old CCJ mortgage shortfall now + CO - sb'ed? - dca adding yrs of backdated interest - is this legal?

[the tinkerman]

As has previously been posted, when one finds ones self in a position where the creditor's practices are questionable sending a DSAR is the best step to take. Also remember if the agreement/CCJ is CCA regulated no interest accrues post judgment unless there's a clause allowing for it furthermore, if the CCJ doesn't specifically stipulate that interest is payable post judgment then the creditor would need to sue again for the interest element once the CCJ amount had been repaid. The best way to find if there's a PJI clause in the original agreement is by sending A CCA request.

 

Hi pauwlton

 

do you know if this applies to Statutory interest as well, just as a matter of interest

[paulwlton]

The creditor would need to particularize the interest element in their poc for the court to award it and, If there's no interest stated in the terms of the CCJ then imo the creditor hasn't requested it and/or the court hasn't awarded it. So there are strong arguments to put forward against PJI.

 

I have correspondence from RBsS senior management which states that they can only claim PJI if it's stipulated in the terms of a CCJ.

 

In my own case i'd kept copies of the judgment and the bank's poc.

 

Paul

Edited May 29, 2011 by paulwlton

[paulwlton]

Paul.... you're famous!

 

Not in a way you'd like though, I'm sure....

 

I met RBS execs and their lawyers in the House of Commons and pressed them further.

 

Not hijacking guys just think it's relevant.

 

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/jul/25/royal-bank-loan-debt

[PriorityOne]

Incredible and appalling that people are put through through this level of stress....

[BradB]

Great result for you Paul. I do not have copies of my original agreement (dates back to 1990) and although I did sent a disclosure request asking for it in February this year they will not supply it stating that it is of no relevance to the proceedings before the court. Also asked for the POC issued to the court and this was declined. Not a helpful bunch I must say.

[the tinkerman]

thing is Paul in my case this DCA is claiming (statutory interest) which the Judge states that they are entitled to do and that they do not need to stipulate it in the POC from the OC OR the terms of the CCJ ?

[BradB]

Do judges not have to sing from the same hymn sheet? There seems to be a lot of cases where different judges rule differently.

[the tinkerman]

unfortunately seems to be the norm in this country in any law, bloke runs over someone in one part the country gets 5 years then in another part of the country someone does the exact same thing and gets 2 years ????????????

 

 

 

I have read so many posts recently where basically the Judge has either ignored what the defendant has had to say, even when the law states otherwise, not give you the opportunity to fully state your case, or just wants to get it over and done with asap with 99% of the time the Claimant coming out on top when it seems unjustified using let’s just say (TACTICS) and from the experience I have had so far I get that gut feeling as well.

Edited May 29, 2011 by the tinkerman

[PriorityOne]

Please question your respective DCAs under CPUTR before the hearings.... as mentioned in an earlier post.

[dx100uk]

wish i could find the thread

 

i believe they cancharge S69 even if not mentioned in the org CCJ judgements box

 

but they certainly CANNOT charge anything else

 

unless the CO is on the back ofa CCJ that has not been met with the correct payments against any arrangement made

then i believe they can charge int at the loans rate.

 

dx

[the tinkerman]

Hi, thanks for the response. The DCA definitely own the debt as I raised this at the Charging Order hearing and the judge said the paperwork was in order even if I had not received a copy of it although he never mentioned one from the original creditor to myself. I do now have a copy of the judgement issued by The High Court of Justice in Leeds. It states the amount payable forthwith as £19k.. DCA have now increased this to £30k since they purchased it in 2007. But as I said earlier if they did not substitute themselves as the claimant until 2010 can they claim interest for a debt that as far as the court are concerned they did not own until 2010?

 

Hold on a minute I was of the impression a NOA was essential for the claimant to send to you either from the OC or the DCA

 

1, to prove who owns the debt

2, to see if it is absolute or equitable and

3, to check if the date on the assignment is correct, and that without a NOA the debt is classed as equitable only therefore the debt cannot be sold on without the OC

 

being made a party to it, I am sure I have read that under the LOP Act somewhere will have a dig.

[BradB]

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 - I have goggled and was just wondering if this would cover a mortgage from 1992 or would it be another regulation? Sorry for the silly questions.

[PriorityOne]

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 - I have goggled and was just wondering if this would cover a mortgage from 1992 or would it be another regulation? Sorry for the silly questions.

 

 

It covers "unfair trading".... so if you ask them to clarify something under CPUTR now, then they have to tell you. This will then determine how you proceed.

