Holiday disrupion

mdann52

Caz3121 said:

mdann52 said:

 and makes it possible for bailiffs to seize any assets, or the courts to seize any monies, 

looks like this is just a rented mailbox. There are over 20,000 companies listed on Companies House that use or have used this address. (previously Metro Bank building) Unlikely to be any people or assets for Malaysian Airline ...maybe some mail forwarding though

Indeed - but they do have assets which enter the UK - namely the planes operating in and out, and their assets aboard the planes. 

You can also make Third Party Debt orders once you have the judgement to obtain any monies going through their UK bank accounts.

So yes, they might not have assets at their registered office. That doesn't stop you enforcing elsewhere or through other means

Hoenir

mdann52 said:

Caz3121 said:

mdann52 said:

 and makes it possible for bailiffs to seize any assets, or the courts to seize any monies, 

looks like this is just a rented mailbox. There are over 20,000 companies listed on Companies House that use or have used this address. (previously Metro Bank building) Unlikely to be any people or assets for Malaysian Airline ...maybe some mail forwarding though

Indeed - but they do have assets which enter the UK - namely the planes operating in and out, and their assets aboard the planes. 

I would suggest that the planes are leased not owned outright. 

la531983

Hoenir said:

mdann52 said:

Caz3121 said:

mdann52 said:

 and makes it possible for bailiffs to seize any assets, or the courts to seize any monies, 

looks like this is just a rented mailbox. There are over 20,000 companies listed on Companies House that use or have used this address. (previously Metro Bank building) Unlikely to be any people or assets for Malaysian Airline ...maybe some mail forwarding though

Indeed - but they do have assets which enter the UK - namely the planes operating in and out, and their assets aboard the planes. 

I would suggest that the planes are leased not owned outright. 

I recall an episode of Cant Pay We'll Take It Away where they indeed did go to (I think) Heathrow and an option open to them was to impound a plane to stop it taking off until payment was made, it never got as far as that though.

Think the airline in question was United.

lisyloo

Would be very surprised if this is a practical option for £1040.
I would imagine there's a cost to get debt enforcement people to travel to an airport.
In reality you'll do what you'd is get a no-win no-fee company involved for a % share.
I'm now 2 years down the line as all stages take many months.

la531983

lisyloo said:

Would be very surprised if this is a practical option for £1040.
I would imagine there's a cost to get debt enforcement people to travel to an airport.
In reality you'll do what you'd is get a no-win no-fee company involved for a % share.
I'm now 2 years down the line as all stages take many months.

Well yes, its covered in the usual fee which you add onto the claim, its no different if they have to travel to a registered office or an airport to enforce a High Court writ. They will go where assets are, in order to get some leverage.

From memory the debt in the programme was only for four figures.

And no, in reality you issue small claims court proceedings, which leads to enforcement if you win and they dont settle up.

lisyloo

Which entity do you issue proceedings against if there is no UK company?

la531983

lisyloo said:

Which entity do you issue proceedings against if there is no UK company?

Well this is the issue being discussed in the thread, Im merely stating they can and indeed do go to airports.

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1494396347580717

My mistake, it was the programme on C5 that came after CP,WTIA, but the point still stands.