Urgent Help Needed - Court Says Pay £15,585.59 now to Funding Corporation

never-in-doubt

A charging order will not sell a house from under you, contrary to popular belief - it can only put a charge against the house if you ever sell. If you never sell, then the charge is meaningless.

A charge on a property means that if the property is sold, the charge has usually to be paid first before any of the proceeds of the sale can be given to the judgment debtor. You should note, however, that a charging order does not compel the judgment debtor to sell the property.

If there are already charges on the property when your charge is registered, for example, arising from a mortgage, then that charge will be paid first.

See here: http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/infoabout/enforcement/charging/index.htm

See here: http://www.insolvencyhelpline.co.uk/debt_factsheets/charging_orders_in_the_county_court.php

Also, it should be noted that if this was a HP Agreement then after you've paid 50% of the debt you can hand the keys back and walk away. Have you looked into this?

Personally, I reckon you need to seek professional help - this forum may not be the place to get what you desire.

Best of Luck....

november

fermi wrote: »

This is a "bill of sale" isn't it? Like logbook loans etc..... I think?

Yes its a bill of sale

Haven't looked much into those, but I don't think the same HP conditions under the CCA apply. But could be wrong. I thought there was some question as to their legality as well?

According to Trading Standards the bill itself is invalid but the court appear to have accepted it

I think the OP has a thread on the CAG Legal Issues forum as well. But proffesional help here would probably be a good idea.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/211317-urgent-help-needed-court.html

Yes I have a thread there as well. My sister is trying all the free professional help that is available and is phoning the Insolvency helpline as well as I found that yesterday by searching for charging orders. She's tried debt line, CAB etc in the earlier stages of this problem. She can't afford to pay a solicitor as she can't afford to pay costs should she lose.

I posted the threads on a 'just in case' basis as you never know - someone might have some advice that makes a difference. Also on a warning basis for anyone else who may be considering taking out what they think is a car loan with the Funding Corporation via a car sales place. I found the consumer action group by googling 'problems with the Funding Corporation'.

~Brock~

never-in-doubt wrote: »

Also, it should be noted that if this was a HP Agreement then after you've paid 50% of the debt you can hand the keys back and walk away. Have you looked into this?

Although this agreement wasn't HP, even if it was it would be far too late at this point to be able to terminate the agreement, because it would have been done long ago by the lender as a precursor to their legal action.

Once they have terminated themselves the option no longer exists for the borrower.

november

~Brock~ wrote: »

Firstly, the reason they can apply for a charging order is because they already have a judgement against your sister. It is irrelevant why the money was originally owed, or what it was borrowed for - the fact that a court has awarded a judgement in their favour is enough for them to apply for a charging order as one of the enforcement options open to them.

Enforcement options only become available if the payments required under the original judgement are not paid.

That's what we thought. The original judgement by the court official was that the amount should be paid in full immediately as the payments offered were too small to actually repay the debt during my sister's lifetime.

Which shows actually that having a budget plan doesn't make a difference if your budget at the time doesn't allow for you to repay the debt in a reasonable amount of time. So if a company can take out a charging order surely all debts are priority debts

Their situation is slightly different now. At the time her husband had lost his job, they were awaiting CTC and my sister worked part-time. My sister now works full-time and they have CTC. Presumably they need to work out the debt over her lifetime (she is the younger slightly and employed) and hope they can afford to make those payments

With all that said, however, it is very - and I mean VERY - unlikely that they would be granted possession of the house - I doubt that any judge in the land would grant possession unless it was absolutely clear that your sister is completely avoiding any type of payment.

No she has offered payment all along. All offers were refused by the Funding Corporation who said the amount in full became due once they had missed the first payment. The offer made to the court was smaller as it was done on the advice of CAB on what they could actually afford. This was deemed unacceptable by the court.

Their tactic will probably be to simply sit and wait - for years if necessary - and hope to be settled off from the eventual sale of the property, should your sister ever decide to move.

She's never going to move. I presume then they would wait to eventually claim from the estate if there is anything in it?

Voyager2002

Firstly, please get your sister herself to visit and post on this forum. Small details that you may have missed or got slightly wrong might make an enormous difference.

Anyway, the court judgement against her is not valid if she was not notified of the date of the hearing and so given the opportunity to attend. And if the hearing was held in a court some way away from her, she has the right to insist that it be transferred to her local court. So, if she really did not know when the hearing would take place, and was waiting for a court date and then received judgement against her, she can apply for the court to set judgement aside. There is a fee for this, but it means that the company then has to go back to court and start all over again. But before she applies for SJA she should check her paperwork carefully: if she received notice of the date of hearing but did not read it properly then she has no case.

