Irwin Mitchell want more PCM on old Natwest Debt CCJ.

[dx100uk]

what does your cra say about this debt?

 

dx

[citizenB]

Well there is certainly nothing on that judgment that suggests it is subject to review.. so I think if they want to amend the agreed installments they will need to apply to the court

[Everett]

My problem at the moment is that Irwin Mitchell have returned my last two standing order payments.

 

They have never notified me in writing of any account change.

 

They wrote to me in Nov 2011 asking me to contact them by telephone as they where closing the account being used,

but as I have clearly given them instructions that I will only deal with them in writing they should honour this.

 

At the time, they where also persistently writing to me ( more like harassing me ) to complete an I&E with them,

but as the CCJ was not subject to a review I refused.

 

I also saw this as an attempt to coerce me into agreeing to completing an I&E.

 

After a strongly worded letter to them ,

they acknowledge this and said it was a system generated letter and that I could continue to make payments as instructed.

 

Because IM told me in my first telephone conversation with them "that they fully intend to apply for a charging order"

I do not trust them one inch.

 

I feel that they are using underhand tactics to gain their coveted charging order.

[dx100uk]

disregard anything ever said on the phone.

 

get your cra file please

 

dx

[Everett]

I have had an automated telephone call this morning from a company called Ascent, calling on behalf of Irwin Mitchell.

Seems IM are cranking up the heat with their underhanded tactics.

[ronnie6]

http://www.ascent.co.uk/irwin-mitchell/

[dx100uk]

same people bloke a diff desk in a diff skirt

 

get your CRA file

 

dx

[Everett]

Re: CRA

Is it OK to use a free 30 day trial ?

Will they actually take no money if I say I dont want it ?

[ronnie6]

free for 30 days just remember to cancel before the end of the free trial.

[sillygirl1]

I would report them to OFCOM/OFTEL and hopefully Ascent will decend back into their 'niche pit'.

[dx100uk]

https://www.noddle.co.uk/signup?source=mgm

[sillygirl1]

With IM NOT accepting the payments you have made for a long time I would report them to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority, Trading Standards, OFT and copy in your local MP. You could also provide the evidence to the court manager, citing your case number and explaining that THEY are being stroppy.

 

The government are against people getting charging orders for less than £25,000 anyway.

[citizenB]

With IM NOT accepting the payments you have made for a long time I would report them to the Solicitors Regulatory Authority, Trading Standards, OFT and copy in your local MP. You could also provide the evidence to the court manager, citing your case number and explaining that THEY are being stroppy.

 

The government are against people getting charging orders for less than £25,000 anyway.

 

 

Have we got any information on this, SG ?

 

Many Credit card companies are managing to do just this!!

[Guest]

citb

once s93 TCE act is in force (october?), co's may be std practice re unsecured debt despite instalments!

anyway, as for 25k threshold. think this is re an order for sale re an unsecured matter. in one recent thread, cty ct j said that re a granted co that there would be no order for sale anyway as it was under 25k?

Edited March 19, 2012 by Ford

[sillygirl1]

Sorry Ford, but the government think otherwise, ANY debt UNDER £25K, whether sealed or not may not have a charging order put on it. It is buried somewhere in the Law of Property Act (and is often abused) so that act is going to be overhauled - and about time too.

 

If you look at the history of the act you will see what a mean minded buncy of beaurocrats we have in this country.

[sillygirl1]

If a debt is SEALED, ie a MORTGAGE there is the repossession route rather than a Charging Order, much faster, swifter and more up to date.

[Guest]

not quite (re #50), re unsecured debt and an order for sale. eg

http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/consultations/Enf_IA_orders_for_sale_-_final_version_as_signed_off_by_ministers.pdf

 

also see their recent charging orders response ia pdf (trying to find the link)

 

one eg, http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/consultations/Enf_IA_charging_orders_-_final_version_as_signed_off_by_ministers.pdf

 

'final' one posted below

Edited March 19, 2012 by Ford

[sillygirl1]

Sorry but I am bunged up with a cold and not in the mood for arguing the ins and outs, they are reviewing this in May 2014....

[Guest]

says policy poss implemented May 2012, impact review 2014.

there is a more recent (final. 2/2/12) one, which i linked in another thread which says october re s93. but the link in that thread seems broken. trying to find it again.

anyway, don't argue it with me. just posting up what the gov't says! ie co's are currently poss (no 25k threshold) re an unsecured debt, and the 25k 'threshold' referred to orders for sale.

