CCJ and Forthwith judgement help

pe11y

Hi

I'm in a quandry and would welcome your assistance

I have had a DMP with the CCCS for over a year now and one creditor, Santander, has always refused to enter into any negotiations about freezing interest and reduced payments, although I have been paying the 'reduced' amount since I started the DMP.

To cut a long story short a redetermination hearing was held at my local court (they disputed an earlier judgement by Northampton Court) where the judge agreed with the creditor that the reduced payment would take too long to complete and even though they both acknowledged that I did not own a house/have any other assets the judge issued a forthwith judgement and told me to continue the monthly payments in the meantime. The creditors solicitor more or less told me after the hearing that the next step would be the bailiffs. I have spoken to the CCCS who said they don't understand why the judge ruled a judgement in this way as well as telling me to continue payments (which I will anyway) when she had all the paperwork (list of creditors, salary, etc) confirming my financial status. The CCCS have suggested I write a letter to the solicitor reaffirming my financial status and then if I don't receive a response within 14 days to file a N245 form with the court.

If anyone has any template letters I could use or has had the same thing happen to them could you let me know as all I can find on this forum are charging orders which is something different. I'm also worried about how long it will take before bailiffs arrive - will I be given notice?

Thank you

3Dogs

Hi there - sorry about you're predicament

Bailiffs can only come to your house after a court orders them to - so you will know if they are appointed. There is a guide to bailiffs somewhere - I will try to find the link for you - it will tell you what bailiffs can and cannot do

I am sure others will be along to help soon with further advice but I can't understand how the court did not accept your offer in view of your financial statement given CCCS's involvement

Edit: This should help: http://www.insolvencyhelpline.co.uk/debt_basics/bailiff-guide.php

never-in-doubt

pe11y wrote: »

Hi

I'm in a quandry and would welcome your assistance

I have had a DMP with the CCCS for over a year now and one creditor, Santander, has always refused to enter into any negotiations about freezing interest and reduced payments, although I have been paying the 'reduced' amount since I started the DMP.

To cut a long story short a redetermination hearing was held at my local court (they disputed an earlier judgement by Northampton Court) where the judge agreed with the creditor that the reduced payment would take too long to complete and even though they both acknowledged that I did not own a house/have any other assets the judge issued a forthwith judgement and told me to continue the monthly payments in the meantime. The creditors solicitor more or less told me after the hearing that the next step would be the bailiffs. I have spoken to the CCCS who said they don't understand why the judge ruled a judgement in this way as well as telling me to continue payments (which I will anyway) when she had all the paperwork (list of creditors, salary, etc) confirming my financial status. The CCCS have suggested I write a letter to the solicitor reaffirming my financial status and then if I don't receive a response within 14 days to file a N245 form with the court.

If anyone has any template letters I could use or has had the same thing happen to them could you let me know as all I can find on this forum are charging orders which is something different. I'm also worried about how long it will take before bailiffs arrive - will I be given notice?

Thank you

Hiya

send a PM to 10past6 and ask him to come to your thread, he's the expert on ccj's and, i'm sure, will gladly help, as the above is one of the things he's good with......

pe11y

Thanks I'll PM him now.

pe11y

Thanks 3Dogs for the bailiff information

10past6

pe11y wrote: »

Thanks I'll PM him now.

Your case depends on what the judgement was, without that it'll be difficult to advise you, however, in general terms, a claimant is allowed to make a “Forthwith Judgement” if / once granted this allows the claimant to “Secure” the debt against any assets a defendant has, rightly or wrongly, 99% of all DJ's hold the the opinion “it’s reasonable for a creditor to secure the debt so they get their money back at some stage” however, more importantly, 99% of DJ's are reluctant to enforce a “Forthwith Judgement” if a debtor can prove repayments set by the court have been met each month

You should have been informed by the court what payments to make per month, should you breach that order, that allows the claimant to go back to court and request the “Forthwith Judgement” be enforced, i.e. make a claim on any of your assets, it's important any court order (CCJ) is treated with the same priority as a household bill.

When you attended your “Redetermination” hearing, if you submitted an up to date I&E which clearly shows the instalments set by the court are to high, I'm surprised the court didn't lower the amount to a more realistic figure, if the instalments are set to high, you have the right to appeal to a higher court (Circuit Judge) but ONLY on a point of law, i.e. the redetermination instalment amount, you CANNOT appeal against the claimant making a “Forthwith Judgement”

If the claimant received an up to date I&E prior to your hearing, I'm surprised they wanted a CO placed, your I&E should clearly show you rent, and therefore a CO is pointless, providing you adhere to the monthly instalments set by the court, the claimant cannot apply to enforce the “Forthwith Judgement” UNLESS, you either breach the order, or they believe the debt will take to long to clear, based on the monthly instalment amount.

