Pursued in NZ by NZ DCA for UK debt

[cerberusalert]

If the CCJ was made whilst you were living in England/Wales under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933 (c.13) they could take enforcement through the NZ system, however if they obtained a judgement when you were a non England/Wales resident that judgement will be invalid.

[podling89]

Re: Pursued in NZ by NZ DCA for UK debt

 

If the CCJ was made whilst you were living in England/Wales under the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933 (c.13) they could take enforcement through the NZ system, however if they obtained a judgement when you were a non England/Wales resident that judgement will be invalid.

 

So they can't take a judgment in England/Wales now I'm resident in NZ, as it would be invalid.

 

Instead, can they just say well we'll take one out in NZ then, and not bother with one in UK, bypassing the 1933 Act. Would that be valid, considering the law governing the Credit Card and the CCA 1974 is UK based. I was told that if I'm not a resident of England/Wales then you would be ineligible to apply for the card as it applies only to residents of England?Wales. For example I can guarantee if you were a kiwi wanting a UK credit card you have to be resident in the UK? Thanks.

[cerberusalert]

Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933 (c.13)

4

Cases in which registered judgments must, or may, be set aside

 

 

(1)

On an application in that behalf duly made by any party against whom a registered judgment may be enforced, the registration of the judgment—

 

 

 

(a)

shall be set aside if the registering court is satisfied—

 

 

 

(i)

that the judgment is not a judgment to which this Part of this Act applies or was registered in contravention of the foregoing provisions of this Act; or

 

 

 

(ii)

that the courts of the country of the original court had no jurisdiction in the circumstances of the case; or

 

 

 

(iii)

that the judgment debtor, being the defendant in the proceedings in the original court, did not (notwithstanding that process may have been duly served on him in accordance with the law of the country of the original court) receive notice of those proceedings in sufficient time to enable him to defend the proceedings and did not appear; or

 

 

 

(iv)

that the judgment was obtained by fraud; or

 

 

 

(v)

that the enforcement of the judgment would be contrary to public policy in the country of the registering court; or

 

 

 

(vi)

that the rights under the judgment are not vested in the person by whom the application for registration was made;

 

 

 

(b)

may be set aside if the registering court is satisfied that the matter in dispute in the proceedings in the original court had previously to the date of the judgment in the original court been the subject of a final and conclusive judgment by a court having jurisdiction in the matter.

 

[spamheed]

This is a debt which is governed by UK law and cannot be enforced under NZ law unless it has first been taken through the UK courts, the reciprical enforcements legislation was brought into being to prevent debtors from escaping the reach of the UK legal system, since this debt has never been through the UK legal system, then it is not covered by the legislation.

 

Neither the UK based, nor NZ based DCA can do a thing.

 

If they attempt to enforce this debt through the NZ courts in the first instance, any judgement would be invalid because the agreement entered into is UK legislated and cannot be enforced by a foreign court.

 

If they attempt to enforce through the UK courts in the first instance and at the current time, any judgement would be ninvalid because you are now domiciled in NZ and they know it and you can now prove that they know it

[Pinky69]

I don't know the specifics of procedures - you would need someone who had knowledge of international law. One thing I am sure of is that HSBC will know what is possible as they are an international bank and will have done this before. There have been a few cases on here of debts being pursued in places like France. I only raised the point as something you should be aware of and might be something you would want to look into in the future.

[dannyboy660]

Can they do this in NZ as the agreement with XXX was a UK 1974 CCA signed agreement, I remember it - and I guess only legally enforceable in the UK. Or now that the debt has been sold (I'm guessing here) does that then become automatically enforceable in New Zealand?

 

Do I reply at all, or is that giving them what they need?

 

Do I just ignore it? Do I return envelopes back marked not at this address??

 

OR;

 

do I fire off the CCA request, subject access request letters (as on here) and state that as the debt was signed under UK law as a UK resident it is not enforceable here in NZ and they must comply & that they have no ability to cllect this under NZ law. Do they have to have registration under UK CCA to to do this. They don't even put the card acc number on their letters.

 

Does the OC have to gain CCJ in the UK first, then the NZ DCA 'domesticate' the debt' before it can be collected here?

 

cca '74 ALWAYS gives jurisdiction to UK County Courts or the High Court - check s.141.

 

If you move abroad - no ccj = no worries - especially if you completed R85 for HMRC before you bade your "last farewells". If you return within 6 years the law may be slightly different for 'other debts' ie secured.

 

If an NZ (or any other) DCA is bothering you, the best thing you can do is ignore them.

Deal with your OC if you can/want to, or I'll bet you a pound of Poo they sold it for pennies in a batch of securitised debt and they are just looking to squeeze your colon.............

[podling89]

I have to say that all this advice is so much appreciated, I never knew people could be so helpful. Thanks everyone, I will tip the scales for all and leave a donation as well. I bet the banks and DCAs hate this website...

