Debt collector chasing more money after Judge ruling CCJ

Gordon_Hose

The OP isn't going to get charged more. Stop talking sh*t.

Gordon_Hose

You're the only one going against the grain here. So offer your advice and move on. Do not tell me the advice I've offered so far is "a bit daft", because it clearly isn't.

Good day.

Hanky_Panky

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

You're the only one going against the grain here. So offer your advice and move on. Do not tell me the advice I've offered so far is "a bit daft", because it clearly isn't.

Good day.

Please explain then in your infinite wisdom who would pay the court fee should it come to that.

awayinchina

Daft_Planky wrote: »

Please explain then in your infinite wisdom who would pay the court fee should it come to that.

Ok let someone spell it out for you. I will try and make simple for you as your infinite wisdom requires:
1) CCJ awarded to creditor £5pcm

2) OP paid £5 pcm

3) Creditor sending letters asking for more money regardless of court ruling.

4) OP when they were in a position to pay more increased payments to £7 pcm

5) creditor continued to send letters (now harassment)


Above are the facts as posted by the OP and what any judge would be presented with.

the OP has done as the judge instructed and more. should this go to court. Do you actually think with the weight of evidence a judge would rule against the OP. Think not!
Also, the OP is well within their right to complain to OFT in regards the letters and counter sue for harassment and stress caused due to the creditor ignoring the court ruling also could complain further.

Now thats as simple as it gets.

the OP has done more and than the ruling asked for and has stuck to the judge's ruling. Although, as slim cahnce may be present for it going back to court. I doubt there are any grounds for it to return to court. unless:

1) OP has notified creditor to change in circumstances

2) credior has grounds to think OP circumstances have changed

3) OP has missed payments.

Now as for the blind leading the blind...where is your stick?

Sparklyfairy

OP, only a court can MAKE you increase your payments, the creditor cannot, so rest assured. I also believe you should hold on to all the letters sent to you just in case they do ask for a redetermination & when the district judge sees that you've already increased your payment, they'll have a hard time pleading their case to the dj..but chances are slim they'll actually go for a redetermination (easier to hassle the debtor..) as your total debt with them is at £2k & is relatively a small amount.

Hanky_Panky

awayinchina wrote: »

Do you actually think with the weight of evidence a judge would rule against the OP. Think not!

Very good on the name calling - really helping the OP.

I'm afraid you have joined the shortsighted group - as they say in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king !!

So back to the point.

A) Would you like to take a stab at actually answering the question or is that beyond you.
What has the weight of evidence got to do with anything !! Really stop being so blinkered.
The whole point of the creditor going back for a re-determination would simply be to re-assess the payment level and force via the court procedure an increase if appropriate. There will be fees assocoiated with this and however small that risk maybe it can be avoided quite easily.

Of course only the court can force the increase but the whole point is why let it get that far in the first place.

Remember this is a money saving site.

awayinchina

A) Would you like to take a stab at actually answering the question or is that beyond you.


What has the weight of evidence got to do with anything !! There will be fees assocoiated with this and however small that risk maybe it can be avoided quite easily.


A) The OP has increased payments in regard what was awarded to the creditor (end of topic) and has stuck to the conditions. Secondly, as to date there is no offical paperwork ie summons from the creditor in regards a court action. thus far only empty paper threats. So at present the subject ofcourt costs DO NOT even enter into the equation until such documents are forthcoming. <conclusive answer based on what the OP has said.

Should it (no evidence other than threats) go to court the judge makes a ruling on the weight of evidence of both the creditor and OP presents in regards the case. In this case the OP has a stronger case than the creditor.

THEREFORE,

As you have no clue... A JUDGE makes a JUDGEMENT BASED ON FACTS. Facts which are presented as documented evidence for example:
LETTERS
Payments made

as pointed out to you. although, with your claim to infinite wisdom you fail to grasp the following:
Main reasons for such a debt to return to court are:
1) OP has notified creditor to change in circumstances and is not prepared to negotiate.< change in circumstance presented on this forum but NOT to the creditor. Unless, the creditor has access to the IP address of the poster then gets an injunction from court to trace the IP to the original poster (not a sniff) and then they still have to prove the poster is the debtor (networks especially wi-fi get hacked).

2) credior has grounds to think OP circumstances have changed and option 1 (above) has been ignored. < Still no evidence

3) OP has missed payments. < as with 1 and 2, no Proof.


Now how about you answering a question?

which you have avoided...Do you work for a DCA?? a simple yes/no will do....

Before you say it has nothing to do with the thread. Yes, it does as it will make your views bias also please feel free to inform the forum as to how much commission you make on each settlement should you have the balls to answer "yes".


As for name calling one should really practise what once preaches. If you can't take it do not dish it.

Did you parents ever educate you to sticks and stones?

Please feel free to answer in a constructive and adult way and I am sure all will then respect your views.


So let me recap for you: No Court papers to say it is returning to court (so added costs are not certainty. just empty threats to date!).
Now before you reply, you might want to read this:-

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3558031

nice document on DCA harrassment. OP you might want to read it too.

Kind regards and best wishes
Awayinchina

Hanky_Panky

awayinchina wrote: »

A) The OP has increased payments in regard what was awarded to the creditor (end of topic) and has stuck to the conditions. Secondly, as to date there is no offical paperwork ie summons from the creditor in regards a court action. thus far only empty paper threats. So at present the subject ofcourt costs DO NOT even enter into the equation until such documents are forthcoming. <conclusive answer based on what the OP has said.

