Limitations Act and Bankruptcy

[buggaluggs]

Can someone answer my question please.

 

 

Under s.24 of the limitations act, does Bankruptcy come under the term 'action' with regard to judgements over 6 years old.

 

 

I have been told by national debt line that Bankruptcy is not covered under the limitations act and a creditor can make someone bankrupt at any time, regardless of the time elapsed after judgment.

[unclebulgaria67]

As far as I understand it, a creditor with a CCJ has 6 years to enforce payment of their debt. The CCJ does not die at the 6th year anniversary as such, but to use the CCJ after 6 years, they would have to go back to court to ask for more time to enforce payment. This could include using bankruptcy. But all that I have read is that courts don't normally allow more than 6 years for enforcement.

 

How many cases have you read of a CCJ being used say 10 years later to make someone bankrupt ? I can't recall reading any.

[buggaluggs]

I have not heard of it happening but national debt line assure me it can as bankruptcy is not classed as new action.

[unclebulgaria67]

I have not heard of it happening but national debt line assure me it can as bankruptcy is not classed as new action.

 

Yes it appears they are correct when it relates to a court judgement, where enforcement has yet to be carried out.

 

Below is the relevant appeal court case which appears to be the main precedent, which I am sure you will enjoy reading. I am not convinced that creditors will try to go down the bankruptcy route after 6 years of no enforcement, because it may not be that straightfoward if any statutory demand is applied to be set aside or the bankruptcy petition is properly challenged. Debt collection agencies and creditors must get legal advice on such cases and if they were routinely going for bankruptcy after 6 years of non payment of a CCJ, it would be reported on CAG and elsewhere.

 

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2005/92.html