RBS CCA request refused due to CCJ

[Josie8]

Wow!!!!:o

[Josie8]

I don't understand why they gave you that advice as because judgment was given on admission by the defendant the court would be reluctant to look behind that judgment - especially after such a long time as 10 years.........are you sure you understood correctly?

 

Did they confirm in writing how fees were to be applied?

 

What terms of business did you sign?

[Josie8]

Hi josie,

 

This is the problem, our case is not easy.

 

The bulk of our indebtedness to the RBS was for an overdraft on a business current account. In Nov 1997 the bank told us that our account numbers were changing because our accounts were being moved from our branch to Edinburgh.

 

It was these "NEW" accounts which were detailed in the CCJ.

 

When we did our S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) in April, it was to calculate exactly how much of our debt was interest & charges[we have not recieved any statements since 1993].Our debt on the CCJ was £58000, we have for the first time been able to calculated that £46000 of this is debt is charges & interest.

 

The bank refused to give us this information prior to the CCJ.

 

But we also discovered in April, the accounts were being referred to as Loan Capital & interest accounts. What they had done, without our knowledge or consent, was to close all our current accounts in June 1996. And open Loan accounts.

 

They also used a guarantee in 1997 from a business loan that had been discharged in 1996, to make it appear on their system & their solicitors that these loans were secured by my parents house.

 

What we want to establish is.

 

Can a bank alter a customers account without there knowldge or consent ?

In using the guarantee. Did they break the law?

 

By not disclosing to us & the courts the true identity of the "NEW" accounts when they applied the CCJ. If the information contained within the CCJ is innaccurate. How does this affect it's validity ?

 

These were the issues which we wanted to raise.

 

Debbie

 

 

I would think the only possible course of action is not to make application for set aside but to apply for leave to appeal on the grounds that you have only just discovered that the Particulars of claim were erroneous as debt wasn't current accounts but loans which had not been signed for by you.

 

How much were the loans for before extra interest was added? If they were under the regulated amount a ground of appeal would be that the loans were unenforceable becuase you hadn't signed any agreement and then the courts can rule on enforceability. However ten years is a long time and it will depend on strength of evidence you have available.

[Josie8]

It is far more difficult to get set aside after a long period. If you can put forward potential unenforceability arguments then the appropriate procedure according to Goode & the White book is to ask for leave to appeal though I know set aside of judgments are granted for same if relatively recent.

 

What was the amount that was converted into the so called loan before intertest & charges were put on?

[Josie8]

even better if you can do s.142 route as PT says - thats why i wanted to know loan amount

[Josie8]

Wouldn't that, effectively, be an application to set the Judgment aside though, Paul? I can't see the Court dealing with a s.142 application without wanting to see the original Judgment being set aside first, IMHO. Also, the CCJ is a cause of action on it's own, so getting the s.142 application granted would still mean the CCJ is enforceable via the Court, until it is set aside.

 

 

No as PT says a s.142 declaration can be applied for at any time to determine the rights of the parties (i.e. enforceable or not). If court declares actual agreement to be unenforceable then all enforcement proceedings halt.

[Josie8]

Does that mean then, as in a case I have where repossession was being sought on a personal loan which I have challenged as being unenforceable, need not wait for the hearing but with a s.142 application to the court the court will effectively determine if the agreement is enforceable or not rather than have barristers battle it out?

 

 

Yes with combined application to stay enforcement until application for declaration under s.142 is determined

[Josie8]

Once declaration loan is unenforceable obtained then the creditor can no longer enforce anything

[Josie8]

no probs let me know your thread -

[Josie8]

Can anyone help with this question?

 

Thanks

 

D&D

 

 

Yes they do have to be members

[Josie8]

Thanks Josie

 

Any more confirmation of this would be great

 

D&D

 

 

If they are practising then they need to be members.

 

However suggest you ring the Law Society tomorrow and check it with them if you are in doubt