CCJ aged over 6 years

[bigshoes...bigsocks]

Hi guys

Just a quick question...

 

I have a CCJ aged over 6 years old which no company has ever tried to collect

until recently

 

- I sent the SB letter and received a response saying that the debt was subject to an order and wasn't SB.

 

I'm sure I've read on this site that in order for the CCJ to be collected on they would have to apply back to the court to get it re-instated.

Is this true or have I made it up?

 

I'm receiving various letters from a DCA regarding this,

who has passed it on to another DCA,

so I'm thinking it's not currently valid as they'd have me otherwise with no comeback from me.

 

Do I write them a letter telling them to do one unless they go back to court and explain to the judge, and me,

why it took 6+years to try to collect on the debt?

Thanks

 

BSBS.

[sequenci]

Hello there.

 

The general rule is that 6 years is long enough for them to enforce the judgment.

For bailiff action there are rules built into the legislation (civil procedure rules) that puts a 6year limit on such an application being made.

All other enforcement measures have a hearing - the time delay can raised then.

There is plenty of case law that works in your favour - UNLESS they have tried to enforce the debt during the 6 years.

[postmn]

from what other people in the know have posted . they do have to apply to a court and come up with a very good reason why it was not collected over the 6 years . have you moved addfresses in that time ?

[fkofilee]

Who the original creditor and who is chasing?

[bigshoes...bigsocks]

The chasers were Lowells approx 3months ago, who I sent the SB letter to, and they've passed it on to BCW to collect on their behalf - offering very generous 90% discounts...

 

Neither are the original creditor nor the company who sneaked the CCJ through Northampton CC via my old address.

[renegadeimp]

The debt is a bad debt, and they are trying to trick you into paying. Send them the Statute barred letter and tell them to bog off.

[42man]

Interesting, so you told Lowells it was statute barred and they have passed it on...please report this to Polly.Ashford@oft.gsi.gov .uk (without the space)

[brokebutnotbeatn]

As it is subject to a CCJ it cannot be SBd. So when was the CCJ obtained?

[Annie71]

From my own experience they will not chase you after a certain period. It is neither a bad debt nor SB

[renegadeimp]

WHile the CCJ isnt Statute barred, it is very very very unlikley it can ever be collected upon. Lowells know this and have sold it on regardless instead of closing the file. A full complaint MUST be made about this.

[Annie71]

If I read it correctly they have not sold it on. It is being collected on their behalf. I do agree that it would be difficult for them to collect. I really don't understand why a complaint on this is even useful. It would clog the system for real complaints

[renegadeimp]

It doesnt matter. Once the creditor has been informed of the status of the debt, they must mark the file as such and cease collection activites. Failure to do so lands them in violation of OFT guidelines on debt collection and their credit licence. As i said earlier, a complaint MUST be made, both to the DCA and the regulators.

[the tinkerman]

Hi All

 

been reading this with interest and speaking from experience a CCJ is never status barred and there is nothing at all to stop a creditor

or DCA going back to court to resurrect such and be substituted as the new claimant as mine was after a 10 year period to

 

but a DCA took me back to court and the Judge stated that regardless of the length of time it has taken the DCA to take this matter back to court

and to be substituted as the new claimant as the original CCJ was still in the old claimants name his words were:

 

"THAT DOES NOT DETRACT FROM FACT THAT I STILL OWE THE MONEY"

and had no problem at all in granting them the substitution and a CO to boot and

 

believe me I fought tooth and nail quoting all laws available to me regarding this issue and spent month upon month building what I thought was a concrete defense

 

but all fell on deaf ears in court and just to add insult to injury I then also got hammered with costs.

 

What appears to be the Law and the Judges interpretation of the law are two completely animals

hence the saying the law is an ass,

 

just speaking from own experience,

 

plenty people on this site said i just got a bad judge

but I replied to that by saying

"show me one thread on this site that has challenged these issues about length of time given to resurrect a CCJ

and to be substituted as the new claimant,

whom have been to court and won"

and I am still awaiting a reply (

that was about a year ago)

all I am saying is please tread carefully.

[renegadeimp]

Enforcement of a CCJ is only granted in very limited circumstances. The CCJ can still be passed on to multiple creditors. However, since enforcement orders cannot be given, the creditor under oft guidelines ( i wish they were regulations), should close the account and mark it as such.

[dx100uk]

If a judgement has not been enforced for 6 years from the date of judgement, Then under section 24 of The statute of limitations Act 1980 the creditor would have quite a hard time trying for further enforcement action

 

Time limit for actions to enforce judgments

 

(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.

[sequenci]

If a judgement has not been enforced for 6 years from the date of judgement, Then under section 24 of The statute of limitations Act 1980 the creditor would have quite a hard time trying for further enforcement action

 

Time limit for actions to enforce judgments

 

(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.

 

s24 has nothing to do with the enforcement of existing judgments, it's to do with the right to bring a new action based on the existing judgment - see Lamb and Sons v Rider and Lowsley v Forbes.

 

There is statutory provision within the civil procedure rules, though, to prohibit the use of bailiffs and plenty of case law to argue the time limit for all other forms of enforcement - see Duer v Frazer, Patel v Singh. It's only where the claimant has been trying to enforce over the years would further action be granted - see The Society of Lloyds v Longtin.

[Annie71]

These seems to show that a little knowledge can be very dangerous. "Have a hard time" is not the same as "would be legally unable". Equally saying the owner of the debt is breaching oft rules appears to be wrong. This could lead the op into believing they are home free which may not be the case.

In my opinion it is unlikelyvthey will try to enforce but not impossible so prudent action is called for.

