Reply to: IQ Contracts - Statutory demand

[creativity]

How will you make Felicitas pay anything if they withdraw before going to court?

As I said in my post if they withdraw you cant. If it goes to judge you claim expenses.
Ideally 5k of expenses, that way you can send them an SD...

[Fred Bloggs]

Felicitas will likely drop the case before August. If not please ensure that you charge Felicitas with expenses when the judge confirms the SD to be set aside. Make sure to include all expenses, including stress, make it a few grand.

How will you make Felicitas pay anything if they withdraw before going to court?

[creativity]

Has anybody sucessfully challanged these Statutory Demands. I've currently submitted all the necessasry paperwork and evidence to challange the demand through my solicitor. A judge has reviewed these and determined that there is a case for the demand to be set asside and has scheduled a hearing date in August but in the meantime was wondering if anybody has already gone through the process and what the outcome was?

Felicitas will likely drop the case before August. If not please ensure that you charge Felicitas with expenses when the judge confirms the SD to be set aside. Make sure to include all expenses, including stress, make it a few grand.

[Nic53]

IQ Contracts - Statutory Demand

Has anybody sucessfully challanged these Statutory Demands. I've currently submitted all the necessasry paperwork and evidence to challange the demand through my solicitor. A judge has reviewed these and determined that there is a case for the demand to be set asside and has scheduled a hearing date in August but in the meantime was wondering if anybody has already gone through the process and what the outcome was?

[eek]

I don't think it is as simple as that Fred. My understanding is that the debt must be first proved in an IOM Court. Once judgement has been given, an application can be made to a non IOM Court for the debt to be recognized elsewhere. Remember IOM Courts don't allow no win/no fee arrangements. If they want to go to Court, they'll have to pay their lawyers up front.

As a previous Litigant on an unrelated matter I can tell you how sobering it is when the lawyer tells you "you are my client and you are personally responsible for payment of my fees. If we win your case, the other side may be liable for your legal costs however before we begin, you need to understand that you are my client and you are personally responsible for payment of my fees".

The correct way of doing it is for the debt to be disputed in an IoM court and then (if Felicitas won) they could go to the UK High Court to recover payment.

Felicitas are simply bypassing all that by abusing Statutory Demands to force immediate payment - because as you point out going to court costs money (especially in the IoM and Felicitas are arrogant cheapstakes).

Now a Statutory Demand can be easily stopped - you just need to say you dispute the debt is owed but if you don't dispute it it's very hard to then argue that you don't owe the money.

[piebaps]

It's absolutely astonishing to imagine that debt in the IoM can be legitimised in the UK as simply as this? It's hard to believe, but in this saga, there's a stream of endless surprises.

I don't think it is as simple as that Fred. My understanding is that the debt must be first proved in an IOM Court. Once judgement has been given, an application can be made to a non IOM Court for the debt to be recognized elsewhere. Remember IOM Courts don't allow no win/no fee arrangements. If they want to go to Court, they'll have to pay their lawyers up front.

As a previous Litigant on an unrelated matter I can tell you how sobering it is when the lawyer tells you "you are my client and you are personally responsible for payment of my fees. If we win your case, the other side may be liable for your legal costs however before we begin, you need to understand that you are my client and you are personally responsible for payment of my fees".

[Fred Bloggs]

Nope they are throwing them out there and hoping people ignore it.

As if ignored a Statutory Demand becomes a valid debt requiring repayment.

It's absolutely astonishing to imagine that debt in the IoM can be legitimised in the UK as simply as this? It's hard to believe, but in this saga, there's a stream of endless surprises.

[eek]

yes they are basically just throwing these out there and hoping someone will pay up

Nope they are throwing them out there and hoping people ignore it.

As if ignored a Statutory Demand becomes a valid debt requiring repayment.

[mickeyslondon]

+1. But I think that it's more than 'can't hurt'.

