Full and Final on a Joint Account - Statute Bar on Second Party?

[sutherland]

I have agreed a settlement on an account with a DCA for a joint bank/credit card account. Their letter, however, says that they may pursue other parties for the balance remaining after I have settled. The last time I made a payment to this account was probably about 1 year ago and the second party to the account has never made a payment and never been in touch with them.

 

My question is, do we need a clearer assurance that they will not pursue the second party to the account, or could they do not so anyway as the account defaulted six years ago and they would be statute barred (5yrs here in Scotland) from pursuing the second party even although I have made payments within the last 5 years?

 

Hope that makes sense.

Edited June 2, 2009 by sutherland

[dx100uk]

i dont think it matters 'who' pays on a joint a/c, it will still be deemed as a monetary transcation in respect to statute barring.

 

is this agreement in writing & how long ago?

what has prompted your post now if you have heard nowt in 1yr?

 

dx

[sutherland]

The letter accepting my offer of settlement has just arrived and is valid for another fortnight or so. If it doesn't matter who pays in respect to statute barring, should the same not apply to settlement? Could they actually split liability in this way?

 

Over the last year I've been negotiating and had someone negotiating on my behalf. They've been refusing everything until now.

[I've got no money]

Interesting situation.

 

Assuming that the agreement is enforceable

 

It is likely to have joint and several liability which means that they can accept a full and final settlement from you but then pursue the other party for the balance

 

HOWEVER Don't forget that the other party may then potentially have claim for an indemnity from you in respect of some/all of the amount claimed by the Creditor. If, for example, it was a joint credit card and you were the only person who ever used it then they could possible claim a full indemnity from you. If, however, it was a loan used for a joint purpose then they may be able to claim up to a half of the total amount (depending how much they paid). It all depends on the specific facts

[sutherland]

The agreement is almost certainly enforceable.

 

The other party won't sue me, but I certainly don't want them to get sued.

 

On another thing that they have sent to my agent they have simply written 'Your client's offer...in settlement of this account has been accepted.' Given that that wording just refers to 'this account' I wonder if that would restrict their ability to pursue a second party in the future? The settlement would of course be made by a third party with an accompanying letter saying it is made on the understanding that neither they nor anyone else would pursue me or any other party in any way whatsoever.

[I've got no money]

I'm afraid that I'd need to see all of the correspondence before I could really form a proper view - I thought you'd said that they had already expressly reserved the right to pursue the other party

 

"Their letter, however, says that they may pursue other parties for the balance remaining after I have settled. "

[sutherland]

I did say that. That's what they wrote in a letter to me, but in a letter to the money advisor acting on my behalf, they made no statement about pursuing other parties.