I have no idea why OFSs aren't already being applied for more widely, and I hope this won't happen in future either. It wasn't my intention to scare people off knowing and exercising their rights - I was only trying to imagine what might happen if this particular knowledge re. restrictions does become more common: right now, largely, creditors still get paid on COs (in the form of restrictions) after a sale, even though there is no legal obligation to do so. If, in a growing number of cases, they end up with nothing, what do you think they might do? I totally agree with you in that other routes, such as the one you describe, would be much preferred but 'acting reasonably' and 'debt collection' aren't exactly concepts that fit in with each other.

Not sure if this link has been posted earlier on this thread - if knowledge of these things starts spreading amongst debtors, it certainly will do amongst creditors as well, which could see an increase in Orders for Sale being applied for. http://www.bllaw.co.uk/pdf/financeandrecoveries_0806_charging%20orders%20on%20property.pdf

Court has ruled on my N244 application, which included an Unless Order and a request of a strike-out if AG don't comply within a certain timeframe, plus payment of my application costs. None of this was ruled, rather, the judge ordered that the claim is stayed until such time as the Claimant complies with the Defendant's CPR 31.14 request. Time for service of Defence is extended to 14 days after service of documents. Does this mean that they now have unlimited time for complying and providing the documents? I.e. to find something that they should have had in their possession before issuing the claim?? I really don't think this is fair but highlights the preferential treatment of companies over LiPs once again. How long do I reasonably have to wait until I could make another application for strike-out? Also, no mention of my costs, as expected. BC's sloppy approach and tactical manoeuvring means that I'm now in limbo and out of pocket, at least for the time being. Brilliant system.

That sounds a bit odd to me even though the advice came from a court - isn't the whole idea of doing an N244 to halt the process and suspend any deadline for a defence until the application has been decided upon? Even if it were subsequently declined, surely a new deadline for the defence should be set then? Got my N244 ready to go tomorrow - will phone the court before the end of the week to see if they recommend the same as above (i.e. still submit a defense).

Thank you again, citizenB, can't give you a rating as have to "spread" first but will do so as soon as I am able to. Court confirmed fee without a hearing is £45. I'll get the form etc. plus the letter to BC done over the weekend. I know it will be quite some time until hopefully a new deadline for my defence but would the lack of these items in the PoC be part of the text for my defence, as you have suggested in your earlier post? I'm particularly wary of the warnings by pt re. "Embarrassed defences" but I suppose will cross that bridge when I get to it. In the meantime, more reading to be done, all of which will contribute towards a costs order should I ever have the opportunity to draw one up - good to see that the hourly rate has gone up to £18.

Just phoned the court - currently, the fee for an N244 is £80 and it could take up to 4 weeks to be dealt with! I'll still put in the dates as if it were being dealt with asap, and then have to wait what new dates the court sets. Also, would it be the right thing to do to inform BC of me having made an application under N244, and tell them they'll be hearing from the court in due course? Still not sure whether to send Arrow a CCA request in the meantime, just to see if they can come up with the agreement - of course, this could backfire as if they have it, I'm sure to get it again through the N244 (no strike-out) and will then face the task of formulating a defence on that basis. Is a claim just on the basis of an agreement acceptable, i.e. where do things like T&Cs, statement of account, DN, TN and NoA come into it? Just with the agreement, even if they have it in their possession, how can they prove that the amount they're claiming is accurate, and all other legally required steps have been taken?

Excerpt from BC letter received today: "We confirm that this matter relates to a simple debt and would most properly [sic] be allocated to the small claims track and so Part 31 of the Civil Procedure Rules does not apply." Again, have they got it totally wrong or have I? I know the claim is as yet unallocated but I thought small claims was for amounts of up to £5K, or is this in reality variable/at the judge's discretion? From what I've read, the probably proper ( ) track for this should be multi track, shouldn't it? Never mind who is right here, N244 it will be then. Couple of questions on dates: I'm still tempted to request that they comply with my CPR request by 18/03/2012 but having read pt's guideline document again, this is probably wishful thinking on my part. The text for the Unless order mentions 14 days from the date the court decides on the application, therefore "N244 submission date + 14/15" sounds more realistic. As to the new date for filing my defence in case they do comply, am I being reasonable adding 28 days to "N244 submission date + 14/15"? Lastly, can the Court change any dates I request on the N244 at their discretion? Give them more time than what I have requested they be given, and/or give me less time for filing my defence than what I've put on as the new deadline? Sorry for the very specifc and detailed questions but I want to do it right and not mess up any timescales. Thanks in advance for any input. ph

phaitun, thanks for your post. I absolutely agree - the "common" man/woman has little or no chance in this system, which is one (more) reason why I am leaving. My (albeit limited) experience with large companies/banks/courts in my home country leads me to believe things are a bit more equal there - it's a modern democracy without all the bias of the class system and its stuffy and incestuous aspects. Transferring the house to my partner only won't work via the simple route as his salary isn't high enough to take out a mortgage in his name only. Currently I'm looking at the option of removing my name from the title deeds but keeping the joint mortgage (will obviously continue to pay my share from abroad). Will keep following your thread and wish you all the best! ph

You said they are Restrictions - debts in sole name but property jointly owned? Have a read here: http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=1839539

Sadly, I cannot afford legal representation - if I had spare funds, I might have made BC an offer of payment (either monthly or F&F) when the claim was first issued.

Hmmm, pt's document seems to suggest otherwise ... Application for reversal of a strike-out? That is now way above my (limited) knowledge of court procedures. Where can I read up on that?

Absolutely fine with me.

pt's document has a template for incorporating both on an N244 so it is possible but as I said, I'm wondering whether tactically it might be better not to ask for an extension and put them under time pressure instead, in the hope they won't be able to comply and I get a strike-out.

Thanks citizenB for the quick reply. Hidden in long initial post: Amount in POC is the 5 digits I put in above, i.e. just over £10K. Sounds a good wording for the defence - what about my idea to slap them with an N244 and a tight deadline?

Hi, Looks like I'm in a similar position to you, my thread can be found here: http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?339613-Arrow-Global-BC-claim-received-today-help-please Maybe we can exchange info on progress etc., also by PM if you want. Others reading this, I'd be most greatful if you could spare a moment to have a look at my thread and provide some advice. Let's beat the barstewards! ph P.S. My claim is for more than £5K so there is some difference in them having to comply with CPR 31.14 - from what I've read they have to in my case but still refuse...