Old debt just awarded a CCJ

FireWyrm

I dont often disagree with you Bob, but in this case...

The onus is on the DCA to PROVE you owe the debt, not the debtor to prove otherwise. The 'proof' that they have submitted is entirely inadequate showing nothing other than an amount and a reference number. The DCA has not provided any actual evidence of the debt and the OP is well within their rights to question it. They should have done this earlier, granted, but now, they really need to get their skates on, enter a dispute and motion to have it set aside on the basis that proof has yet to be provided by the DCA.

First step is tomorrow morning, demand that proof from them. I dont just mean a bit of paper with an amount, but an actual statement of account, the reference number of the account etc.

They then need to get onto the bank and demand to know where and how this 'debt' has accrued. It is most likely charges, and if this is the case, it is entirely unfair. Why didnt the OP receive any information from the bank about this?

Then, they need to get onto the court and have the CCJ set aside on the basis that proof has yet to materialise and take it from there.

[Deleted User]

I appreciate what you are saying FireWyrm, but the CCJ has been granted by default, due to the OP not bothering to read the letters they were sending him.

Additionally, the clock is running, for the CCJ to be registered, and the consequences to the OP, of it being registered, would be very serious, namely losing their job.

The OP is racing against time, and if the motion to overturn is declined, they are going to be in the excrement big style.

FireWyrm wrote: »

It is most likely charges, and if this is the case, it is entirely unfair. Why didn't the OP receive any information from the bank about this?

I suspect the OP did receive this information, but simply didn't bother to read it.

The OP admits they have been ignoring letter for ages.

FireWyrm

Bedsit_Bob wrote: »

The OP is racing against time, and if the motion to overturn is declined, they are going to be in the excrement big style.

They're in it anyway, the CCJ exists. Fortune favours the bold.

OP, are you sure you would lose your job? Surely, if you went to your employer and pleaded your case? This isnt profligate spending as such, it is a years old debt that crawled out of the woodwork at the worst possible moment and slapped you in the face. I cant imagine any employer would be so unfair as to dismiss you over this? Especially as you claim you dont actually owe the money anyway?

olddebtproblems

I will know more tomorrow.

i'll get some help in the morning and get it sorted. I of course want the proof I even owe any money and even if I do owe any (Which I still don't think I do) The limit was £250 on the card and they want £960. IF there was any money left on the balance, you're talking a couple of quid/fiver maximum as if I remember rightly my monthly payment on it was about £20.

Thanks for any suggestions/help from posters.

olddebtproblems

As for my job, without going in to detail on what I do. I really cannot have a CCJ, no matter what. I have perfect credit, I don't even use credit and have not done for over 5 years now.

This sort of thing is all new to me.

Lensman_2

The CCJ established a new debt in law. You now owe £960. Regardless of the merits of the case or the history of the debt.

You need to either:
1. Get Restons to mark this as satisfied within 14 days (highly unlikely without full payment)
2. Pay it within that time
3. Get it set aside.

Or you will have a CCJ on your record for the next 6 years.

You have a very good case to get judgement set aside and then challenge Restons and probably win. National Debtline will give you good advice on how to do that. I think that would be a much better use of your phone time tomorrow.

[Deleted User]

Lensman wrote: »

You have a very good case to get judgement set aside

On what grounds?

That they couldn't be bothered, to read the LBA they were sent?

Buzby

A set aside to succeed will need a payment from the debtor, with the application. The judge will then decide whether to grant the request, but payment of the fee does not guarantee this. The judge will decide whether the debtor had an opportunity to deal with the issue but chose not to, until the judgement by default was entered (The CCJ follows).

Saying you thought the letters were 'funny' is not a valid defence. Going on holiday is, but it will depend on the day.

With so much at stake, there is no wriggle room or opportunity to take any moral high ground of 'I don't owe it'. You do, and bailiffs will follow to enforce it - never mind the CCJ.

You need to find the money and pay it. You can then get Reston's to prove the amounts they billed, and if you are not satisfied, you send them a LBA and if they don't respond you go to court and get your money back.

If your employment depends on it, I'd dispense with points of principle and realise many folk bury their heads and get a CCJ so your situation is not unique, and courts are wise to it.

fatbelly

Back 30-odd posts, National Debtline posted a link to their factsheet in it is the following two-part statement:

If you did not deal with the papers or go to a hearing because you were ill, in hospital or away and have a defence then this may be a good reason to set aside a judgment

On the second part, the individual judge would have to take a view that there was a 'defence with a reasonable prospect of success'. I don't think you have that. You would taking a gamble on how the judge might view it.

On the first part, the dates of you being away could also pose a problem. The claim is deemed to be 'served' five days after the issue date, if Northampton Court is used. The 14 days to respond runs from then and the moneyclaim site is available 24/7. If you could have acknowledged service on your return but didn't (and your first post does suggest that) then that may also cause a problem.

stevemLS

fatbelly wrote: »

Back 30-odd posts, National Debtline posted a link to their factsheet in it is the following two-part statement:



On the second part, the individual judge would have to take a view that there was a 'defence with a reasonable prospect of success'. I don't think you have that. You would taking a gamble on how the judge might view it.

On the first part, the dates of you being away could also pose a problem. The claim is deemed to be 'served' five days after the issue date, if Northampton Court is used. The 14 days to respond runs from then and the moneyclaim site is available 24/7. If you could have acknowledged service on your return but didn't (and your first post does suggest that) then that may also cause a problem.

The actual CPR says that the defendant must "have a real prospect of successfully defending the claim" (CPR 13.3) - a reasonably subtle but important difference.

A judge is not going to be impressed with OP's conduct.