I have CCJ against company but the debt hasn't been paid

Humminghorse23

Hi naedanger,

Thanks for post,

It was my car. I was advised by the solicitor to sign over ownership (different from registered keeper) to my partner as a strategy to stop them from taking it. Something I'm legally entitled to do.

However they took it anyway, stating my document was not legally valid. Therefore. As far as they are concerned, and according to their actions, it was my car.

Point being, if it became my partners car, legally speaking, then it was also an illegal seizure, as the debt has nothing to do with her.. See what I mean? As far as I can see they are wrong in either case...

Humminghorse23

Hi macman,

A very good point, and one I seriously need to consider, hence my reaching out for opinion.

It would be a relatively small claim, through the small claims court, so my costs would be relatively low, but as you say, if I lose then my situation would become much worse.

But if we all just do nothing, then are we not guilty of perpetuating this nonsense ourselves...?

unholyangel

According to this page (not sure how reliable it is) the value they should be going by is auction value.

http://bailiffadviceonline.co.uk/index/motor-vehicles-clamping-anpr/can-a-bailiff-take-my-car

Also pretty sure it should be a case of that if the vehicle is worth more, they're supposed to give you the £1350 and put the rest towards your debt.

What kind of bailiffs were they? Who were they acting on behalf of? You'll want to make complaints - but who to will depend on who the bailiffs were acting for. You will at least want to make complaints to the council who issued the ticket & the bailiff company. If they were court bailiffs, then you'll want to make a complaint to the court. If none of those are fruitful, you should be able to make a complaint with the local government ombudsman given its for enforcement of a council issued ticket.

Bogalot

Humminghorse23 wrote: »

Hi Bogalot,

I came onto this forum because I am in a difficult situation. I was open and honest about it, and my mistakes. If all you can contribute is a snide remark which offers nothing at all except to perhaps amuse yourself and boost your ego then I suggest you think about the old saying, "if you have nothing useful to say, say nothing at all"

I will now probably withdraw from the forum because my vulnerability was met with an insult. You can take responsibility for changing something I hoped would help me into something which has done the opposite.

I'm sorry you didn't appreciate my comment. The only person that needs to take responsibility here is yourself, for whatever reason you chose to accrue multiple PCNs and then failed to pay them. You then allowed the situation to escalate to such a point that they took your car. Note - your car - any judge would see your attempt to manipulate the situation by transferring ownership and treat it as still being yours.

What you need to do now is a) make arrangement to pay your outstanding debts, and b) find a way to increase your income. The Debtfree Wannabe board can assist you with the former, and the Employment board the latter.

Good luck! :beer:

naedanger

Humminghorse23 wrote: »

Hi naedanger,

Thanks for post,

It was my car. I was advised by the solicitor to sign over ownership (different from registered keeper) to my partner as a strategy to stop them from taking it. Something I'm legally entitled to do.

However they took it anyway, stating my document was not legally valid. Therefore. As far as they are concerned, and according to their actions, it was my car.

Point being, if it became my partners car, legally speaking, then it was also an illegal seizure, as the debt has nothing to do with her. See what I mean? As far as I can see they are wrong in either case...

Yes, that makes a lot of sense.

I did wonder why (a) the solicitor would instruct you to lie, (b) you would follow that instruction, and (c) the solicitor would not just tell you to argue they could not seize the car because of its value. However it now makes sense. (Presumably your solicitor thought signing ownership of your car to your girlfriend was a better tactic than arguing about your need for the car and its value.)

You do need to establish whether the "sale" to your girlfriend was legally effective and take action accordingly. (Presumably if the transfer was legally effective it would be your girlfriend who would need to take action.) Otherwise you could lose on a technicality. My guess is the "sale" was not effective because the car had already been seized but you do need to be sure of the actual position.

Your situation does sound complicated. For example is there a risk that if you become insolvent and win a court case that the amount you win will be taken to cover your debts before you get a chance to replace your car?

I hope the matter is resolved to your satisfaction since it is clearly a big deal.

fwor

naedanger wrote: »

You do need to establish whether the "sale" to your girlfriend was legally effective and take action accordingly. (Presumably if the transfer was legally effective it would be your girlfriend who would need to take action.) Otherwise you could lose on a technicality. My guess is the "sale" was not effective because the car had already been seized but you do need to be sure of the actual position.

With a limited understanding of how bailiffs operate, I suspect that this is where you will fail. As I understand it, once the bailiffs record an asset, it cannot legally be sold, transferred or otherwise disposed of - and that happens as soon as they turn up and identify the asset as yours. It sounds as though you attempted to transfer ownership too late for it to be legally effective. The time at which a recovery truck turns up is irrelevant - it's the earlier process that records the asset as a subject of the order that will count.

Also, it's doubtful that the issue of the car's value would go in your favour. I doubt that a bailiff is expected to be able to value a car by eye with complete accuracy - with an actual auction value of £1100 they could probably argue that their estimate was within the bounds of what could be expected of them.

unholyangel

I dont believe the solicitor was advising OP to transfer ownership/sell the van to his partner after the fact - rather they were telling OP to lie - to make a statutory declaration that the partner had owned the van all along (or at least some time before the bailiffs tried to seize it) and the OP is just the registered keeper.

The law when it comes to debt enforcement can be a bit backwards sometimes to say the least so it doesn't necessarily need to make sense in order to be correct.

For example the old rule (could actually still be current rule in E&W but I know the loopholes been closed in scotland) that once wages were paid into your account, they ceased being wages and even if a bailiff/sheriff officer couldnt arrest your wages as they were too low, they could arrest every penny once it hit your bank account.

steampowered

I don't think the fact the car was sold for £1,100 matters. It was sold at auction so you can't really argue with that.

I also don't think the last minute transfer of title to your partner would sounds very convincing. Presumably you would need to have registered the transfer prior to enforcement. In any event it would have to be your partner that would bring the court case if the car was hers.

The point about cars essential to your work not being seized if below £1350 sounds relevant. Have a read of the legislation here http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/1894/pdfs/uksi_20131894_en.pdf
Have a read of https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/debt-and-money/action-your-creditor-can-take/bailiffs/your-belongings-and-bailiffs/what-goods-can-a-bailiff-take/vehicles-and-bailiffs/.

AG47

Hi, I can't seem to open a new threa on this board, so sorry if it seems I hijacked this thread.

I have somebody claiming I agreed to a loan with them, I said I did not and would not agre to that loan. I never had any loan from them at all as they claim.

They said they had the loan agreement that I signed my self. I asked many times please can I have a copy of this, because I know I did not sign it.

I finally got it, and it's not my signiture at all. It looks like a child's signed it.

Then they said it's an electronic signiture.

What on earth does this mean? Could anybody pick somebody off the street and claim they owe them thousands of pounds and they have this electronic signiture to some loan agreement?

What can I do so that they don't damage my clean credit record?

[Deleted User]

If it's not your agreement, then you simply tell them that.

Who is this 'somebody'?