hi there
i have been advised to post this here, I've already tried another forum - any ideas to help us please?
My son (aged 21yrs) lives with me and my husband. He has been unemployed since Feb 09.
He recently recieved a set of court papers out of the blue stating that Bryan Carter 'solicitors' (yes, we have read all about them) are claiming more than £3000 in 'debt' to the Nat West Bank.
Son has had a few problems recently, so I have been helping him write letters etc, and we have been in contact with CCCS too, through the PM on here and by telephone.
We were advised that since there has been no proof of this debt, he should contest it. He has asked BC's, they say they don't have any breakdown, Nat West have so far not sent any paperwork despite 2 phone calls and a letter......He has kept the court informed of his situation, that he cannot deny/accept the debt until he has proof of it's origin..but today a letter has turned up saying Judgement has been made in his absence!
Is this correct, they can hold the hearing without his knowledge?
Also, as this debt is probably made up of charges against an account he was never able to use (it had a fee to use it, but son never received cards etc, so left it.........) can he now reclaim the charges due to 'hardship' as he now has a CCJ?
I'm confused now, can anyone help please?
thanks
worried mum
i have been advised to post this here, I've already tried another forum - any ideas to help us please?
My son (aged 21yrs) lives with me and my husband. He has been unemployed since Feb 09.
He recently recieved a set of court papers out of the blue stating that Bryan Carter 'solicitors' (yes, we have read all about them) are claiming more than £3000 in 'debt' to the Nat West Bank.
Son has had a few problems recently, so I have been helping him write letters etc, and we have been in contact with CCCS too, through the PM on here and by telephone.
We were advised that since there has been no proof of this debt, he should contest it. He has asked BC's, they say they don't have any breakdown, Nat West have so far not sent any paperwork despite 2 phone calls and a letter......He has kept the court informed of his situation, that he cannot deny/accept the debt until he has proof of it's origin..but today a letter has turned up saying Judgement has been made in his absence!
Is this correct, they can hold the hearing without his knowledge?
Also, as this debt is probably made up of charges against an account he was never able to use (it had a fee to use it, but son never received cards etc, so left it.........) can he now reclaim the charges due to 'hardship' as he now has a CCJ?
I'm confused now, can anyone help please?
thanks
worried mum
Comment