Husband facing custodial sentence - what about debts?

JimBobJones

tinkerbell28 wrote: »

Especially when the so called "expert" has already given incorrect information. Saying a CCJ would be statute barred.

I think I just mis-worded that post, I'm multi tasking and as a man this is impossible; I meant it would be SB if they didn't go down that avenue after 6 years, unlikely. Apologies. A pending review CCJ does indeed carry the same judgement as any other CCJ.

tinkerbell28

Considering you thought a CCJ could be statute barred, I think it you who lacks the knowledge and op would be best advised to ignore your so called experience.

It was pretty clear what you wrote. You said it twice.

JimBobJones

tinkerbell28 wrote: »

It was pretty clear what you wrote. You said it twice.

No, it was bad wording, I said at the bottom they'd apply for the CCJ anyway in this case. I did forget to add in SB was without a CCJ twice I'll admit. The reason I said they'd apply anyway was for that reason.

marleyboy

JimBobJones wrote: »

If the OP wants to get legal advise they can as far as I'm concerned, but they will tell you no different. If me quoting relevant laws which you can read for yourself doesn't convince you, then nothing will short of visiting your local solicitor. The CAB would be able to advise on this as well, which is free.

Very sound advice, I am in no way assuming you are offering dodgy advice, moreso that you are not who you claim to be, you know more about law than I ever could.

However I think even you would agree that such advice (that is more likely the same advice you have offered) would be more valid if given face to face, either by the CAB or a legal advisor.

ValHaller

zzzLazyDaisy wrote: »

OP, I would definitely get his name off the joint account. But in fact, once it is in your name only, personally I would open a new account in my sole name, transfer all the direct debits etc, and close the joint account all together (that's not legal advice, it is just what I would do).

I hesitate to disagree on this technicality - but it could be important.

I do not believe that OP could get her OH's name off the joint account. I believe that a bank would be in the wrong to remove someone from an account without their specific sayso.

I suggest that OP should open a new account with another bank and transfer all payments in or out to that account. She should make sure the existing account is in credit and remove her own name from the account. This should be possible while the account is in credit. OP should request this in writing and keep a copy of the letter.

Tryingagainandagain

JimBobJones wrote: »

The application form says "any previous criminal convictions" he answers no, this is correct as he's not been convicted.

Under common UK law everyone is innocent until proven guilty, pending charges and sentencing cannot be used against you thus, they're not even allowed to ask you.



You are wrong. If he has entered a plea of guilty or been found guilty in a criminal court then he has a conviction from that date - the sentence is completely immaterial as a sentence may be deferred (different from suspended) or the defendant may disappear before the sentence hearing.

And yes, I do know what I am talking about here - although I cannot see that it has any bearing on the wife's position.

ROCK_HAZZARD

JimBobJones wrote: »

I'm not saying you should, I was merely pointing out I'm not a lawyer and never said I was, I said I have a law degree. I do.

This will be my last post on here, a lot of people are attempting to over dramaticise this and scare the OP, people of which have no legal knowledge.

When applying for credit under the 1974 Rehabilitation of Offenders act, you ONLY have to disclose unspent criminal convictions. it says that clearly, that is all you are obliged to disclose legally when applying for credit. As he has not been sentenced, he has no unspent conviction for this offence. There is the proceeds of Crime Act, I'm not familiar with it, in the sense it's not my area of specialty. So I've asked someone who does and it's not under the proceeds of crime unless his criminal history helped him apply for this loan. OR unless his assets have been seized by the courts. If either of these are true then he has committed a criminal offence, but only then.

That is the criminal side of the law. Anything else is under the Consumer Credit Act. The EU Consumer Directive which is now in force states it is the lenders responsibility to carry out checks for legibility before lending any monies.

If the OP wants to get legal advise they can as far as I'm concerned, but they will tell you no different. If me quoting relevant laws which you can read for yourself doesn't convince you, then nothing will short of visiting your local solicitor. The CAB would be able to advise on this as well, which is free.

I've followed your posts since I linked one to the AllAboutDebt Forum, your first post. Where you claim to have gotten £800k credit card debt as UE.

A few points from that:
1. Individual Credit Agreements over £25k aren't covered under the CCA, so how can section 78 apply?
2. County courts don't have hearings at 8am, so I'm guessing this District Judge is imaginary.
3. Millionaires don't have £500k credit cards, they have high limits maybe £50k sure but they are not given credit limits that high, why would they even need them??

From this post:

Your legal knowledge is good, but it's vague, acts quoted without specific sections you're referring to? The reason this works is because no one is going to google and read an entire act to prove you wrong, so really you could say that they say anything. No one here will dispute it. As such I'd class your legal advice on the level of a junior clerk or someone with access to google. I don't have a law degree but I can quote the CCA better than you have so far. If you're a millionaire with a law degree, what are you doing on here?

If there is really no crime here, can you quote specific sections of these acts? Do you have a case to refer to?

Luckily for you in this post I agree with you, this isn't a crime and the only reason I know this is because I've not disclosed things on a credit application they haven't asked for, but they later found out. Not happy about it but they can't do anything about it.

But the OP should call the CAB, they are free and it's just a phone call to put your mind at rest.

As for you JBJ, stop acting like a flash lawyer, if you want to give legal advice on here, refer to specifics that people can check and see for themselves. I could just as easy say that the CCA says people who apply for credit of more than £2k are entitled to cheese on toast once every tuesday from the creditor. It doesn't but it would take you a couple of hours to read to prove it :P

Naf

When was the loan taken vs. when was he told to expect a custodial sentence?

OP: you say you'll struggle with the loan payments - surely you would have struggled to keep up payments on the accounts that this loan paid off.
Get all of your joint finances made into single only accounts (sever credit ties); but try to keep up payments on the loan if you can. If you find that you can't, it'll only be his credit file gets trashed, not yours.

DizzyMum_2

Hello,

I'm struggling to follow the logic of why the OP should continue to pay the payments on the loan. It's not in her name.

If her husband had taken out a loan in his name, given her the money and then done a bunk it wouldn't be suggested that the OP keep up payments.

Obviously, as his wife and accepting that there may be long term consequences to defaulting the OP may want to try and pay but, there isn't a legal obligation for her to pay.

TBH I don't see that morally it's any different from someone applying for credit knowing they're likely to be made redundant, or are about to change jobs roles to a lower salary.

DM

ValHaller

DizzyMum wrote: »

Hello,

I'm struggling to follow the logic of why the OP should continue to pay the payments on the loan. It's not in her name.

If her husband had taken out a loan in his name, given her the money and then done a bunk it wouldn't be suggested that the OP keep up payments.

Obviously, as his wife and accepting that there may be long term consequences to defaulting the OP may want to try and pay but, there isn't a legal obligation for her to pay.

TBH I don't see that morally it's any different from someone applying for credit knowing they're likely to be made redundant, or are about to change jobs roles to a lower salary.

DM

Good point. I think OP would be well advised if she does pay anything to make it clear that it is voluntary payments from herself..