Opposing solicitor wants *my* documents to challenge third party debt order

born_again

You really need to keep to one thread
It makes it hard for people to understand what is going on.

Thanks team for moving 

fatbelly

Is this the bank asking for 10k costs to process a 1k TPDO?

Or the defendant?

Jmoo

fatbelly said:

Is this the bank asking for 10k costs to process a 1k TPDO?

Or the defendant?

The bank is.

They want to set it aside and say that's how much it cost to bring it to court.

My argument is that the final order was only made because they didn't provide the court with the documentation before the interim hearing. They accept if the court had this evidence it wouldn't have proceeded. They emailed a general gov.uk courts address, but not the county court it was at, nor me.

born_again

Banks legal teams do not come cheap...

Jmoo

Indeed. As I say, I don't think they've followed process here, and had I been aware they were preparing to add a £10,000 bill would have sought legal advice.

Jmoo

I'd also argue that it's a small claims cost in front of a district judge, presumably there are limits to what they can charge me if they won.

Okell

born_again said:

You really need to keep to one thread
It makes it hard for people to understand what is going on.

Thanks team for moving 

I don't think the OP understands.

I had to tell him to keep to one thread when he started a second thread in September after the original thread in July.    Clear Bank not complying with third party debt order - Page 6 — MoneySavingExpert Forum

Fortunately the site team merged the first two threads (see link) but now here's a third...

I'm really impressed by anybody who can follow this thread without being aware of the six pages of the merged first and second threads.

Plus I'm not sure how reliable and accurate the OP's narrative is...

[Edit:  @born_again -  actually, reading your post again, is this current three page thread a single thread, or is it another two merged threads ?  One started a week ago on 1st November and a second one started yesterday on the 8th?]

Okell

@Jmoo -  on 8th August you told us that Tide had told you:

"While we cannot provide you with legal advice, we understand you may be able to apply to the court to amend your TPDO. You may be able to demonstrate to the court that Mr. Bloggs asked you to transfer the funds to the account ending in XXX and that the funds in this account are owned by Mr. Bloggs. The court may then agree to amend the order.

'For Tide to be able to make the payment, the order would need to explicitly state that Tide has to make the payment from the account ending in XXX, even though this account is not owned by Mr. Bloggs."  [My emphasis in bold]

You stated that you didn't see what difference an amended order would make and later that day I explained:

"The difference is that Tide don't want to freeze the account on your say so but if  a judge orders them to do so they will have to.  The question is: can you get the judge to amend the order as Tide have suggested...

... So it comes down to whether the judge would amend the order to be against a/c no 12348765 in the name of "Joe Bloggs Building" irrespective of who owns the account"   (And @eskbanker basically said the same)

So did you go back to the court and ask the judge to amend the TPDO as Tide had suggested you do?  It seems to me they were telling you what to do in order to get the TPDO enforced.  You never came back to that thread to explain what followed.

Regarding this current thread, are Clear's solicitors arguing that your TPDO should never have been against them in the first place, and should have been against Tide instead?

eskbanker

Okell said:

Regarding this current thread, are Clear's solicitors arguing that your TPDO should never have been against them in the first place, and should have been against Tide instead?

I was wondering that too last week, but OP suggested not:

Jmoo said:

Whilst Tide seems to use Clear Bank, Clear Bank are accepting in the legal documents it falls under them.

OP said that the hearing is today, so will hopefully return to update on the latest developments....

Jmoo

No Clear Bank have accepted it's their account, using the trading name, just couldn't identify the correct person as we have known for a while. They say it is a 'slightly different' address. I'm still nonethewiser who it is with, or why he uses different addresses, telephone numbers and email addresses. 

It turns out they'd emailed this to a generic courts address when the interim order was made, it just never got passed to the Judge or myself. An odd one but they seem to accept they oversee Tide accounts. 

Anyway pleased to say we both agreed not to claim costs of each other, and we were able to reach agreement to scrap the order. 

I now have the option of baliffs if I wish to pursue. I will report this back to the other customers also wishing to challenge this trader.