defence if they were to continue. I continue to claim that there is no debt outstanding and have a solid defence but now I'm faced with a judgement from Northampton CCBC!! Am I entitled to 1) be made aware of an application to have a stay lifted and an application for judgment in default, 2) a hearing in relation to these, and 3) apply for the judgment to be set aside due to a failure to follow process and because I am in a position to successfully defend the claim AND counterclaim?

Thanks guys for input. Very useful.

Did you have a joint and several liability clause in your contract? I imagine you would have done. Perhaps (as someone else I spoke with earlier today suggested) the several term allows for them to make a separate claim for the same alleged debt.

For the same alleged debt? Same account? Was it a joint account?

Why isn't this the case?

Hi Andy - these were my thoughts too but I have nothing to substantiate it. Do you? I guess they would have the option of applying for the stay to be lifted and then adding my wife as a co-defendant. Not sure whether that would be much of a goer for them though as it begs the question, why wait 18 months if you have a strong case?

Glad that we have ruled you out as an employee of the bank then - lol

It is 18 months since the stay and they have resorted to tactics of 3rd party interlopers. If they have a valid case and an ongoing claim why not lift the stay for a couple of hundred quid?

I am trying to ascertain if indeed it is a viable defence. Also, I am trying to understand more about stays on proceedings and whether there is a time limit on either party to make an application for these to be lifted. Anyone? As for background. In short. Bank wanted me to make "additional credits" into the account (which was overdrawn but within limit) as they were "concerned with the lack of credits being applied". I said, I am not aware of any obligation to make additional credits and if they believe I am to show me a contract and terms that state as such. This went back and forth and then bank started to demand I repay all the money but continued to fail to honour my request!! I was not in a position to make additional payments and I determined the maximum amount I could afford to pay back was £25 per month. I stapled a cheque to an official offer to this effect and the bank duly returned it. I sent it back again with the offer, the bank returned it again. I sent it back again from a different bank account this time (again cheque stapled to offer), only this time I was in a position to make payments of £50 per month. The bank accepted the offer by removing the cheque and lodging it. I continued this for months and then the bank returned another cheque. I returned the same cheque the next month along with a further £50.00 for that month and said that if the bank refuses to accept my payment via our contract then both parties agree and acknowledge that no debt exists. They returned the cheque. The debt became extinguished therefore I do not acknowledge any debt. Whether you agree or not is irrelevant really, but that is what happened and I am comfortable with it. I made every effort I could to continue to discharge the previous debt and honour any existing agreement/contract/arrangement but the bank refused my payments.

I do not accept that a debt exists, so naturally I haven't "paid the debt". They refer to a "joint and severel" [sic] clause, however despite repeated requests they have failed to provide me with a copy of a contract, using all manner of excuses, the latest being that they are not obliged to keep contracts older than 6 years (despite the request being in 2012 and the alleged contract being 2009). But regardless of this, the wiki quote still says "...the creditor can sue for each debt only once..." and I would interpret this to mean that each action (claim) counts as one, therefore if there is a stayed claim and then the bank attempts to sue (claim) again (for the same debt) with a different defendant, then that would be suing twice for the same debt. Interested to hear other thoughts though - thanks.

Do you know this for certain? I wasn't named as Claimant, but as a Defendant. The reason I ask is because Wikipedia (ahem) suggests under Joint Liability that "... in suing, the creditor has only one cause of action; i.e., the creditor can sue for each debt only once. " LINK

Thanks for all the replies people It is a weird one I appreciate. To add some flesh. It was a joint bank account since mid 90's!! Originally a current account but I was then mis-sold into taking out one of those paid-for accounts (I may look into some compensation for that at some time). It was in both my and my wife's names. The reason they did not seek default judgement is because when they took out the claim against me (not me and my wife) I had already instigated an official complaint which was still ongoing. I made them aware of this and they instructed their solicitors to hold fire until the conclusion of the complaint and the outcome of an ombudsman if I took that route. The timings of this may have messed with their plans a bit, but if I recall, the ombudsman's findings where within the 6 month timeframe from the deadline for me responding to the claim, however the bank did not act on this for a default judgement. Now if they believe the money is still owed then why now change tack and attempt to harass my wife. I think it is disgraceful. I have even provided a letter for my wife to send the bank stating that I take sole responsibility for the alleged debt and the account, and I also made sure both I and my wife referred to the previous stayed claim. Very strange and immoral behaviour IMO

