CCJ Set Aside today

JDOG1982

National_Debtline wrote: »

Hi again and thanks for the update.

My best guess as to the significance of this latest letter? They are trying to establish whether they have any evidence of payments/written acknowledgements that would scupper your statute barred argument. Bear in mind that when they were originally passed the debt, they may not have known a great deal about its payment history.

Now that they know you are aware of the Limitations Act and its significance, I would have thought they would decide to stop pursuing you for it if they can't find any relevant evidence as above.

Sit tight for now, is my advice.

Dennis
@natdebtline

hi thanks for your response.

Quick question...

As they took legal action out against me in Feb 2014 and now i have had that set aside. If they decide to take legal action again would the statuted barred period be 6 years from when they took legal action again or will it be 6 years ago from feb 2014.

hope that makes sense.

exoteric

Unfortunately, the claim against you is still "live" - all that has been set aside is the default judgment, which means that the claim can be pursued if they choose to do so. What they will have to do now is try to obtain a judgment by proving that you are liable for the debt, which is harder and more costly and time-consuming.

The claim will only be statute barred if the 6 year period from the relevant date (which is either the date of last acknowledgement / payment or the date of default depending on the type of debt) expired before they issued the claim. If the claim was issued within the 6 year period, as the claim is still live they are in time and not statute barred.

National_Debtline

JDOG1982 wrote: »

hi thanks for your response.

Quick question...

As they took legal action out against me in Feb 2014 and now i have had that set aside. If they decide to take legal action again would the statuted barred period be 6 years from when they took legal action again or will it be 6 years ago from feb 2014.

hope that makes sense.

Hi again

Yes, I think I understand your question!

The effect of the CCJ being set aside is that we have now reverted to the stage where the creditor can issue the claim. It is as if that previous CCJ never existed at all.

On that basis, the date of legal action commencing for Limitations Act purposes would be the issue date of any new claim - so if the creditor sued you afresh tomorrow, the relevant date would be 28/11/14.

If, as you appear to believe, the debt was already statute barred by the time of the original claim, then this is a moot point as it is SB either way.

Remember that in the event of an SB defence the onus would be on the creditor to refute it, rather than being on you to justify it.

Dennis
@natdebtline

exoteric

National_Debtline wrote: »

The effect of the CCJ being set aside is that we have now reverted to the stage where the creditor can issue the claim. It is as if that previous CCJ never existed at all.

On that basis, the date of legal action commencing for Limitations Act purposes would be the issue date of any new claim - so if the creditor sued you afresh tomorrow, the relevant date would be 28/11/14.

The first para is correct, but the second is unfortunately not - all that has been set aside is the default judgment, not the whole claim. The claim (which had previously been "closed" by the judgment) is effectively reopened and the claimant can choose to pursue it or discontinue it. There is no need to issue a new claim, so the relevant date for limitation purposes is the issue date of the original claim.

JDOG1982

exoteric wrote: »

The first para is correct, but the second is unfortunately not - all that has been set aside is the default judgment, not the whole claim. The claim (which had previously been "closed" by the judgment) is effectively reopened and the claimant can choose to pursue it or discontinue it. There is no need to issue a new claim, so the relevant date for limitation purposes is the issue date of the original claim.

Hi

So do they have a time limit to take me back to court if they want too, or will the claim remain live until they decide if they want to take further action or not.

Thanks

exoteric

Not as far as I'm aware, but now that the claim is active the court will want to know what's going on and won't just let it sit there - the claimant will need to make a decision about whether it's going to pursue you or not.

If you are confident about your limitation defence, you can make an application (on paper) for the claim to be struck out on the basis the claimant doesn't have a valid argument - if you are successful you will get back whatever court fee you have spent plus any costs you have incurred, and the matter will be over.

Alternatively, with the CCJ gone, you can attempt to make a Without Prejudice settlement offer to the claimant for a fraction of the amount owing just to get rid of it for good - they may take the view that something is better than nothing, although that may also prompt them into pursuing you. Might be worth a trip to the Citizens' Advice Bureau to discuss specifics, but either way you've done well in getting the CCJ set aside.

JDOG1982

National_Debtline wrote: »

Hi again and thanks for the update.

My best guess as to the significance of this latest letter? They are trying to establish whether they have any evidence of payments/written acknowledgements that would scupper your statute barred argument. Bear in mind that when they were originally passed the debt, they may not have known a great deal about its payment history.

Now that they know you are aware of the Limitations Act and its significance, I would have thought they would decide to stop pursuing you for it if they can't find any relevant evidence as above.

Sit tight for now, is my advice.

Dennis
@natdebtline

Hi

If they do come back at me and state I have made payment within the 6 years, what is considered as proof I made payment. As I requested this information and proof and all they provided me was a date and a sum of money they claim I made.

Thanks

JDOG1982

****UPDATE****

I have now received a letter from the court stating that the CCJ was set aside.

It also states...

1. The judgement in this claim is hereby set aside.

And the court of its own initiative orders.

2. The defendant sends to the court and the claimant a fully pleaded defence to this claim.

Question is, what do i do now, do i just send letter to court and claimant that my defence to the CCJ is that its statuted barred.

Adviced need asap as on timescale to send to court.

Thanks

sourcrates

JDOG1982 wrote: »

****UPDATE****

I have now received a letter from the court stating that the CCJ was set aside.

It also states...

1. The judgement in this claim is hereby set aside.

And the court of its own initiative orders.

2. The defendant sends to the court and the claimant a fully pleaded defence to this claim.

Question is, what do i do now, do i just send letter to court and claimant that my defence to the CCJ is that its statuted barred.

Adviced need asap as on timescale to send to court.

Thanks

Hi,
Yes, if you believe it to be SB, then that should be your defence.
Timescales are critical, to the best of my Knowledge, I would act as if it was 14 days, however it could be 28, unsure on that bit.

exoteric

It is 14 days from the date of the order. If you look online you should be able to find a template for a Defence, but essentially what you need to do is respond to each one of the claimant's allegations, point by point, and deny them and explain why. No need to attach any evidence at this stage, just refer to it. If you need more time, you can file an acknowledgement of service, but I would suggest just doing this within the 14 days. You will need to send a copy to the claimant and to the court.