As for her not being able to afford a solicitor: she should try to get a free or low-cost half-hour appointment with one, and ask about possible ways to meet further costs. But the bottom line is that she cannot afford NOT to have a solicitor: she stands to lose far more this way than the cost of a lawyer.

Voyager2002

Firstly, please get your sister herself to visit and post on this forum. Small details that you may have missed or got slightly wrong might make an enormous difference.

Anyway, the court judgement against her is not valid if she was not notified of the date of the hearing and so given the opportunity to attend. And if the hearing was held in a court some way away from her, she has the right to insist that it be transferred to her local court. So, if she really did not know when the hearing would take place, and was waiting for a court date and then received judgement against her, she can apply for the court to set judgement aside. There is a fee for this, but it means that the company then has to go back to court and start all over again. But before she applies for SJA she should check her paperwork carefully: if she received notice of the date of hearing but did not read it properly then she has no case.

As for her not being able to afford a solicitor: she should try to get a free or low-cost half-hour appointment with one, and ask about possible ways to meet further costs. But the bottom line is that she cannot afford NOT to have a solicitor: she stands to lose far more this way than the cost of a lawyer.

fermi

Voyager2002 wrote: »

Anyway, the court judgement against her is not valid if she was not notified of the date of the hearing and so given the opportunity to attend. And if the hearing was held in a court some way away from her, she has the right to insist that it be transferred to her local court. So, if she really did not know when the hearing would take place, and was waiting for a court date and then received judgement against her, she can apply for the court to set judgement aside. There is a fee for this, but it means that the company then has to go back to court and start all over again. But before she applies for SJA she should check her paperwork carefully: if she received notice of the date of hearing but did not read it properly then she has no case.

In the first post it says that.

"My sister sent a budget to the court showing they could afford to pay £5.00 per month. CAB agreed that this budget was correct."

Appears that an "admission" and offer was sent in response to the claim forms.

If that is the case, then there would be no hearing to attend and no defence offered. They wouldn't have been informed of any date because there is nothing to attend.

The creditor would just ask the court to proceed immediately to judgement.

If the creditor did not agree with the instalments offered, then the court would set the payment level.

november

fermi wrote: »

In the first post it says that.

"My sister sent a budget to the court showing they could afford to pay £5.00 per month. CAB agreed that this budget was correct."

Appears that an "admission" and offer was sent in response to the claim forms.

That's exactly right. She was advised to send a budget etc (admit the debt) unless she could afford a solicitor to defend their case. At the time they had only her part-time income and were living on less than income support so affording a solicitor was out of the question.

If that is the case, then there would be no hearing to attend and no defence offered. They wouldn't have been informed of any date because there is nothing to attend.

The creditor would just ask the court to proceed immediately to judgement.

If the creditor did not agree with the instalments offered, then the court would set the payment level.

Exactly right again. The instalments offered weren't accepted and the court set the payment level at immediate payment of the amount in full.

Thanks to all who have responded to this thread.

november

Voyager2002 wrote: »

Firstly, please get your sister herself to visit and post on this forum. Small details that you may have missed or got slightly wrong might make an enormous difference.

If my sister had been able to post on this forum herself she would have. I haven't missed any details and if there were any questions I wasn't sure of I rang her and dictated her response.

As for her not being able to afford a solicitor: she should try to get a free or low-cost half-hour appointment with one, and ask about possible ways to meet further costs. But the bottom line is that she cannot afford NOT to have a solicitor: she stands to lose far more this way than the cost of a lawyer.

The bottom line is she couldn't at the time afford to have a solicitor and still cannot now. She has tried every possible option to find a free or low cost solicitor but none are available in her area (and that means in her county or surrounding counties which will deal with someone living in her area).

virtuous

Hi there,
Is there anyone here with any experience dealing with The Funding Corporation personal loan mis-sold PPI. In February 2004, I phoned Funding Corporation for a personal loan and was approved straight away. I was told that the credit agreement was to be couried to my home for me to sign the following day, so the biker (courier) turned up at my home with the documents and stood there while I signed it and then took it back. I had no time to read the document at the time. Recently having read from Martin's newsletter, I asked them for a copy of my agreement which I received yesterday. They charged me PPI - £2,884.40, Loan £6,000 and interest £2,487.60 Total=11,352.00. I settled this loan on 30/6/2004 - I paid £9,252.73. I believe I stand a chance to claim PPI since I was not aware it was included in my loan. The loan was supposed to paid in 62 months. The APR 9.9% - can anyone here advise me on how to deal with them - complain - who to contact/address etc.