I did not serve or file an admission or file a defence or counterclaim and the claimant has not entered or applied for judgement (default or summary). I have received no correspondence from the Claimant or their solicitors since on March 2013. The Court confirmed in writing (email) that "the case was stayed due to no action on the 2 October 2013" My understanding is that to make an application to have a stay lifted you would require new evidence, i.e. something over and above why default judgement was not sought. I think I know what you mean - LOL

How do I make the claim un-pending for want of a better term? Is there a statute of limitations type thing for stays? Or, better to let sleeping dogs lie. As for new challengers, the Bank hasn't claimed to have sold the alleged debt on, they are just using 3rd party interlopers to act (harass) on their behalf, of which I am under no obligation to enter into dealings with. I'm just hoping that there is something I (my wife) can write back to the Bank, to the effect of, "there is pending litigation regarding these matters, as claim XXXXX, which is currently stayed, as such why are you harassing me in relation to these matters?"

"Even if it were true...", which part don't you believe? The court confirmed that the case is currently stayed (over a year ago). Does anyone know if there is a time limit for an application for a stay to be lifted?

I hope someone might be able to shed some light here please. I HAD a joint account with my wife. To cut a long story short, the Bank attempted to take me to court for an alleged debt (there is a lot around this subject but not for now), however there was an ongoing complaint at the time which went to Ombudsman. As as result I never submitted a Defence, and the Bank never attempted to receive a Default Judgement. As such the Claim was stayed after 6 months (as per CPR). The Bank is now attempting to harass my wife now over this using 3rd party interlopers. This is of no concern to us. We do not acknowledge the alleged debt, or account exists. However, my question is this: Can a Bank take out a separate claim ("sue") for the same alleged debt where there is a joint and several clause in a contract? My understanding is that when a joint and several clause exists the Bank can only sue once for the debt. Any thoughts anyone?

Thanks for info. So was there a default notice issued by Barclaycard to you (or at least do they claim there was)? Did this pre-date the date that MKDP claim the debt was assigned to them and did they (Barclaycard) ever enter a default entry on your credit reports?

My point is that ONLY the legal owner of the account (i.e. Barclaycard or the DCA in this example) is legally entitled to place an account in default (and if they choose to, report to CRAs) and if they do attempt to default the account SHALL follow the requirements laid down in the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (chiefly those found in section 88). I am not aware of any legal entitlement for a CRA to report a Default on an account regardless of how many payments have been missed. With regards to the "debt buyer simply inherit[ing] whats there", this too would not make sense in my example as the Barclaycard account was marked as settled WITHOUT a default entry (just 6 alleged missed payments) and the buyer (DCA) or CRA(s) (if what you say is true) entered a default AFTER it was marked settled by Barclaycard. I.e. the action was taken by the buyer or CRA(s).

I can't say I've ever come across a CRA taking the liberty of applying a default to an account before. Where have you heard of that before? As the original credit agreement would have been under the CCA74 then I would assume that any default would need to follow the correct procedure. Also, in this example, once assigned to the DCA the previous alleged missed payments would not be relevant as they were in relation to the previous owner (Barclaycard). As such, if there was an automatic system then surely any default would need to be applied to the Barclaycard account not the DCA account. Do you have examples of this ever happening in the past (either to you or others) or is it just a suggestion? Ta

I would be most grateful of some clarification from you great folks on CAG please. Background Had an original CC with MSDW long time back. This then followed the Goldfish to Barclaycard route. CCA made to Barclaycard who failed to satisfy my request. Upon the 6th alleged missed payment they assigned it to a DCA (will not name at this stage). DCA made usual threats. More interestingly, the DCA applied a Default to my credit reference file only 6 days after the date of assignment. Questions From my understanding a default notice must be provided prior to recording a default with any CRAs. This notice must provide the info prescribed in S88(1) of CCA74 and as such a way to remedy any alleged breach and must afford the debtor 14 days from service to carry out remedy before a default can be recorded with CRAs. Is this your understanding too? As Barclaycard never added a default (and if they did then the DCA would have needed to have recorded the same date with the CRAs in my credit reference file) and the DCA did not follow the correct procedure, where do I stand now with regards to a) the Default entry, b) the alleged debt (that I deny) and c) my chances of suing the DCA for stress and actual loss suffered from affecting my credit rating by applying Default? Does the alleged debt become unenforceable now? Many thanks in advance and any further questions do not hesitate to ask! Cheers Wormy