It's formally showing that SD's are being abused, so add that to your dispute.

yes they are basically just throwing these out there and hoping someone will pay up

[cojak]

It means it was not submitted. Send it to the other court.

The statory demand is nonsense anyway. But your set aside demand can't hurt.

+1. But I think that it's more than 'can't hurt'.

It's formally showing that SD's are being abused, so add that to your dispute.

[BrilloPad]

i sent my Set aside demand to the court stated on the statutory demand felicitas sent to me ........I got a reply from the court stating that they do not cover my postcode region and that the creditor misled you and informed you of the wrong court... they said i should resend my set aside dispute to the court they mentioned.

Does this mean that the statutory demand they sent is now null and void?

It means it was not submitted. Send it to the other court.

The statory demand is nonsense anyway. But your set aside demand can't hurt.

[mickeyslondon]

wrong court address on my statatory demand

i sent my Set aside demand to the court stated on the statutory demand felicitas sent to me ........I got a reply from the court stating that they do not cover my postcode region and that the creditor misled you and informed you of the wrong court... they said i should resend my set aside dispute to the court they mentioned.

Does this mean that the statutory demand they sent is now null and void?

[cojak]

And if people didn't go to my link...

If the scheme was based in the IoM and you don’t consider it a loan, then you can just dispute based on that.

Look here at how to challenge: Make and serve a statutory demand, or challenge one : Challenge a statutory demand - GOV.UK

And here is form IAA... Form IAA: Apply to the court about an insolvency issue ('application notice') - GOV.UK

How to apply
Download and fill in form IAA.

Make 3 copies of the completed form and either post them to the court named on your statutory demand or give them to the court in person.

What happens next
You’ll usually hear back from the court within 10 working days of applying.

If the court does not agree with your application, it can give the creditor permission to issue a bankruptcy petition against you.

If the court agrees with your application, your case will be passed on to a bankruptcy registrar. They’ll look at your case and arrange a hearing.

What happens at the hearing
Both sides will present their case to a registrar or judge. They’ll either make a decision then, or ask you and the other party to give more evidence at another hearing.

You’ll usually get a decision at the end of the final hearing.

If you win your case, you’ll get an order from the court setting aside the statutory demand. The deadline for paying the debt will be suspended.

If you lose, you’ll have to pay back your debt within the 21 day time limit. The creditor can apply to bankrupt you if you do not pay in time and your debt is £5,000 or more.

Just to note, set-asides are the only things we’ve heard about in these types of cases. It’s almost as if judges are annoyed at SD’s being abused in such a fashion...

[eek]

If there is only WTT in town to help us, can't they deal with all of us at once? Instead of billing each of us individually for a case that seems to be the same for everyone?

It feels like contractor get to pay hmrc, felicitas, the court fees and legal fees. Like feeding everyone to abuse...

Perhaps you should have read my entire post

If you wish to contest the loan in an IoM court or tribunal chances are WTT are the only game in town.

And I say that as ETC walked away after convincing people not to take the 5% offer that was on the table. And yes I would prefer people didn't have to spend money but 5% and no hassle compared to continual, additional, hassles, court costs and the risk of 100% seemed a good deal given what I discovered.

If all you want to do is dispute the demand you can use a solicitor or even do it yourself. But were this to go any further you will need to contest things in an IoM court..

[piebaps]

If there is only WTT in town to help us, can't they deal with all of us at once? Instead of billing each of us individually for a case that seems to be the same for everyone?

It feels like contractor get to pay hmrc, felicitas, the court fees and legal fees. Like feeding everyone to abuse...

WTT aren't the only game in Town. Any competent solicitor should be able to advise on a statutory demand. WTT however have very specific expertise in the workings of mass marketed tax avoidance schemes. Grab a brew and read through the various threads. There is some "anti-WTT" feeling too. I haven't used them and can't say they're good or bad. One of their main men Graham Webber was a regular poster on here until comparatively recently, and IMHO he was extremely helpful and was never pushy about WTT's services.

Read into that what you will.