Charging Order/Warrant for Possessiongreenspun.com : LUSENET : Repossession : One Thread
I have been pursued by PSPC No 1 for some time regarding a shortfall relating to a property I left 11 years ago, and was unaware had been repossessed.
PSPC are now the clients of Facility Trading Services (who are trading from the same address so I must assume they are one and the same...), and have written to tell me that they have obtained a Monetary Judgement at the repossession hearing. They tell me that, while it is up to their client what they do with this, I might want to settle this 'amicably' by calling them and filling in a Statement of Earnings.
Failure to do this, they tell me could result in one of three things:
- a charging order being obtained against any property currently owned - An attachment of earnings - A warrant for possession for goods for the value of the debt
I have heard of attachment of earnings, but believed it rare that they would either take property or goods.
Is this correct. I haven't answered their letter - I have never in fact replied to them and they seem to pursue me in August each year, hassle and threaten for a few months (even telling me they would call round) and then leave it until the next August.
They aren't even writing to me at my own address - somehow they have an address of a relative with whom I have never lived!
Is this company bonafide - do they work for Citibank, or have they merely bought this debt??
-- [Edited] (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 01, 2000
As far as I can tell, Facility Trading Services is PSPC No 1 and PSPC No 1 does or did work for Citibank. (It also worked for Paragon/National Home Loans).
You are being contacted each August because you are entered in an electronic diary that reminds them to pursue you once a year.
Most debt collectors favour an attachment of earnings. This is one of the reasons they are less willing to take the self-employed to court - you can't get an attachment of earnings applied to a self-empoyed sole trader.
You haven't said if this new letter is phrased differently to previous letters. Ie, if they have stepped up the threats. I'd be inclined to ignore it until you see some signs that they are putting their money where their mouth is, at which point you should start to exercise your rights as carefully and sometimes repetitively detailed elsewhere on this site.
-- Lee (email@example.com), September 01, 2000.
If the property was repossessed 11 years ago you are almost "home and dry" so I'd suggest holding out. We told PSPC we didn't have anything to give them so they would have to sue us (we live in council property now) to which they replied that they wouldn't be "BLACKMAILED" by us and wanted to reach an amicable agreement - hence taking us to court didn't seem to be part of their agenda. We agreed to pay a small sum every month until 12 years from the repossession date was up (Nov 2002). We are currently 5 months behind with these payments and they are now writing again. I have been in touch with my MP who is going to pass my letter to the Lord Chancellors Dept. At the end of the day they can't have what you haven't got. I have stated before that had I known about this website sooner I would have been a lot braver in dealing with the collection agency - they can be very intimidating. Good luck Sue Gates
-- sue gates (firstname.lastname@example.org), September 02, 2000.