 

Just a side note. Never believe someones qualifaications unless proven. One forum had a so called retired employment law barrister who it appears was nothing of the sort, another encourages posters to send out entirely false letters particularly to PDL companies and lets not forget the twaddle Ceylon and co peddle.

[sequenci]

I agree Annie.

 

I do indeed have formal training, and have a very sound knowledge of limitations issues; especially in relation to consumer debt. That said, this is a forum - and everyone is welcome to post their thoughts and opinions. It's down to our users to consider their options - and to seek further advice if they feel that they are still unsure. CAG cannot provide qualified advice, of course, and I certainly say that there is often wrong or conflicting advice being given out - occasionally via the Site Team itself. The fact is, though, unless the creditor has attempted to enfore the judgment within the 6 time they *will* find it difficult to convince the court to grant permission.

 

I do agree absolutely with you say though, we often see people on CAG mislead people as to their credentials.

[Annie71]

Sequenci, thanks for the response. I would agree that they would/might/may have a hard time but it is still a possibilty. I appreciate that this is a forum and on the whole there is great advice and often several different but valid ways of dealing with things. What worries me at times is the feeling that someone with only a few posts like myself has their opinion dismissed by more long standing posters. I am very much a what if glass half empty sort of person so if someone says ignore it or they don't have a leg to stand on then I like to know why?

[the tinkerman]

HEAR HEAR Well put Sequenci

 

Don't get me wrong I think this site is the best thing since sliced bread and have learned loads from it, but trouble is when you cannot afford a solicitor, as in my case would have cost me £21,000 to take on my case so I went it alone and just being your standard Joe Bloggs against a solicitor whom most of them know the Judges anyway, even when the Law states otherwise and you think you have a concrete defence, 99% of the time the Judges always seems to side with the claimant regardless of what the Law states hence I ended up with a CO and substantial costs against me and was told in no uncertain terms that if I wanted to challenge his decision it would be at a cost hence the saying "the Law is an Ass" no truer words said.

 

All I am trying to say to people is I have been their and done it and would consider myself to be a pretty litigant person, that said it was not a very nice experience at all and could tip plenty people over the edge, but fortunately I am a strong willed person and I managed to come out the other side.

 

IMOO my advice is if you are going it alone even if the Law appears to be on your side don't think it is going to be a cake walk if a claimant take's you to court because it won't be, better to be forewarned than forearmed.

 

Tinks

 

PS

 

MY sentiment exactly Annie71

 

Nice to see the little people standing up and being counted, ifs, buts, maybes, - would/might/may count for not allot when your stood in front of a Judge.

Edited August 6, 2013 by the tinkerman

[Greentea]

HEAR HEAR Well put Sequenci

 

Don't get me wrong I think this site is the best thing since sliced bread and have learned loads from it, but trouble is when you cannot afford a solicitor, as in my case would have cost me £21,000 to take on my case so I went it alone and just being your standard Joe Bloggs against a solicitor whom most of them know the Judges anyway, even when the Law states otherwise and you think you have a concrete defence, 99% of the time the Judges always seems to side with the claimant regardless of what the Law states hence I ended up with a CO and substantial costs against me and was told in no uncertain terms that if I wanted to challenge his decision it would be at a cost hence the saying "the Law is an Ass" no truer words said.

 

All I am trying to say to people is I have been their and done it and would consider myself to be a pretty litigant person, that said it was not a very nice experience at all and could tip plenty people over the edge, but fortunately I am a strong willed person and I managed to come out the other side.

 

IMOO my advice is if you are going it alone even if the Law appears to be on your side don't think it is going to be a cake walk if a claimant take's you to court because it won't be, better to be forewarned than forearmed.

 

Tinks

 

PS

 

MY sentiment exactly Annie71

 

Nice to see the little people standing up and being counted, ifs, buts, maybes, - would/might/may count for not allot when your stood in front of a Judge.

 

Tinks was your CCJ for a large amount therefore making it worth while for them to take you to court. Do you think they would take someone to court for less than £700.00:?:

[sequenci]

Sequenci, thanks for the response. I would agree that they would/might/may have a hard time but it is still a possibilty. I appreciate that this is a forum and on the whole there is great advice and often several different but valid ways of dealing with things. What worries me at times is the feeling that someone with only a few posts like myself has their opinion dismissed by more long standing posters. I am very much a what if glass half empty sort of person so if someone says ignore it or they don't have a leg to stand on then I like to know why?

 

In my view, someone with just one post has just as much to give as someone with 15,000 posts. Of course, as posts build up we can find out a lot about that poster's knowledge - but we should never dismiss anyone with few posts.

 

Should a claimant try and enforce the judgment it would be vital to raise either the CPR rules (for bailiff warrants) or the cases I've posted up.

[Annie71]

Thank you sequenci. Greentea, who knows. There will be a variety of factors they could look at. If they believe you have the assets maybe, if you haven't a pot to p*** in then I would have thought less likely.

 

There are of course solicitors that take cases on no win no fee but not sure what the criteria are or even where to look.

[sequenci]

The court will be more interested in the time. It's completely inequitable to allow enforcement after such a long period. Those cases I've posted up are worth a read - remember that they are binding on the lower courts.

 

In all these years I've not personally come across a single case where judgment was obtained over 6 years ago and further action then granted by the court. Of course, this is simply based upon what I've come across - That said no-one else in my organisation has seen it happen either.

[Annie71]

Sorry I wasn't suggesting the court would vary based on the amount just that the creditor might vary efforts on a commercial basis. I will try to have a read