On a side note, what the claimant said to you re bailiffs was said to intimidate you, sometimes the court system / DJ's make mistakes, however, if the claimant wishes to implement the law, they must stick to it first.

DVardysShadow

pe11y wrote: »

I have spoken to the CCCS who said they don't understand why the judge ruled a judgement in this way as well as telling me to continue payments (which I will anyway) when she had all the paperwork (list of creditors, salary, etc) confirming my financial status.

Have a little think about what you do own. If you have a flash car, for example, or expensive consumer electronics [which could be evident from your financial status], then the judge may be thinking that the bailiffs could make a recovery.

Or are you near bankruptcy? if so, judge may have given 'forthwith' as the line of least resistance and perhaps as a spur to you to go bankrupt.

All speculation on my part.

pe11y

Many thanks for your response - see my comments below:

Your case depends on what the judgement was, without that it'll be difficult to advise you, however, in general terms, a claimant is allowed to make a “Forthwith Judgement” if / once granted this allows the claimant to “Secure” the debt against any assets a defendant has, rightly or wrongly, 99% of all DJ's hold the the opinion “it’s reasonable for a creditor to secure the debt so they get their money back at some stage” however, more importantly,
I agree they should be paid and I suppose if they felt I 'looked' like someone with a fast car or flat-screen TV then so be it ... but I don't)

99% of DJ's are reluctant to enforce a “Forthwith Judgement” if a debtor can prove repayments set by the court have been met each month
The DJ could clearly see from the paperwork and I reinstated this fact that I had been paying the reduced amount since April 2009. However the payment was set by the CCCS based on surplus cash/value of debt per creditor so never actually agreed by the creditor.

You should have been informed by the court what payments to make per month, should you breach that order, that allows the claimant to go back to court and request the “Forthwith Judgement” be enforced, i.e. make a claim on any of your assets, it's important any court order (CCJ) is treated with the same priority as a household bill.
Will have to wait for the paperwork from the Court - she definitely said `judgement forthwith' which is why the creditors solicitor told me outside that the bailiffs would be calling. But then she also said and he agreed as we were leaving the chambers that I should continue paying the monthly amount I'd been paying for over a year.

When you attended your “Redetermination” hearing, if you submitted an up to date I&E which clearly shows the instalments set by the court are to high, I'm surprised the court didn't lower the amount to a more realistic figure, if the instalments are set to high, you have the right to appeal to a higher court (Circuit Judge) but ONLY on a point of law, i.e. the redetermination instalment amount, you CANNOT appeal against the claimant making a “Forthwith Judgement”
The monthly amount set by CCJ was upheld at the first hearing in Northampton (I was told I didn't need to attend), so the amount wasn't in question. I think the redetermination judge had a problem with the amount x debt = 20 years.
So if a forthwith judgement is given you can only go down the N245 form route as opposed to redetermination (I'm asking because some PM'd me and I said I didn't know).

If the claimant received an up to date I&E prior to your hearing, I'm surprised they wanted a CO placed, your I&E should clearly show you rent, and therefore a CO is pointless, providing you adhere to the monthly instalments set by the court, the claimant cannot apply to enforce the “Forthwith Judgement” UNLESS, you either breach the order, or they believe the debt will take to long to clear, based on the monthly instalment amount.
The I&E was up-to-date and clearly set out my finances x debt. The solicitor and I confirmed I was renting and did not own a property. The solicitor did mention 'attachment to earnings' but she said what was the point, payslips had already been sent to the CCCS which confirmed how much I was paid.

On a side note, what the claimant said to you re bailiffs was said to intimidate you, sometimes the court system / DJ's make mistakes, however, if the claimant wishes to implement the law, they must stick to it first.
So how long after the paperwork comes through from the Court confirming the judgement am I supposed to pay the debt (I obviously can't). When I'm in default can they then send in the bailiffs or will they have to go back to the Court to request approval to proceed and then I'll be given notice that one will be calling. I ask because I'm worried I'm not going to have time to submit the N245 form after sending a letter to the creditors solicitor reaffirming my financial status as suggested by the CCC.

Isn't it weird how you never think of CCJ/CO/bailiffs etc until you are head-deep in debt! Steep learning curve for me and I really appreciate all the help/support I've been given so far.

pe11y

10past6 wrote: »

Your case depends on what the judgement was, without that it'll be difficult to advise you, however, in general terms, a claimant is allowed to make a “Forthwith Judgement” if / once granted this allows the claimant to “Secure” the debt against any assets a defendant has, rightly or wrongly, 99% of all DJ's hold the the opinion “it’s reasonable for a creditor to secure the debt so they get their money back at some stage” however, more importantly, 99% of DJ's are reluctant to enforce a “Forthwith Judgement” if a debtor can prove repayments set by the court have been met each month

You should have been informed by the court what payments to make per month, should you breach that order, that allows the claimant to go back to court and request the “Forthwith Judgement” be enforced, i.e. make a claim on any of your assets, it's important any court order (CCJ) is treated with the same priority as a household bill.

