13 year old unpaid CDL

[lordzaz]

I had a CDL with Barclays via Computeach back in 1999, paid the deposit, started the course but cancelled within 6 months or so with Computeach. They verbally said they would sort out the CDL on my behalf due to my circumstances and i didnt hear another word about it - till today.

 

I cant recall ever having made a repayment on the loan itself, indeed the relevant bank statements were discarded just 3 weeks ago so i cant now check, funny timing. I did have a CCJ around the time but for the life of me i cant recall what it was for, could be any number of things at the time when i was terrible with money.

 

Anyhoo, assuming the worst case scenario where i didnt make any payment on the CDL itself, didnt have a CCJ because of it and cant show any documents regarding the course/loan any more (it has been 13 years) where do i stand with Barclays now they have taken a new interest in the debt ? I would never have received the letter if i didnt know the current occupier of my previous address.

 

Oh and, Hi ! - first post

[dx100uk]

cdl?

 

it'll be statute barred

 

dx

[cerberusalert]

With regards to the CCJ a CCJ doesn't become SB, but unless they enforce it within six years they will have to apply to a court for permission to do so however;

 

Section 24 of the Limitations Act 1980....

 

(1) An action shall not be brought upon any judgment after the expiration of six years from the date on which the judgment became enforceable.

 

(2) No arrears of interest in respect of any judgment debt shall be recovered after the expiration of six years from the date on which the interest became due.

 

For this reason alone, cc judges would not normally allow enforcement.

 

There is case law to suggest that 6 years is enough time for a claimant to enforce a judgment debt. In Patel v Singh [2002] EWCA Civ 1938 and Duer v Frazer [2001] 1 All ER 249 leave to enforce these debts were both refused.

 

The reason being is that it was held that the general rule is that the passing of six years is sufficient in itself and the court would not extend time unless their were exceptional circumstances and it is demonstrably just to do so. It would be for the creditor to argue the reasons for delay and argue why they should take the case out of the general rule.