**DISCONTINUED** CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

[Kati]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

The Claimant claims payment of the overdue balance due from the Defendant under a contract between the Defendant and Halifax dated on or about xxxx and assigned to the Claimant on xxxx
Particulars a/c no xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx
Date Item Value
xxxx Default Balance xxxx
xxxx Post Refrl Cr xxx
Total xxxx

Pretty sparse PoC there oxfordgirl ... it seems (to me) that they don't want you being able to ask for much at all

You can request the contract, the notice of assignment and a default notice.

[Diana M]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

Pretty sparse PoC there oxfordgirl ... it seems (to me) that they don't want you being able to ask for much at all

You can request the contract, the notice of assignment and a default notice.

Another interpretation of the scant POC is the Claimant might not know the history of what went on and when so couldn't plead it.

This claim will be allocated to the Fast Track where disclosure can be forced. In effect it's mandatory not discretionary (unlike Small Claims).

They've referred to the assignment so I would ask for the Deed of Assignment and the Notice of Assignment although they have not mentioned the Notice of Assignment so they may refuse.

They've mentioned a Default balance (the amount outstanding after the account was defaulted) but not actually mentioned the Default Notice so in theory you can't ask for the DN under CPR 31.14.

In fact I would be using Part 18 at this stage.

Di

[oxfordgirl]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

You mention that we might be better to use Part 18 at this stage rather than CPR 31.14. Could you possibly explain the difference and guide me to what I need to do next.
This is a world completely new to me, so sorry if I seem to be very naïve in the matter.
I suppose I am worried as time is getting short with the bank holiday weekend post.

Thanks again
oxfordgirl

[Kati]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

[MENTION=87380]Diana M[/MENTION] ??

[Diana M]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

I suppose I am worried as time is getting short with the bank holiday weekend post.

Even if you posted your Request letters today they won't arrive at the solicitors (Restons) or their client (Cabot) until after the Bank Holiday since their offices will be closed so no need to feel rushed.

It's the content which matters.

Can you confirm that your husband has already logged into MCOL and filed his Acknowledgement of Service to say he intends to defend all of the claim (and did not entered anything in the "Defence" box)? He has 19 days from the claim Issue Date to do that in order to prevent a Default Judgment against him.

He is intending to complete an Acknowledgement of service today, it needs to be in by tomorrow, so we have 14 days to prepare a defence.

He then has 33 days from the claim Issue Date to file his Defence unless he agrees an extension of time with the other side.

I know you're anxious to solve this problem for him because you fear a Charging Order on your home which was purchased with an inheritance after your mother died. (Hence your thread title.)

You also said that you put the property in joint names so even if he lost this case the 'charge' should be a Restriction not leading to an Order for Sale. A creditor can't punish you for someone else's debt.

There can be no Charging Order or Restriction until the Claimant gets a CCJ against him and they're a long way off from getting that.

Di

[Diana M]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

You mention that we might be better to use Part 18 at this stage rather than CPR 31.14. Could you possibly explain the difference and guide me to what I need to do next.
This is a world completely new to me, so sorry if I seem to be very naïve in the matter.

It's easy to feel you're naiive when it comes to complicated legal matters. It's like being in a foreign country where you don't speak the language.

There are endless CPRs and they apply to different legal scenarios. Each case is different. It's not really possible to prescribe exactly what to do without knowing the full history and/or seeing the paperwork.

You've posted up a good background including the fact that there was PPI on this account for some years (where misselling may be an issue since you say your husband could never claim on the policy).

I suggested that you edited the exact sums involved and the dates of letters/Notices in order to protect your husband's identity.

I would advise you to edit the actual dates and amounts to show as XXX XXX XXX since some debt purchasers and their solicitors do prowl internet forums so you don't want to be identified.

Of course now that you've done that I can no longer see the information

I'm not sure I can deliver a tutorial on the difference between CPR 31.14 and Part 18 Questions in one post (it's taken me years to understand it myself ) so if you want my input feel free to send me an email to di@joannaconnollysolicitors.co.uk (our initial advice is always free) because as I explained in post # 10 this forum's site rules don't allow me to give advice by PM.

Your husband's privacy is paramount.