Edited March 20, 2012 by Ford

[Guest]

here's the other (re october 2012)

google 'charging orders response ia' click on 'quick view' (pdf doesn't seem to work)

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]34368[/ATTACH]

Edited March 19, 2012 by citizenB

[citizenB]

Looks ok to me.. I have attached below.. the two judgments you refer to in the BoC

Thanks for this, Ford.. I will try and find a working link for the other one

Then it might be a good idea to take this debate off this thread and give it one of its own.

 

 

Ford - I have popped the link in your post.

[ronnie6]

Could you 2 get a room?

 

I would go back to the court with their letter and ask for a hearing for them to explain their actions - sounds very very odd to me - or you could do an N244 Variation and ask to pay LESS which would really really annoy them.t

 

The amount the CCJ was set at is fixed, and only the court can vary it now - especially after all this time.

This is from Sillygirl ages ago and I think the best advice Edited March 19, 2012 by ronnie6

[Everett]

Which is the correct form for a redetermination ?

Ascent now calling regularly, just saying "hello" then hanging up.

Can anyone direct me to a template letter to report them ?

Also is there a particular reason why I should obtain my Credit Reference File ?

 

Many thanks.

Edited March 20, 2012 by Everett

[Guest]

if wish to vary the current instalment order, then would need to apply for a variation. form n245?

could write to ascent/IM ftao complaints/compliance dep't requesting any communication in writing only, and to cease tel calls and remove tel no from records. that should work re the phone calls.

Edited March 20, 2012 by Ford

[Everett]

Some background to this.

 

When I got into financial difficulties by far my biggest creditor was Nat West,

on my CCCS DMP plan they took the lions share of my monthly payment.

 

However Nat West wanted to give the debt some "security" in their words s

o instructed Irwin Mitchell to instigate county court proceedings against me.

 

On the advice of the then CCCS I agreed to pay the same amount as I had been paying them,

and to pay IM directly , so the debt was removed from my DMP.

 

My 8 year relationship with Irwin Mitchell and now Ascent Legal as at times been a little fraught.

 

On receiving my CCJ papers from them I also had a telephone call to ask if I had received them

and that they had to be returned within 7 days,

the woman also told me in no uncertain terms that Irwin Mitchell" fully intended to get a forthwith charging order against my property" and then hung up.

 

So they set out their stalls before the case was even heard.

 

the case was heard and £340 in charges added,

an 8% interest charge was waived and the monthly amount set with no reviews.

 

I have never missed a payment to them from that date ( its paid by standing order )

 

 

but after around two years they wrote to me to say the account that I was paying to them in was closing,

and that I had to ring them, no details whatsoever of the new account on the letter.

 

On calling them they refused to give me the new account details unless I completed

an income and expenditure form over the phone.

 

I said that the CCJ had no provision for either an annual or periodic I&E review ,

they said it didn't need too as their clients were quite within their rights to ask for one to be completed.

 

I refused and they refused to give me the new account details

so I carried on paying them into the existing account as provided in the CCJ.

 

The next two payments were returned and I received a very officious letter from them

telling me I was in arrears and being a CCJ could have very serious consequences ,

 

 

so I returned the payments by cheque and in writing,

demanded that they give me the new account details,

this they eventually did.

 

Last week, I received my 5th letter over 9 years demanding that I complete an I&E ,

I telephoned them and they said it was because my monthly payment was quite high

and wanted to see if they could lower it ? Yeah right !

 

I once again told them that the CCJ had no provision for a I&E review,

once again they reiterated that they did not need one and that" I HAD" to provide one to them.

 

I asked once again for a copy of their complaints procedure,

and this time they have actually sent it ( Ascent Legal ) I

t says I have 5 days from the date on the letter to make my complaint

and they have six weeks to reply ?

A little one sided ?

 

I feel that Ascent Legal ( Irwin Mitchell ) are trying to circumvent the legal system by means of harassment,

they have their CCJ they get their payment every month without failure

( 50% of the debt has now been paid )

 

Where do I go from here ?

 

Is it worth complaining to the ombudsman or are they toothless wonders ?

 

If I don't respond and ignore their I&E demands it just sets off a whole chain of harassing letters from them .

 

I feel that Irwin Mitchell (Ascent Legal ) are so big that they hold the entire legal system in contempt .