so let me get this right..........they were forced to capitalise arrears and then they sold your account to another lender (ie. from future to engage to a new lender)?

as you've kept to the court's order, on what basis can they "try it again"? I provided details of income and expenditure before the first hearing and also made a reasonable offer to pay off the arrears over 3 years. engage then attempted to argue that my offer was unaffordable whilst at the same time trying to prove my spending habits showed that my arrears are not a priority. have another hearing in a couple of months but in the meantime judge order I make payment in accordance with the offer made and re-send income details (which engage can then make inquiries into)

was thinking something in the way of knowledge-sharing. ie. people like me include the experiences of others in our court defence and then we "feed back" back to the forum so others can benefit from the information gathered here

top post!! i'm currently battling with them after court hearing was listed without notice - i'm also pursuing an ombudsman complaint. i'm looking for as many examples of their true motives as possible so the more case studies the better. i may even include elements of this thread in my court papers by way of evidence of their well-versed malpractice keep the faith

i'm due in court in a month's time attempted to reach an agreeable repayment plan but ecl issued an application without notice - have also passed my complaint to the ombudsman. would appreciate examples of similar cases that i can cite (in court and to ombudsman) as evidence of ecl's true motives, ie. to unnecessarily repossess properties and plunder equity (1)the connection between future mortgages/citibank and ecl, (2)adding unreasonable charges to accounts in arrears, (3)premature/unfair repossession hearings and (4)details of court decisions will all be helpful - i'm happy to feed back my progress and assist those following me on the conveyor-belt

i have a similar story to your own and am happy to add my name to the list for "group action". would CAG be prepared to publicise this issue on their twitter account?

does the above judicial review process also apply to csa liability orders where the summons was sent to the wrong (old) address?

let me have your tele.no. or email

will let you know in due course

are there any of you who were offered "capitalisation" of arrears back in late '08/early '09?

blackkhorse - you've got it one!! attempted to allude to this last weekend but had to wait for engage to surface with their intro letter. we may need to mobilise group action and prepare a strategy if necessary down the road - see additional figures for the company itself for further evidence ("principal activities" in the directors report on page 1) 10.11.05 Engage Credit Dec09 accounts2.pdf

engage are owned by a company called oakwood based in the cayman islands. make no mistake, they're not a mortgage company and are only interested in earning increased profits from available equity in the loans bought from engage - see attached 10.11.05 Engage Credit offer to redeem mortgages.pdf 10.11.05 Engage Credit Hldgs Dec09 accounts.pdf

mortgage - already done my homework, good sir..............was just confirming whether your mate hypo knows what he's talking about or just making it up. in any event, not sure of the purpose your note intends to serve.... apart from promoting the above publications hypo - still eagerly waiting your response fred

I'm an experienced user of search engines and financial information but cannot establish a link between Deutchse Bank and ECL Hypo - please reconcile the two by way of clear explanation or posting an attachment of you google findings thanks

bae - can you explain the basis for being able to challenge the £50pm charge and how clarify whether a challenge is likely to succeed fred