There has never been any dispute form me that the Op is not sticking to the court order as arranged. However can you absolutely guarantee that the dca will not pursue this through the court. No - so in that case who pays the court cost. You seem completely unable to grasp the really very simple concept that it is an option THAT CAN BE AVOIDED BY A LITTLE COOPERATION. Why is it helpful to anyone in this situation to not cooperate. I suspect you and other that post on this thread have your 'hate all dca/lender' hats on and that is clouding your judgement.

Should it (no evidence other than threats) go to court the judge makes a ruling on the weight of evidence of both the creditor and OP presents in regards the case. In this case the OP has a stronger case than the creditor.

The judgement has already been made - the hearing is simply to assess the level of payment, nothing more. A few letters from the DCA certainly don't constitute harrassment and it's ludicrous to try and make that connection.

THEREFORE,

As you have no clue... A JUDGE makes a JUDGEMENT BASED ON FACTS. Facts which are presented as documented evidence for example:
LETTERS
Payments made
Seems I have a much better clue than you.

as pointed out to you. although, with your claim to infinite wisdom you fail to grasp the following:
Main reasons But certainly not the only ones and it is the creditors right to return to court at any time to re-assess payments. for such a debt to return to court are:
1) OP has notified creditor to change in circumstances and is not prepared to negotiate.< change in circumstance presented on this forum but NOT to the creditor. Unless, the creditor has access to the IP address of the poster then gets an injunction from court to trace the IP to the original poster (not a sniff) and then they still have to prove the poster is the debtor (networks especially wi-fi get hacked).

2) credior has grounds to think OP circumstances have changed and option 1 (above) has been ignored. < Still no evidence

3) OP has missed payments. < as with 1 and 2, no Proof.


Now how about you answering a question?

which you have avoided...Do you work for a DCA?? a simple yes/no will do....
Have already stated have nothing to do with Link but for the record have absolutely nothing to do with any other DCA or lender either. Actually the opposite - I give advice and help people who find themselves in difficult financial situations. I can do this by drawing on the vast experience I have in this area from previously running a collection operation for one of the larger banks.

Before you say it has nothing to do with the thread. Yes, it does as it will make your views bias also please feel free to inform the forum as to how much commission you make on each settlement should you have the balls to answer "yes".

Quite simply - remove your blinkers and apply some common sense before posting your nonsense.

Now before you reply, you might want to read this:-

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/3558031

nice document on DCA harrassment. OP you might want to read it too.

Definately more up to speed on this than you are which is evident form your comments.

Kind regards and best wishes
Awayinchina

This thread has just decended into farce - it's really quite comical.

awayinchina

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

This thread has just decended into farce - it's really quite comical.

There has never been any dispute form me that the Op is not sticking to the court order as arranged. However can you absolutely guarantee that the dca will not pursue this through the court. AT PRESENT THERE ARE NO PAPERS TO INDICATE IT IS GOING TO COURT!!! DON'T YOU EVEN UNDERSTAND THAT!!! (No - so in that case who pays the court cost. You seem completely unable to grasp the really very simple concept that it is an option THAT CAN BE AVOIDED BY A LITTLE COOPERATION. Why is it helpful to anyone in this situation to not cooperate. I suspect you and other that post on this thread have your 'hate all dca/lender' hats on and that is clouding your judgement. ) THEREFORE, THERE ARE NO COSTS JUST PAPER THREATS NO ACTUAL PAPERS! GET OVER YOURSELF YOUR STARTING TO SOUND LIKE A STUCK RECORD INDICATING SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN WHEN THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO INDICATE SUCH A THING. AS FOR HATING DCA FAR FROM IT DEAR FELLOW. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THEM THEY ARE JUST DOING THEIR JOBS. AS LONG AS THEY OPERATE WITHIN THE GUIDELINES SET OUT.


Should it (no evidence other than threats) go to court the judge makes a ruling on the weight of evidence of both the creditor and OP presents in regards the case. In this case the OP has a stronger case than the creditor.

The judgement has already been made - the hearing is simply to assess the level of payment, nothing more. A few letters from the DCA certainly don't constitute harrassment and it's ludicrous to try and make that connection <<YOU INSINUATED THAT IT WOULD GO BACK TO COURT JUST POINTING OUT TO YOU ALTHOUGH YOU ARE UNABLE TO COMPREHEND THAT THE DCA IS IGNORING THE COURT RULING AND THEREFORE FLICKING TWO FINGERS UP AT THE JUDGE AND ARE ACTUALLY HARRASSING THE OP. IF YOU CAN TAKE A MINUTE AND ACTUALLY READ UP ON THE TOPIC YOU MIGHT ACTUALLY COME BACK WITH A VALID ARGUMENT. UNIL THEN DO SOME READING!

DVardysShadow

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

I don't think you are paying attention.

The OP has already stated that her circs have changed - albeit by not much. The REAL issue here is that the creditor can go back to court for a redertermination hearing to assess the current level of payment anyway. Why force them to do that and therefore incur charges when you can do it voluntarily - some common sense needs to apply here it's not all about creditor bashing, sometimes it is in the 'debtors' best interest too.

It all goes back to the above.

Yes, the creditor can go back to court for a redetermination. And if they have reason to believe that there is a change of circumstances, then they should make their choice.

But this is not a matter of the OP forcing them to go down that road. OP states that that they are paying as much as they can. So there is absolutely no point in OP paying more than the £7 they are paying at the moment. If the creditor applies for a redetermination hearing, and the judge orders £7, the costs would rightly fall on the creditor. And even if a higher amount were awarded, if the costs would actually mean that the debt would take longer to pay even with the higher payment, then I think that costs should not be awarded.

If the OP cannot afford more than £7, then there is no point in them paying more than £7. I suspect that if OP was able to offer £9, then the payments would be increased to £9.

To me, this particular creditor looks to be flogging the willing horse. And you seem to be joining in.