Court proceedings issued again.

Loulou_belle82

Hello everyone

molerat

A CCJ never becomes statute barred, it has just dropped off your credit file but can be re-applied for through the courts. Who can do this and if they will be successful is for someone more knowledgeable to comment on.

Loulou_belle82

molerat wrote: »

A CCJ never becomes statute barred, it has just dropped off your credit file but can be re-applied for through the courts. Who can do this and if they will be successful is for someone more knowledgeable to comment on.

I understand that a CCJ never becomes statute barred and if 6 years pass they have to seek permission from the court to be able to enforce it. What I am wondering is, because the solicitors are clearly not aware that capital one obtained a CCJ in 2003, do I plead the limitation defence since it is 6 years since the debt was sold. The problem is with this, I don't know if it it exactly 6 years since I made a payment or whether it's just less.

I spoke to a debt advice line and they said don't mention the CCJ and instead ask them to prove that I owe the debt etc.

Thanks for your response

Tixy

I wouldn't file a defence that states that you believe the debt to be covered by the limitation act/statute barred because that would be making a false statement to the court, you know that it is not SB.

I would either admit the debt and offer to make arrangements to pay it, or you could go down the route of asking them to provide proof of the debt. Although that may drag up that there is already a judgement in relation to this debt.

Loulou_belle82

Tixy wrote: »

I wouldn't file a defence that states that you believe the debt to be covered by the limitation act/statute barred because that would be making a false statement to the court, you know that it is not SB.

I would either admit the debt and offer to make arrangements to pay it, or you could go down the route of asking them to provide proof of the debt. Although that may drag up that there is already a judgement in relation to this debt.

What would I do to ask them to prove the debt? I'm in no way intending to mislead the court but to be honest the particulars of claim are so vague and therefore I think the onus is on the claimant to prove the debt before I admit to anything. If this does drag up the previous judgement then surely the court would not give them permission, 10 years on, to enforce the same, particularly bearing in mind that Lowell have been aware of my whereabouts for 6-7 years and I have not moved house in over 10 years.

Further, isn't there an element of law that prevents fredericksons from actually sueing me in any event. My contract was never with them?

Thanks in advance.

John1993_2

Loulou_belle82 wrote: »

What would I do to ask them to prove the debt? I'm in no way intending to mislead the court but to be honest the particulars of claim are so vague.

They've correctly identified a debt which a court has ordered you to pay , there's nothing vague about this.

It's not clear why you aren't willing to comply with the court order, is there something that you are not telling us that would explain this?

Loulou_belle82

John1993 wrote: »

They've correctly identified a debt which a court has ordered you to pay , there's nothing vague about this.

It's not clear why you aren't willing to comply with the court order, is there something that you are not telling us that would explain this?

The CCJ is from 2003. It was sent to my old address and I knew nothing about it until I checked my credit file in about 2006. The CCJ was not enforced and the debt was sold to Lowell portfolio. It really is as simple as that. Court proceedings have now been issued again...a new claim, not an enforcement application. The DCA obviously are not aware of the previous CCJ. You can't obtain two CCJ's for the same debt. Perhaps I'm on the wrong forum. There is nothing I'm not telling you

Tixy

Loulou_belle82 wrote: »

What would I do to ask them to prove the debt?

I would ask them to provide evidence of the alleged debt

Loulou_belle82 wrote: »

I'm in no way intending to mislead the court but to be honest the particulars of claim are so vague and therefore I think the onus is on the claimant to prove the debt before I admit to anything.

It is up to them to prove it.

Loulou_belle82 wrote: »

If this does drag up the previous judgement then surely the court would not give them permission, 10 years on, to enforce the same, particularly bearing in mind that Lowell have been aware of my whereabouts for 6-7 years and I have not moved house in over 10 years.

Quite likely the court would not allow them to enforce it after all that time. I can't think of what good reason they could use to convince the court that they should be allowed to.
But if this triggers the to look in detail at the case then thats why you need to be careful as to what defence you file to ensure you are not misleading the court.

Loulou_belle82 wrote: »

Further, isn't there an element of law that prevents fredericksons from actually sueing me in any event. My contract was never with them?

Most credit agreements do contain terms that allow for the full assignment of debts and are worded so that the new creditor is able to take the same action as the original creditor up to and including court action (thats in general, not necessarily in your case where a judgement already exists).

Loulou_belle82

Tixy wrote: »

I would ask them to provide evidence of the alleged debt



It is up to them to prove it.



Quite likely the court would not allow them to enforce it after all that time. I can't think of what good reason they could use to convince the court that they should be allowed to.
But if this triggers the to look in detail at the case then thats why you need to be careful as to what defence you file to ensure you are not misleading the court.



Most credit agreements do contain terms that allow for the full assignment of debts and are worded so that the new creditor is able to take the same action as the original creditor up to and including court action (thats in general, not necessarily in your case where a judgement already exists).

Thank you very much for that, it's really helpful. I am going to file the defence asking them to prove the debt and then if and when they prove it I can then say if it relates to the same debt as the original CCJ then I will make an application to strike out the claim. To be honest, as I said previously the particulars are vague, all it says is that the debt was assigned to Lowell and it refers to capital one and an account number. Obviously I do not intend to mislead the court. Thanks for your helpful reply.