Question about charges when a CCJ exists

[alanfromderby]

I would like some opinions (well I would prefer a definitive answer actually), about the situation where a bank has obtained a CCJ, and an order exists for repayment at a specified amount per month.

 

It is a fact that a large percentage of the original debt was made up of penalty charges, however the account in question was closed in 1999, and the CCJ obtained in 2002.

 

A letter has been sent to the banks solicitors concerned stating that the original amount is disputed, and a DPA has been sent ot the bank concerned. However, I foresee several problems:

 

1) The charges are more than 6 years ago.

2) The bank will almost certainly not have the data.

3) The debt has been established - albeit by default.

 

Assuming that number 1 is irrelevant, as per discussions elsewhere, that leaves a difficult legal situation. My questions are these:

 

a) Is there a time limitation on a request for setting aside a judgement?

 

If no, then problem solved.

If yes:

 

b) If I was to refuse to continue payments, effectively forcing them to issue a warrent - would I then be able to challenge the issue of the warrant, on the basis that the original judgement was faulty?

 

If yes, again, problem solved.

If no:

 

c) Am I just stuck with having to pay this money - even though clearly most of it was unlawfully levied, or is there something I am missing?

 

Your advice comments would be much appreciated.

[BotB]

I think the problem you have in getting the judgement set aside after this length of time is overcoming the principle of finality in litigation i.e. a case once decided cannot be reopened. Its not impossible of course otherwise we wouldn't ever be able to appeal against anything. But the difficulty shouldn't be underestimated. Endless litigation is not encouraged by the Courts.

Even in proximity to the date of the judgement, one is required to have good reasons for applying to set aside e.g. claim not served otherwise it is a discretionary remedy that won't be exercised lightly.

Also, if the evidence had been obtainable for the original hearing but was not collected and presented to the Court, basically that's tough luck for the person who now wants to rely on it.

The analogy to your situation is that whilst reclaiming bank charges is high profile now in 2006, there's nothing new happened since 1999 or 2002 that would suggest these very same arguments about penalty charges could not have been put then.

 

Well not a helpful opinion from your point of view unfortunately but I can't see a way around it.

[alanfromderby]

This topic was closed on 10 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group