Restons CCj advice

ClareD32

Can anyone help.

I have recently been given a CCJ for an MBNA debt which is being handled by Restons and they accepted my offer of £50 a month in installments. I then had a letter saying Restons were going for redetermination hearing which had been transferred to my local court. I have been waiting for a date to go to court and yesterday received a letter from the court ordering payment forthwith. I have not defaulted on the installment order and we were not notified of the redetermination hearing date so we could attend.

I am assuming they are going for a CO. I already have one for a Nationwide debt and they accepted my installment offer. I am not disputing the debt and want to pay it back over time.

So, can anyone advise what the best course of action is now? Can I ask for another redetermination hearing or complain that we were not told of the hearing date.

Thanks

fermi

If I remember correctly, then if the original instalment order was decided by a court officer rather than a judge, any redetermination by a judge does not necessarily have to be at a hearing unless one of the parties specifically requests it.

And of course, Restons being the sneaky barstewards that they are, would be quite happy for a judge to just decide it without you having a chance to put your case. Relying on that fact that you don't realise that might happen.

I think you very probably have a right to ask for a further redetermination by a judge at a hearing, since there was not a hearing for the last one.

Obviously the thing to do is get onto the court ASAP on Tuesday to see what can be done.

Sparklyfairy

If you own a house - they no doubt want a charging order. They move VERY fast & are ruthless. Go to any/all court hearings - they want it changed to forthwith to enable a charging order to be granted.

Take a look here . Sequenci states "Section 86(1) The County Courts Act 1984:

Where the court has made an order for payment of any sum of money by instalments, execution on the order shall not be issued until after default in payment of some instalment according to the order.

This was further considered in the case of Mercantile Credit V Ellis in The Court of Appeal 1987. It was found that the wording of the Charging Orders Act states quite clearly that no further action could be taken without a default in payment. It should be noted, however, that in the case of Ropaigealach V Allied Irish Bank CA Nov 2001 where an instalment order is made AFTER an interim charging order has been made, a court has the jurisdiction to make a Charging Order final.

There are various tactics which a creditor will use to try and obtain the Interim Order, they will try their best not to allow the court grant an instalment order on a CCJ. If a debtor wishes to admit the claim and request instalments, the creditor may argue the instalments are unacceptable and that a Charging Order is more appropriate. A creditor might also seek a re-determination if a court accepts a debtor’s offer of instalments. Some creditors have even been known to ask a district judge to consider a Time Order to change the judgment to forthwith. "

To fight against the change to forthwith - you'll have to quote the case law of Mercantile Credit V Ellis in The Court of Appeal 1987 to the judge - read up on it as much as possible - a judge will grant a forthwith payment if it will takes 10 years to clear the debt (as an example) and MBNA want their debt secured. It's how the game is played & trust me, Restons know how to play it!

ClareD32

Thanks, I'll give the court a ring on Tuesday and see if we can get another redetermination hearing.