TOMLIN: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell - SORTED !

[Nickij01]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

Ok cool, thanks for the reply.

Done the review, its increased our payments by nearly half, which is a little scary but if its says we can afford it then so be it, plus it will reduce the length of time we will be paying by a lot which is a good thing.

I have composed this letter as Payplan communicate with our creditors on our behalf:

To Whom it May Concern

Thank you for your letter dated 8th December 2009.

I would like to apologise for my delayed response to your letter and apologise for not replying within your 14 day request, my partner has been experiencing problems with her pregnancy and that has occupied my time.

We are have just completed a review with Payplan and you should be receiving all the information you have requested from them, including a revised payment plan with increased payments.

Please contact once you have received the details from Payplan and advise.


Yours sincerely

Think that should do it.

Thanks again. Posting another query for another debt with Next, Debt Managers are ignoring me.

Thanks Ame

Nicki

[Amethyst]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

That sounds completely fine Nicki, well done Yep it can be scary when they put it up on the DMP - they took into account the pending addition to the family didnt they ?

[Nickij01]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

Ello!

Just a mini update, the letter went off, so just waiting now, Payplan have done their bit too and I have made my first huge payment to Payplan.

I will be honest I am totally rubbish and not contacted the court as you suggested earlier, I can't find the court paper anywhere which is really bad, must look harder, my brain is total mush and not in the best place for dealing with things like this when you need to be on the ball.

Just hoping that the increased monthly payments will make them go away but who knows.

Will update you if and when I hear anymore.

Thank you!

NJ x

[Nickij01]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

Hello Ame, hope you are well and enjoying the new spring like weather we have been having.

Ok my hope that they would go away was in vane and probably short sighted of me.

I have had absolutely no further communication from Irwin Mitchell, the last communication was as previously stated, they contacted me acknowledging the payment they had been receiving of £143.68 per month from Payplan but they wanted a current financial statement etc and this was when I wrote back advising that we were going to complete a review and that Payplan would provide all these details, which they have. But nothing from Irwin Mitchell.

Then this weekend, Rob received a letter with Northampton County Court on it and my heart just sank knowing the battle is still not over.

In it contains something that has completely complexed me so once again, I call upon your expertise and assistance in the hope of understanding what it is we have received.

First page is a "General Directions Order" from Northampton County Court dated 4th March 2010. It states the following:

Before Deputy District Judge Elmer sitting at Northampton (CCBC) County Court, 4th Floor St Katherine's House, 21-27 St Katherine's Street, Northampton, NN1 2LH

On date of order The Court will deal with the application to list the stay without hearing under CPR 23.8(c)
It is ordered that:

The Application to list the stay and Transfer is granted.

Note: A party affected by this Order may under Rule 23.10 apply to have it set aside, varied or stayed. Such a party must apply under Rule 23.10 within 7 days of service of this order. The judge orders that you and the other parties prepare for trial as follows:

(Time Estimate


No disclosure of documents is required.

The judge considers that the claim can be listed for trial without the need for pre-trial checklist.


Then enclosed is an "Allocation Questionaire" that is to be completed by Robert Stevens (my OH) but I don't understand the form at all and wouldn't have a clue what relevance it has. It has to be completed and returned to my local court Winchester County Court by 22nd March. I know that the form has guidance notes but seriously that is about as much use as a chocolate tea pot to me.

Also since the last communication with Irwin Mitchell towards the end of last year, we have completed our review with Payplan and our payments have doubled, we are now completely brassic but our debts are being paid at least! We are now paying a total of £633.59, £271.10 of which is going to Irwin Mitchell, this is an increase of £127.42 per month, I don't understand why this is not exceptable and why they feel the need to continue with court proceedings, we can't do anything else and surely the judge will see that. Is it just a case that they want Rob to have a CCJ to spite sake? I would have thought fairness should be the overall factor here not spite, its not like we have refused to pay anything like so many people do.

Really hope you can help, its not unexpected its continuing but this is competely unexpected and I have no understanding of what or how to complete it.

Thanks

NJ x

[Amethyst]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

Is it List or Lift ?

[Nickij01]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

Sorry Ame it is Lift not list as I had typed, huge stupid typo, sorry for my sloppyness.

NJ x

[Amethyst]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

lol its okay just confuddled me for a bit.

okay lifting the stay will basically be so they can continue and have your payments enforced under a CCJ. I dont think there is anything to worry about.


the allocation questionnaire should be quite straightforwards, I'll do a draft in a tic.

What you do want to do is get a list of payments made since the original claim (and prior actually) with dates and amounts, so you can show the court that you have been paying, despite the dispute on the account.

I would recommend just leaving the bank charges, as seriously you dont need the stress of trying to reclaim those or get them knocked off.

Am going to have a quick read back through your thread so be back soon.

[Amethyst]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

one thing you can do is give the court a call and ask them for a copy of the application to lift the stay and attached documents - last we heard the court were waiting for Natwest to provide proper details of the claim and they failed to do so and the case got stayed. xx

[Amethyst]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

This the form you have received? http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/c...forms/n150.pdf or http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/c...forms/n149.pdf


what we will do is complete that simply return to the court and then when they come back with a 'trial' date, send in a witness statement.

Will you be okay attending the court ?

[Nickij01]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

Hi Ame

This is why I am a little confused, that was the last I heard, wasn't even aware of a stay, have no idea what it was put there for.

I am unable to look at the links at work, majorily secure internet system annoyingly.

