CCJ on credit file marked as unsatisfied despite settling out of court.

Fighter1986

Jumblebumble said:

Fighter1986 said:

 

<REDACTED>, CCJ <REDACTED> wrote to the court advising my debt was Settled. The court didn’t update the registry trust and the registry trust therefore didn’t update the credit reference agencies. The publicly available data clearly alleges to any interested party that this liability is outstanding.

 

This is a material inaccuracy. It is borne out of the fact that, when a court receives notification that a debt has been satisfied, they update the registry trust, as they interpret the word satisfied to mean paid in full, however when a court receives notification that a debt has been settled, they have no mechanism for passing this data on to the registry trust.

 

The system as it exists at present, has no way to demonstrate publicly that a defendant no longer has a liability towards a CCJ / claimant where the debt has been settled by means other than payment in full (e.g. by way of a successfully completed insolvency).

 

I am having a bit of a struggle here
Surely The courts job on a settled but not satisfied  CCJ is only  to prevent enforcement action and has nothing to do with telling others that you do not owe the money
I am not surprised the ICO are ignoring you as in the case of a satisfied judgement this shows the debt was paid  whereas in your case a court said you don't need to pay
To look at the ICOs point of view it may be that they ask "Is it fair on others who might be considering granting you credit that they should be led to  believe that you paid when you did nothing of the sort ?"

It is my stance that the public record needs to demonstrate without question the fact that I have no outstanding liability to the claimant.

The public record as it stands tells an interested party that I still have an outstanding liability.

I do not.

The data is therefore inadequate and inaccurate. 

Thrugelmir

Perhaps your creditor doesn't feel inclined to assist you given that they didn't receive full settlement of the debt owed. People in business generally don't take kindly to being shafted. 

Fighter1986

Thrugelmir said:

Perhaps your creditor doesn't feel inclined to assist you given that they didn't receive full settlement of the debt owed. People in business generally don't take kindly to being shafted. 

You might wish to re-read my post.

First of all, you have absolutely no idea whatsoever about the circumstances surrounding my bankruptcy, or whether or not anyone was "Shafted". Your use of such curt and assuming language speaks volumes about your level of intelligence.

The bankruptcy came about from a period in 2013 when I resigned my highly salaried permanent post within the NHS to become a full time carer for my then partner which resulted in debts spiralling especially when it came to light that I'd been lied to for the seven years we had been together and he'd been hiding a diagnosis of schitzophrenia from me as well as ignoring professional advice for CPN visits and anti-psychotic prescriptions.

I made a poor decision in 2013 and it resulted in my homelessness and unemployment when he saw fit to kick me out of the specially adapted home I'd worked tirelessly to get us from the local authority, when I confronted him about the medical history and diagnoses he'd been hiding from me and lying to me about for seven years.

I tread water with interest for six years before taking the decision to finalise everything by way of a bankruptcy in 2019 and move on with my life. It was the right decision, and the responsible decision. One I wish I'd made sooner rather than spending six years paying more in interest than I'd borrowed in the first place.

This paticular CCJ constituted under 1% of my total insolvency and I am ready and willing to pay it in full - however to do so would be a breach of my bankruptcy order. I would be breaking the law if I paid them. 

The lender concerned does consider the matter settled, they have advised the court of such, and a creditors "feelings" about whether they consider a debt settled or not is irrelevant. It fell under a successfully completed insolvency. It is settled. The ICO guidelines are very black and white on how accounts which formed part of a bankruptcy must be reported following the successful completion of an insolvency.

The issue here is there not being a mechanism in place for the court to record in the public record the fact that they've been informed by the claimant that the matter has now been settled, which is a breach of the DPA 2018. 

Data must be adequate for its intended purpose. It's law.

The data on the public register is not adequate enough to show an interested party that I no longer have a liability to the claimant.

The registry trust themselves have been petitioning to the MoJ to allow Settled statuses to be recorded publicly as well as Satisfied statuses. If the Registry Trust themselves are campaigning for the same thing it is a clearly recognised industry wide issue that needs addressed, and I agree wholeheartedly - this is an email sent to me directly from the registry trust on the matter:

"Thank you for your email.

 

There is no mechanism to show a judgment as settled on the public Register. 

 

A claimant has the choice to either inform the court that a judgment has been settled (not paid in full) or satisfied (paid in full). 

 

The court will notify us if a judgment has been satisfied (paid in full) and this will show on the public Register as satisfied.

 

The court will not notify us if a judgment has been settled.

 

I hope I have been able to give you the information you need.  But if anything was unclear or if I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact Customer Services on 0207 380 0133.

 

I trust the above is of assistance."

...

"Thank you for letting us know that you are referring your case to the ICO.

 

I would like to take the time to inform you that we have been campaigning for a Register of Partial Settlements for a while, but have not yet received agreement to set one up from the Ministry of Justice. 

 

Yours sincerely"