Tweet
Hi all,
First post here and looking for a little advice if possible..
I had a letter in middle of August this year from CapQuest, advising that they have recently obtained a CCJ against me and expecting me to contact for payment etc etc etc.
Following, some quite extensive investigations, i've managed to find the following:
Obviously as we're dealing with a CCJ, I was obliged to offer any form of payment under duress to prevent further action (or so I thought). A 'without prejudice' payment schedule was setup, and the first payment taken out at the end of September. Now knowing full well that CapQuest had applied for judgement in a previous address when they had full awareness of my current address, and being able to prove this with various means, documents etc. Considering I have made payment without prejudice, is this grounds for a set-aside?
The delay from mid-august to now, has been finding all documentation, speaking to occupiers of previous house etc.
I've drafted a letter which I will be sending tomorrow giving them the 'without prejudice' offer of applying a Consent order to remove the CCJ, removing all defaulted accounts from my credit file in return for the full payment being made at the end of the month. On the understanding that if they fail to accept this, all payments will be stopped, my set-aside will be processed, a subject access request will be served on CQ and complaints filed with FOS and OFT. Is this the right thing to do?
Thanks in advance,
First post here and looking for a little advice if possible..
I had a letter in middle of August this year from CapQuest, advising that they have recently obtained a CCJ against me and expecting me to contact for payment etc etc etc.
Following, some quite extensive investigations, i've managed to find the following:
- This is in relation to an old T-Mobile account which I vaguely remember having around 5 years ago. Lost the phone with about 5 months left in the contract, and rather stupidely didnt pay the bill expecting the insurance to cover it.
- During my time at previous address, I had no correspondence whatsoever from CapQuest, no calls, no visits, no letters.
- A copy of their Notice of Assignment received by CQ, shows the alleged debt was assigned to them late November 2011. Three months after I moved out of the property
- In January 2012, CapQuest credit searched me at my new address. No contact was made to me at my current address either.
- Having discussed with them recently, the residents of my previous address told me that around February / March 2012 they had a visit from someone called Scotcall (an acting agent of CapQuest) and that they had advised no longer at this address, and provided my current address. I was on the electoral roll at my new address, registered October 2011.
- CCJ was obtained by default in May 2012, at my previous address knowing full well of my current address and my inability to defend.
- CapQuest then sent a letter advising that a CCJ had been obtained against me, to my current address in the middle of August and that I should make payment.
Obviously as we're dealing with a CCJ, I was obliged to offer any form of payment under duress to prevent further action (or so I thought). A 'without prejudice' payment schedule was setup, and the first payment taken out at the end of September. Now knowing full well that CapQuest had applied for judgement in a previous address when they had full awareness of my current address, and being able to prove this with various means, documents etc. Considering I have made payment without prejudice, is this grounds for a set-aside?
The delay from mid-august to now, has been finding all documentation, speaking to occupiers of previous house etc.
I've drafted a letter which I will be sending tomorrow giving them the 'without prejudice' offer of applying a Consent order to remove the CCJ, removing all defaulted accounts from my credit file in return for the full payment being made at the end of the month. On the understanding that if they fail to accept this, all payments will be stopped, my set-aside will be processed, a subject access request will be served on CQ and complaints filed with FOS and OFT. Is this the right thing to do?
Thanks in advance,