I still struggle with accepting a CCJ, I do have an issue with it, we could have paid all these depts off in about 2 to 3 years time, but now if he gets a CCJ it will be on his record for 6 years, its just such a long time, such a vital time to have your credit score affected when you haven't stopped paying them, its the same treatment someone who had completely avoided paying them would get and I just don't see it being fair when we have tried to be honourable and do things right instead of hiding. Plus what will an enforced CCJ mean for us in terms of when I won't be earning any money, there is no way we would be able to keep up with our Payplan payments the way they are, we would have to reduce them, its such a mess, I will never borrow money ever again other than for our house thats for sure, if we ever are allowed, probably once the kids have left home, what a fabulous life!!! Sorry, the whole thing just really gets me down, but then I will admit to being particularly sensitive.

It wouldn't be me going to court, it would be Rob, another worry of mine as he has barely had any involvement, I have done it all for him, what a mug I am.

So first step then Ame would be for me/Rob to contact the court you think? the reason the form confuses me is there are loads of questions that I would have no idea about for eg. Settlement, clearly there will be no settlement, I wish. Location of trial, Huh?? Pre-action protocols, errrr pardon?Case Management information, I don't understand. Trial or final hearing, how long do I estimate the trial or hearing will take, why would someone who has never been through this before in their life have the first clue of how to answer this question. I presume we need to make them aware he might not be available around when the baby is due, I don't know how long it takes to get a trial date.

Please accept my sincere apologies, only place I get to have a rant and it is just going on for ever, I wish it would just go away and leave us to pay our depts off. Why all this additional hassle?

It also mentions attaching a fee for filing this allocation questionaire, I am not paying a fee am I? If the CCJ goes through we will have to pay the court costs too won't we, just think its awful.

NJ x

[Amethyst]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

Okay, Natwest/Irwin Mitchell are terrible for this, where there is really no need for a CCJ just a repayment arrangement acceptance. Their complaints procedure is currently being investigated by the FSA and I really hope their debt collection practises will be too.

Yes get Rob to call the court tomorrow and ask for copies of the application from Natwest.

The case was stayed (put on hold) when Natwest/Irwin Mitchell failed to respond to your defence and submit revised particulars of claim (ie those with the correct documents).

They have supplied these to you now and you wrote to them informing them that you would continue with the arrangement to pay by installments.

Regarding the CCJ, if you did get one, then yes it would be on record for 6 years, but you can have it marked as satisfied once the debt it paid up which does help on the records.

The Default on the account/s will be on file for 6 years already.

The form does sound like the N150 - fast track claims allocation. There shouldnt really be any need for AQs or fast track in this case as it is a straightforward consumer credit act claim.

I'll put an example completed up later for you but would prefer to see what Irwins entered to the court to get the stay lifted as it isnt off the courts own volition. So Irwin must be after something and it does seem to have been kicked off by the change in the payplan payments.

If these are going to change again then when you enter the information to the court we will put that it will need reveiwing in X months when you stop working, or we could even come up with a plan to pay the current amount until XX/XX/XXXX and then £XXX for 6 months and then review the situation.

With showing you have been paying and are planning how to pay in the future I cant see any reason to end up with a charging order, but it will be a CCJ.

[Nickij01]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

Ok Ame, I have pre-warned him he will need to make the call. I will give him more information tonight so he at least will know what he is talking about.

I will start getting all the defense evidence together that is likely to be needed as you have previously suggested, proof of all payments etc.

I forgot to mention earlier, we gave up on the charges claim a long time ago when the case was lost and we also got a get stuffed letter from them so don't worry about that.

I think just stating a date of when we will need to review would be a good idea, will they be happy for this to be done via Payplan? Its going to be hard to know how much we will be able to afford at this stage. Also I am not planning on going back to work, I am currently working on a contract that finishes when I leave to have the baby, at the end of May so really don't know what our future holds at the moment.

What is the likelyhood of Rob actually needing to attend court and is it likely to be Northampton or Winchester? My ex managed to acquire heaps of CCJs but never attended court to get them, one reason why this is a little raw for me, my ex never dealt with anything that is why I always vowed when we finished I would deal with things and not run away. Very stupid and diluded to think that would make a blind bit of difference.

Thanks for all your help.

NJ x

[Amethyst]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

He may not need to attend, it will be Winchester hence the transfer comment in the order from the court.

Hopefully we can get it sorted at allocation stage as there isnt really a dispute and its just a matter of getting them to accept affordable payments.

You are definately doing the right thing in dealing with this rather than hiding. Hiding gives you CCJs and forthwith orders and charges over your home. This way you will get an installment order at an amount you CAN afford and CAN be reviewed through the court periodically and the bank cant do any more to you so long as you keep payments up.

Remember that Natwest / Irwin Mitchell are well known for stomping ahead with court action regardless of repayment plans in place and they WILL be bought to task for it one day. Other lenders will be much simpler to deal with so long as you stay in comminucation with them - so dont take this as how it always is if you do the right thing, its just Natwest are arse holes.

[Nickij01]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

Hi Ame, ok I have got Rob more involved and he's doing ok so far but then he hasn't done all that much.

He contacted Winchester County Court who have sent out copies of the application from Natwest/Irwin, so that is on its way.

Shall we wait to recieve that before dealing with the questionaire that needs filling in and returning by 22nd March, we have enough time don't we?

Many thanks

NJ x

[Amethyst]

Re: Nickij v Natwest/Irwin Mitchell

yes that should be fine Just get the info up once you receive the docs, and whatever they say, DON'T PANIC ! lol.