[the tinkerman]

Think P1 the best bet for that

[the tinkerman]

BINGO I knew Id read it somewhere:

 

have just found this on a website for Walker Morris Solicitors which states

 

INEFFECTIVE ASSIGNMENTS

 

To be effective as a legal assignment, the assignment must:

 

be absolute (an unconditional assignment of the entire right, not by way of charge only)

be made in writing and signed by the assignor

relate only to ascertainable benefits

be notified in writing to the third party.

 

If the formalities for a legal assignment are not complied with, the assignment will take effect as an 'equitable assignment' only. The main practical consequence of an equitable assignment is that the assignee cannot bring an action in its own name against the third party but must join the assignor as a party to the action. This could be a costly and time-consuming inconvenience

 

 

Quote: the judge said the paperwork was in order even if I had not received a copy of it FAMOUS LAST WORDS and who are we to question such!!!

Edited May 29, 2011 by the tinkerman

[BradB]

Thanks for that tinkerman,

 

should I have received a assignment notice from both the DCA and the OC as I didn't.

 

I have also read that all the details on the assignment must be correct.

 

The DCA only ever communicated to me using my maiden name and did not start using my married name until this year.

 

If they completed the NOA in my maiden name ( approx 13 years after I got married) would it still be valid?

 

The OC always used my married name so do not know why DCA reverted back to maiden name.

[the tinkerman]

I think one from either or would suffice so long as you got one, and yes I to have read that the details on the assignment must be correct but not to sure if still having your maiden name on it would cut much ice if you brought it up with the Judge.

 

My point is without a NOA the debt could not be sold without the OC being made a party to any action.

[the tinkerman]

IF its okay for the Judge to say everything is in order well if thats the case then lets see it

[BradB]

This is really useful, thank you very much. I know that I never received a NOA of the DCA or the OC so shall be putting this in my case. In effect does this mean the DCA should not have been able to obtain the CO without including the OC

[paulwlton]

This is really useful, thank you very much. I know that I never received a NOA of the DCA or the OC so shall be putting this in my case. In effect does this mean the DCA should not have been able to obtain the CO without including the OC

 

The problem your faced with is that a defence should have been submitted when they sued and CPR requires that any application to setaside must be made promptly.

[paulwlton]

wish i could find the thread

 

i believe they cancharge S69 even if not mentioned in the org CCJ judgements box

 

 

dx

 

Was this backed up by statute or case law.

[BradB]

Hi Paul,

I am not applying to have the whole case set aside

I accept that there is a shortfall and that it needs to be paid.

 

The OC and DCA only ever quoted the judgement amount in all correspondence and then suddenly the DCA apply for a £30 k (double the original judgement) charging order.

 

I gather from reading other posts that they should have been sending statements every year to show the increase, which again was not done.

 

What I am attending court for is to try to get the interest stopped and get confirmation that they are entitled to add on £15k of interest when they have only owned the debt fo 3 1/2 years.

Edited May 29, 2011 by BradB
spelling

[the tinkerman]

In a nutshell yes if Walker Morris Solicitors information is correct, because upon reading it cannot mean anything else as far as I can see.

 

Think it also states more or less the same thing in the LOP Act 1925 somewhere, but do no forget I am no solicitor but your normal Joe Blogs, i rely on snippets of information and try to use them to my advantage, lets put it this way I will be using the exact same argument in court as my CCJ debt was sold twice, and the first time it was sold I did not receive a NOA from either party and have put the now Claimant to strict proof to provide that NOA from the first sale as they stated in their witness statement that I had received one.

 

At the end of the day what harm can it do its either right or wrong, if its wrong so what least we tried,but if its right then DCA up s**t creek without a paddle.

 

But try to use your own judgement as I tend to do, I look at all the information given on this site and see if it is useful to my case and then assess what will be the positives and what will be the negatives if I use this information.

 

Tinks

[the tinkerman]

The problem your faced with is that a defence should have been submitted when they sued and CPR requires that any application to setaside must be made promptly.

 

Yes but then the Judge stated the paperwork was in order even if I they had not received a copy of the NOA which maybe not be the case

[paulwlton]

Hi Paul, I am not applying to have the whole case set aside I accept that there is a shortfall and that it needs to be paid. The OC and DCA only ever quoted the judgement amount in all correspondence and then suddenly the DCA apply for a £30 k (double the original judgement) charging order. I gather from reading other posts that they should have been sending statements every year to show the increase, which again was not done. What I am attending court for is to try to get the interest stopped and get confirmation that they are entitled to add on £15 of interest when they have only owned the debt fo 3 1/2 years.

 

I think you need professional advice.