Tweet
Hi Forum - I hope this is the right place for this post.
I have successfully got a CCJ against another company. I have also got an Interim Third Party Debt Order and the funds are frozen. What I want to try to find out is what actually happens (or can happen) in the TPDO hearing itself. For example: is the judge just looking over the administration side to ensure that it's all correct, or is he/she likely to start getting bogged down in the various facts leading up to the CCJ itself? If the debtor says something like 'I shouldn't have a CCJ, the facts on their claim form are wrong'.....is the judge likely to trawl through the original small claims paperwork (???!?which would seem a little odd to me, as a non-legal bod) or at this stage, is it too late for the debtor to be trying to explain why they don't owe the debt on the basis of the facts in the small claim... I can't find much info on what the scope of the judge is, at one of these hearings.
Thanks in advance:santa2:,
Gwynnie
I have successfully got a CCJ against another company. I have also got an Interim Third Party Debt Order and the funds are frozen. What I want to try to find out is what actually happens (or can happen) in the TPDO hearing itself. For example: is the judge just looking over the administration side to ensure that it's all correct, or is he/she likely to start getting bogged down in the various facts leading up to the CCJ itself? If the debtor says something like 'I shouldn't have a CCJ, the facts on their claim form are wrong'.....is the judge likely to trawl through the original small claims paperwork (???!?which would seem a little odd to me, as a non-legal bod) or at this stage, is it too late for the debtor to be trying to explain why they don't owe the debt on the basis of the facts in the small claim... I can't find much info on what the scope of the judge is, at one of these hearings.
Thanks in advance:santa2:,
Gwynnie
