Kafka v DLC

[Kafka]

This is an old and complex one that has resurfaced and needs some background about our old friends Hillesden Securities aka Direct Legal and Collections.

Background
This was a credit card with Citi Cards, than once had a balance of over 5k. They were charging £25 for late payment and also for overlimit, so by adding £50 regularly the arrears soon spiralled to be unpayable. This was while I was stuck trying to move and I could not get on top of it because of the charges.
Eventually I moved in 2004 and Citi offered a 60% repayment deal over 12 months. I paid 5 instalments, but a delayed remortgage meant I couldn't make the full payments and they agreed a temporary period of accepting a reduced amount of their choosing to cover a month at a time.
This worked OK for 2 months, but although I paid for the third month they sold the debt to DLC anyway.

DLC
DLC wrote stating that they would honour previous agreements but would not do so and demanded all of the arrears within 7 days. They claimed that the arrears were 1700, when in fact about 1500 had been paid off since that figure was stated.
Following this there was a long dispute and I repeatedly offered them £50 pm - more than I could really afford at the time. At that time I did not know about the forums and although I tried CAB and others I really got no help to fight them, only joining OTR just after it was too late.

Charging Order
Eventually they won a CCJ and a Charging Order by lying to the court that I had been unco-operative. In the papers I offered £50 and gave some figures, but the final CO stated that no order was given on rate of payment. DLC also stated to me and the court that they had no intention of applying for an Order of Sale and would accept payment at a rate that I could reasonably afford.
I went to the Final Hearing (they did not) and the judge was not interested in any form of justice or relevant information so rubber stamped the Order through. I asked about payments and he said "They've gone about as far with the courts as they can now, just pay what you can afford".

Since then
They have filed with Experian that I have an agrement to pay them £135 pm, but we have never even discussed this figure. I always planned that if they started up again I would apply to have this removed. Also, they list the default figure as 1700 when it should have been about 150. Moreover, I am about to file a claim to Citi for more than 1000 in charges on this account, so in truth the default should not be there and I can evidence this.
For the past year I have paid £10 pm as a token and there has been no communication with DLC for more than a year. I have now had a letter saying I have not made payments in accordance with recent agreements...promised payments....
This has been followed by their solicitors threatening to apply for an Attachment of Earnings Order as I have "failed to make payment under the Judgement".

Action
I now need to decide what action to take as a pre-emptive strike.

1. I could CCA them. I know the CCJ records the debt but for only a quid this would be fun.
2. I plan to SAR them to see what they have on me - never done this because I didn't want to rock the boat while they were quiet.
3. Issue letters to them to remove the default and the statement that I am obliged to pay them 135pm.
4. Write to threaten them not to ring again - only done it once but I suspect they will start up again.

With my current financial position I have some arrears of several priority creditors including Council Tax, IR, NI and electricity. In addition, a large mortgage hike means that on a balance sheet I clearly cannot afford large payments to them, even if I was minded to be co-operative.

Any ideas please on how to play this one?

[Sapphire]

Re: Kafka v DLC

Hiya Kafka,

OOOOOOh looks like we have another nominee for 'ugly DCA of the year' doesn't it. Personally I would do options 1, 2 & 4, obviously 1 to see if they have the proper paperwork in order, 2 just to see what they have on you and 4 to stop those calls that will inevitably happen.

Also ask for a statement of account as well (just in case you don't get one with the SAR), I'd love to know how they reckon you owe 1700 rather than the 150 you say.

Then once you have all of the paperwork and checked it though and you know that you are right and they are wrong I'd hit them for your claim & notice to withdraw the notice on experian.

Also 'if' the CCA is dodgy then it will be unenforceable and that could give you some breathing space till you get yourself straight.

Hope this helps hun.

[Curlyben]

Re: Kafka v DLC

As you already have A CO on this account a CCA would achieve little.
Yes it would be interesting, but once a CCJ is in place then all the normal CCA stuff goes out of the window.

Dealing with CO's is a pain in the bottom.
Unless it was contested at the time there is very little that can be done after this amount of time.
A fiend of mine is also dealing with a CO and has asked advice from the Collage of Law and that's what they basically say.

You best plan of attack would be to get the charges off Citi and use these against the CO.
Now I know it sounds carp, but CO's are a pain and also a big axe hanging over you.
IF DLC become so inclined they could push for sale, especially as the judge didn't order the repayment rate.

I would hold on the SAR for now and request a full statement of account. This is a freebie and they are obliged to supply it.
Also get together all of the paperwork from the court as there may well be some good leverage there.

[Kafka]

Re: Kafka v DLC

As you already have A CO on this account a CCA would achieve little. Yes it would be interesting, but once a CCJ is in place then all the normal CCA stuff goes out of the window.

Dealing with CO's is a pain in the bottom. Unless it was contested at the time there is very little that can be done after this amount of time.
A fiend of mine is also dealing with a CO and has asked advice from the Collage of Law and that's what they basically say.

You best plan of attack would be to get the charges off Citi and use these against the CO.

I am in process of doing this.

Now I know it sounds carp, but CO's are a pain and also a big axe hanging over you. IF DLC become so inclined they could push for sale, especially as the judge didn't order the repayment rate.

In all of the paperwork for the courts, DLC espressly state that it was not their intention to push for sale, nor to force me to make payments that I could not afford. Having said the latter, this is exactly what they have been trying to do since day1. It would be very difficult to argue this in that case. They have chosen instead to push for an Attachment of Earnings Order. In my current circumstances they would be hard pushed to claim that I can afford the 100s a month that they normally demand and I have plans to argue so that the amount is kept tp an absolute minimum.

I would hold on the SAR for now and request a full statement of account. This is a freebie and they are obliged to supply it.
Also get together all of the paperwork from the court as there may well be some good leverage there.

I don't follow what a statement of account would help with. They have added about 100 on judging from the balance in the recent letters, but that is not a main issue. An SAR would reveal a lot of other info too, which is why I suggested it.

[Curlyben]

Re: Kafka v DLC

The reason I suggest a statement of account as an opener as it's free, also may lead to other options.
There might well be all the information you require rather than a full SAR.

Also I'm not sure if they can push for an AtE as they already have a CO. They are both enforcement of a CCJ, but I'm unsure if they can have both for the same judgement.

[Kafka]

Re: Kafka v DLC

Certainly at the time it was put to me that it was an either/or.

In the event they went for a CO. I will make some enquiries, as this could be a bluff

[Curlyben]

Re: Kafka v DLC

Give your loacl court a call, I have found them to be very helpful with these matters.