Di

[oxfordgirl]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

My husband has filed his AoS. He opted for the box to defend part of the claim as he felt it was the right one to do. He did not enter anything in the Defence box.
He ticked the 'part of claim' box because he felt it was the right thing to do, to pay his debts but only what he truly owes and not the fictitious values they have come up with.
Was this the wrong thing to do, can he change it and will it make any difference when it comes to preparing his defence?
Many thanks
oxfordgirl

[Diana M]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

My husband has filed his AoS. He opted for the box to defend part of the claim as he felt it was the right one to do. He did not enter anything in the Defence box.
He ticked the 'part of claim' box because he felt it was the right thing to do, to pay his debts but only what he truly owes and not the fictitious values they have come up with.
Was this the wrong thing to do, can he change it and will it make any difference when it comes to preparing his defence?

Oh dear, I fear that was not the right thing to do.

If he has entered that he only intends to defend "Part of the claim" then the court may consider that as an admission of liability so all they need to do is decide on quantum (how much he should pay).

This means he may get a CCJ.

It's not easy to undo what he's done.

Di

[Amethyst]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

Not sure how it works, but if you enter on the acknowledgment you intend to defend in full you are able to change and admit the full or part claim when it comes to defence, so would that work the other way Di ? I think the defend part is just a tick box ? no amounts entered ?

[MIKE770]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

CPR14 might be useful here just wondering???

[oxfordgirl]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

Thanks everyone, no amounts were entered, it was simply a choice of three boxes to tick. There was no place to enter them anyway. He was unsure, we both are.
Surely you would imagine that any defence entered by the due date would be taken in to account.

[Diana M]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

Admission of part of a claim for a specified amount of money

14.5
(1) This rule applies where –
(a) the only remedy which the claimant is seeking is the payment of a specified amount of money; and
(b) the defendant admits part of the claim.
(2) The defendant may admit part of the claim by filing an admission in the relevant practice form.
(3) On receipt of the admission, the court will serve a notice on the claimant requiring the return of the notice stating that–
(a) the claimant accepts the amount admitted in satisfaction of the claim;
(b) the claimant does not accept the amount admitted by the defendant and wishes the proceedings to continue; or
(c) if the defendant has requested time to pay, the claimant accepts the amount admitted in satisfaction of the claim, but not the defendant’s proposals as to payment.
(4) The claimant must –
(a) file the notice; and
(b) serve a copy on the defendant,
within 14 days after it is served.
(5) If the claimant does not file the notice within 14 days after it is served on him, the claim is stayed^(GL) until the notice is filed.
(6) If the claimant accepts the amount admitted in satisfaction of the claim, they may obtain judgment by filing a request in the relevant practice form and, if they do so –
(a) if the defendant has not requested time to pay, the procedure in paragraphs (7) to (9) will apply;
(b) if the defendant has requested time to pay, the procedure in rule 14.9 will apply.
(7) The claimant may specify in his request for judgment–
(a) the date by which the whole of the judgment debt is to be paid; or
(b) the time and rate at which it is to be paid by instalments.
(8) On receipt of the request for judgment, the court will enter judgment.
(9) Judgment will be for the amount admitted (less any payments made) and costs –
(a) to be paid by the date or at the rate specified in the request for judgment; or
(b) if none is specified, immediately.
(If the claimant files notice under paragraph (3) that they wish the proceedings to continue, the procedure which then follows is set out in Part 26)

[oxfordgirl]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

Is there anything we can do to change this and if not will it affect the way the court deals with it. It is very difficult for the layman to understand all of this. Surely there must be some understanding of this problem.

[Amethyst]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

Thanks everyone, no amounts were entered, it was simply a choice of three boxes to tick. There was no place to enter them anyway. He was unsure, we both are.
Surely you would imagine that any defence entered by the due date would be taken in to account.

The acknowledgement is just an indication to the court of your intentions, you are free to change that up to when you enter your defence. Did you do it via MCOL or on the response pack ?

[Amethyst]

Re: CCJ and Charging Order from Restons on behalf of Cabot

N9 from the Response Pack

So long as you just ticked the box and didn't go on to fill in the defence or admission forms I think you're fine.