When you attended your “Redetermination” hearing, if you submitted an up to date I&E which clearly shows the instalments set by the court are to high, I'm surprised the court didn't lower the amount to a more realistic figure, if the instalments are set to high, you have the right to appeal to a higher court (Circuit Judge) but ONLY on a point of law, i.e. the redetermination instalment amount, you CANNOT appeal against the claimant making a “Forthwith Judgement”

If the claimant received an up to date I&E prior to your hearing, I'm surprised they wanted a CO placed, your I&E should clearly show you rent, and therefore a CO is pointless, providing you adhere to the monthly instalments set by the court, the claimant cannot apply to enforce the “Forthwith Judgement” UNLESS, you either breach the order, or they believe the debt will take to long to clear, based on the monthly instalment amount.

On a side note, what the claimant said to you re bailiffs was said to intimidate you, sometimes the court system / DJ's make mistakes, however, if the claimant wishes to implement the law, they must stick to it first.

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Have a little think about what you do own. If you have a flash car, for example, or expensive consumer electronics [which could be evident from your financial status], then the judge may be thinking that the bailiffs could make a recovery.

Or are you near bankruptcy? if so, judge may have given 'forthwith' as the line of least resistance and perhaps as a spur to you to go bankrupt.

All speculation on my part.

Sorry no flash car or expensive consumer goods, although I do have a box-standard run of the mill 4 year old car so suppose they could take that but how would I get to work and it wouldn't pay off all of the deb ... suppose they won't really care.

never-in-doubt

pe11y wrote: »

Thanks I'll PM him now.

Best of luck mate - now you have 10past6 on the case, you'll get some definitive answers which is really what you wanted - nice one, good luck.....

Cheers 10past6 mate - appreciate you coming in to check up

10past6

pe11y wrote: »

99% of DJ's are reluctant to enforce a “Forthwith Judgement” if a debtor can prove repayments set by the court have been met each month
The DJ could clearly see from the paperwork and I reinstated this fact that I had been paying the reduced amount since April 2009. However the payment was set by the CCCS based on surplus cash/value of debt per creditor so never actually agreed by the creditor

The creditor doesn't have to agree to your offer, that's why the instigated litigation against you, BUT the court must be fair and should only set a repayment plan based on your I&E

pe11y wrote: »

she definitely said `judgement forthwith'

The DJ made a FJ to "secure" the debt.

pe11y wrote: »

which is why the creditors solicitor told me outside that the bailiffs would be calling

Why do you think they said it outside the court, and not in the presence of the DJ?

pe11y wrote: »

But then she also said and he agreed as we were leaving the chambers that I should continue paying the monthly amount I'd been paying for over a year

Correct, which is why the debt MUST be treated as a priority debt, any breaches may well result in the claimant asking the court to enforce the FJ.

pe11y wrote: »

So if a forthwith judgement is given you can only go down the N245 form route as opposed to redetermination (I'm asking because some PM'd me and I said I didn't know)

Anyone with a CCJ can apply for a "redetermination" should their financial circumstances change.

pe11y wrote: »

If the claimant received an up to date I&E prior to your hearing, I'm surprised they wanted a CO placed, your I&E should clearly show you rent, and therefore a CO is pointless, providing you adhere to the monthly instalments set by the court, the claimant cannot apply to enforce the “Forthwith Judgement” UNLESS, you either breach the order, or they believe the debt will take to long to clear, based on the monthly instalment amount

pe11y wrote: »

The solicitor did mention 'attachment to earnings' but she said what was the point, payslips had already been sent to the CCCS which confirmed how much I was paid

If you breach the court order, an AOE can be applied to ensure the claimant is paid, you should keep this up your sleeve, if the claimant does apply to enforce the FJ, you could suggest an AOE be applied rather then enforcing the debt.
[QUOTE=pe11y;32645059]So how long after the paperwork comes through from the Court confirming the judgement am I supposed to pay the debt (I obviously can't)[/QUOTE]
Your NOT expected to pay the debt in full, unless the claimant requests the debt be enforced or you default on the ruling.

pe11y wrote: »

When I'm in default can they then send in the bailiffs or will they have to go back to the Court to request approval to proceed and then I'll be given notice that one will be calling

Correct, whatever action they decide on taking, they MUST seek permission from the court FIRST

pe11y wrote: »

I ask because I'm worried I'm not going to have time to submit the N245 form after sending a letter to the creditors solicitor reaffirming my financial status as suggested by the CCC

Your passed that stage now, you've had a redetermination hearing, you need to know what the ruling is from that hearing.