The court have set the amount to pay. As long as you keep to that, there is no chance of bailiffs or any other enforcement. If they wish to increase the amount. They need to apply to the court. Just tactics to increase payment. I wouldn't worry mate

Hi Bill it's just the court. I've a creditor who asks For a I& e every year. I bin mine and ignore. Not heard anything more. The I&e still arrives though

Sounds ok to me mate. I wouldn't get into a dialogue with them. You've paid the money end of. Cad

Hi Bill I would send them a payment get prove of posting. You have complied with the court order as it will reach them by the due date. I wouldn't worry to much. You in the financial institutions priority is probably very low down list.May not even flag up on their system! What's the balance on your Account now? Just another thing Bill I personally would definitely not ring them !!! Cad

As far as I'm aware the charge makes no difference to The allocation of shares of the property and it will remain as per original registration with the land registry Cad

Sorry missed you had extra insurance, puts a bit of a different perspective, and continue as I advised. However you may have case in court now.

Hi I sympathise with your problem. I have worked in the courier, parcel industry for over 25 years. Companies and individuals despatch parcels Under Conditions of carriage which define limitations of liability. This gives the extent you will be compensated. It's usually by weight ie £13.00 per kilo. In a loss situation you submit a claim and it is settled or other circumstances reject the claim. I would contact the head office in writing explaining,you will be contacting the media and your MP . The small claim court procedure in MHO is a waste of time. As they will quote the contract conditions if carriage. A ex gratia payment is your best bet. Regards Cad

Well done well rid and thanks for update

Hi Bill, My guess is this Marlin Company, have bought a shed load of debts from the OC. They cant take you to court twice IMO I wouldn't worry to much, OFS not gonna happen. Cad

You obviously cannot comprehend the complexity of the the discussion and are in a dillusion in believing that your point of view is the only one that has merit. Your inability to even look at the bigger picture rather sad.

Perhaps you could have a word, with Greece,Italy and Spain.oh and Ireland aswell there agreements are looking a bit dodgy

Good points from Andy & Duff I agree. Obvious that some posters are in the view that the creditors are right to take this stance. So looking at this from there perspective, I see lots of reasons it's not to there advantage and hinders there aim of collecting there debt. Often the original CCJ and then the C/O slows the process of repayment. 1/ The debtor usually has a installment order after, (or before) the C/O. Very little that the creditor can now do. The debtor now sits on the repayment, even if they could now pay more. Gain by creditor NIL.(apart from accounts?) Better solution except reduced payment with a review after a period of time and then a charge. 2/C/o puts debtor into negative equity, can't move to improve circumstance so as above. Gain by creditor Nil. Negative may have been able to settle or pay more. 3/C/o negative equity, debtor moves and rents. Pays ongoing payment or decides on bankruptcy Gain by creditor Nil. Negative as debt written off. 4/Debtor, is bitter by the experience of the process and continues with installment order even though circumstances have changed, and could pay more, and sell property and not settle as it's a restriction. Gain by creditor NIL. Negative, as creditor may have payed more and settled upon Sale. I'm sure there are many other scenarios. In truth as Duff has stated it's a rush to obtain a CCJ & C/O even if it is in the long term detriment of the Creditor, other factors at play here.

Hi Duffncustard, Fair point, I'm sure a so called secured debt, looks alot better on the accounts. Benefiting the creditors balance sheet, should not be part of what's reasonable and fair in collecting consumer debt though the courts though. Cad

Hi I agree with a court process, and a route for creditors to obtain there money, including me. What I don't agree with is the court system being used to bully creditors with so called " unsecured " CCA debts changed to c/o s. Also there is no clarity on the process, No minimums, no case law seems to count and now a change again. I also have seen a OFS for 5k, it was thrown out but only if the creditor pays exactly as ordered. The law needs to change, and have a specific criteria.

The law allows further enforcement of a judgment debt, it's important to consider that a creditor should be allowed to have the ability to take further action via the courts if an agreement defaults - so long as the action taken is reasonable and proportionate. QUOTE Further, enforcement, no!! The creditors manipulate the current legislation to obtain a C/O. In our case obtain a CCJ and refuse a offer payment, in our case on a Personnel loan. Then apply for a C/O . This route is to coerce debtors to pay. They are not interested in fairness or the particular circumstances. So IMO the system stinks. Despite our circumstances at the time, loss of job etc and offering to pay around 60% of the original contractural payment,creditor took this route. Wrong wrong wrong! Ok I have seen on another forum a case of a women who lost 40k with a builder or someone? She had taken court action & been offerd £2 per month. Consumer, in reverse and I have sympathy. However, the vast majority of cases are CCA debts . The policy, is not to enforce a judgement debt, but to carry out a policy to intimidate. Cad