 

So, is the consensus that I send the prove it letter, or ignore it and see what happens next - which according to them is legal action.

[hillards]

...which according to them is legal action.

No - the important word is missing - MAY be legal action. It's a much-loved word by DCA's the world over it seems, using that and COULD helps them to produce some really convincing letters, until people learn how to read them for what they really are of couse... ;-)

 

DCA's love to make their own laws, which they then pass on to the alleged debtor as fact. They seem to think that they can despatch bailiffs or deduct payment from salaries, without needing to take the matter before a judge.

 

It is sad that many of their employees will actually believe the rubbish they are told in training. But, if they don't know any better, they are bound to try and enforce it on the people they harass daily..

 

I just don't have patience with them any more and rather than waste time with silly questions, or arguing over my refusal to deal with them, I just ask them to take the matter to court and I'll see them there. I'm quite happy to present my case, showing that the DCA does not have a leg to stand on.

 

Just a pity that the law is not upheld very often. That the OFT and FSO cannot cope with the amount of complaints they get. That trading standards are often not accessible to the public. That organisations like CAB are not clued up enough on these matters. That debt management companies are usually set up to make debtors pay every penny, no matter how long it takes. Oh, I could go on!

[twofoot]

Have said it earlier and I'll say it again. It is very unlikely the debt can or will be enforced in NZ. IMHO I'd just ignore them. I wouldn't waste a stamp on it as you will just be prolonging the outcome. They will eventually drop the debt so the sooner the better.

[pebsham]

One thing I am sure of is that HSBC will know what is possible as they are an international bank and will have done this before.

 

Banks knowing the law & applying it correctly? Hmmmmm let me think.............. Nah not likely is it?

 

They are more likely to try to take you to court in NZ using the little known 1900 Big Corrupt Corporation Bullying (the little guy) Act Section 3a(i) & (ii) and sec. 1, 2 &16 subsection (1ie).

[sillygirl1]

Pursuing debts in France and Spain comes under European legislation, that doesn't cover New Zealand. I wonder if New Zealand law allows for 'licenced field agents' to collect alleged and disputed debts from peoples homes as they claim to be able to do in the UK.

 

A certain DCA has sent me a "Pre-Bailiff Assessment Visit" letter and been sent the appropriate letter in return - for the second time in 18 months.

 

Perhaps somebody at the DCA is hoping for a 'working holiday' in NZ collecting their alleged and disputed debts.

[Pinky69]

No one said this was covered by European legislation. It is covered by legislation pertaining to Commonwealth countries, of which NZ is one. I merely pointed this out to the poster as something to be aware of - I didn't say it would happen.

[dannyboy660]

Cross border legal action for recovery of unsecured Consumer debt is incredibly rare, whether you are in Bordeaux or Borneo.

Unless it is a sizeable outstanding amount and they can account for every penny (including the tax element), it just isn't worthwhile. Then there's the problem of having all the correct paperwork etc etc......

 

Recent EU legislation coupled with CCA2006 has made it easier to chase people in EU member states, but even then the debt has to be 'uncontested' and preferably with Judgement already in place. Many countries, EU or otherwise, will only enforce a judgement if it is in favour of the original creditor, not a third party purchaser.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/178767-chaasing-debt-abroad.html

 

Think carefully before you request CCA now - it would be much better to wait until the Court stage where they have to produce within 12 days, or it fails. You should also request to see the original UK court Judgement as you didn't have the chance to challenge it. It's surprising how quickly they disappear if you know the magic words. ;-)

 

Good luck.

[cerberusalert]

dannyboy660 According to the OP in post #6 there isn't a CCJ in place anyway & as I said in earlier posts unless he is resident in England/Wales they can't get one. Any debt collector who tries it on hasn't got a leg to stand on now whichever court they threaten to use.

[spamheed]

I really wouldn't stress over this one, treat the NZ DCA like the pirates they are, if you let them then they will have money off you, if you don't then legally there is nothing they can do, however, if the UK bottom feeders are anything to go by, then they will more than likely continue to send threatening letters without any real activity.

 

I wonder if those NZ letters and threats are valid even if not read by you?

[dannyboy660]

dannyboy660 According to the OP in post #6 there isn't a CCJ in place anyway & as I said in earlier posts unless he is resident in England/Wales they can't get one. Any debt collector who tries it on hasn't got a leg to stand on now whichever court they threaten to use.

 

I'm sorry - I have to confess I only skimmed through the posts and didn't read everything in great detail......but you're right there's nothing to worry about here.

 

There also something about after living abroad for 3 years or more after your declaration of non-residency to HMRC renders the debt unenforceable (including some judgements) as in most countries the Limitations is 3 years. The OC can pursue, but third parties can't. I was trying to find something to back that up........but it's far too early for me with the complicated stuff