CCJ given to me after bankruptcy

mlt

Hi,

In December 2012 I declared myself bankrupt, I had a lot of help from the Citizens Advice Bureau and i listed every debt on the petition. I had my house repossessed and moved into rental accommodation and again moved in 2013 to my current address. In January 2016 I was taken to court and given a CCJ. I was told that because the debt was in joint names even though I had gone bankrupt I still had to pay the debt. I paid off the amount quickly (think it was for around £750) and have had to live with it on my account all this time. I work in the IT industry and some of my employers banking customers refused me access to their systems because of my financial history. It was not until recently that i decided to change jobs and one of the questions was do you have any CCJ's etc. I explained about my credit report but I still felt that it wrong that I had been given this CCJ 3 years after my bankruptcy date it was almost as if the company waited for that date. I rang up the solicitors last month and they confirmed I should never have been taken to court and they will apply to have the judgement set aside and I today have just had to prove that i paid the money from my account so they can refund it to me. My question is this I want to take the company to court for the distress this has caused me over the years do you think I have a case in getting compensated for what i have written about above.

Thanks

Mark Thxiton

Fighter1986

Well, you accepted liability for the debt by paying it and by failing to defend yourself in court.

I'm afraid it's all too little too late, but if the debt the CCJ pertained to did relate to an account which was opened prior to your declaring yourself bankruptc, then no, you had absolutely no obligation to pay, they had no legal recourse to money from you whatsoever.

Unfortunately, you had the opportunity to make your representations to the court when the CCJ was applied for, as your defence, in 2016. The boat has sailed now I'm afraid. 

You're very, very lucky that they have agreed to set aside the judgement especially after you allowed this much time to pass before disputing it. The window of opportunity was granted prior to the court hearing and you didn't address the issue then. Thank your lucky stars that they are being compassionate after all this time. 

You know now for future. If you have any more grief from any financial issues pop back and we'll endeavour to help when it's needed

finalfantasist

mlt said:

My question is this I want to take the company to court for the distress this has caused me over the years do you think I have a case in getting compensated for what i have written about above.

No, you don't.  Be happy that this was resolved fairly painlessly and move on with your life.

PixelPound

What stress, and why is it now causing stress, when you have been happy for the last three years to not take action and paid the CCJ in full.

The Judge will probably see that the solicitors have seen the error, remedied this by applying for the set aside and paying the fee to do that, also refunding you the total amount for the debt paid, and then at this point see that you are trying to make a compo claim when it was not disputed for three years.   

mlt

Its always caused me stress even more now knowing i was lied to over 5 years ago when they gave me this ccj. The damage a CCJ does to your credit report is immense and from that point i've had to deal with the fact that i could not work on customers accounts as those customers deemed me untrustworthy. After the bankruptcy ended i thought then another three years it will be on my report but no I get given a CCJ which I had put as part of my bankruptcy. I started throwing up at work first of all thought it was a bug and then it kept happening where a headache would start and then the feeling of wanting to be sick. Then i would be sick repeatedly this i realised was migraines brought on by the stress of being in debt. My company didnt understand they told me to work through it as no one else knew the job. I have a video of me at work throwing up into the sink and then you see my right hand going in and out of the sink where im pushing the sick down the plug hole. Do you have any idea the stress debt can do your body from your first words what stress i dont think you do. The bankruptcy was supposed to end one chapter and start a new one not for a company to ignore and give me a CCJ.

[Deleted User]

Having a bankruptcy on your record (which is permanent, it is listed forever in the OR database) is far worse than the CCJ

If a firm refused to deal with you for having a CCJ, they would have for having a bankruptcy

Fighter1986

Deleted_User said:

Having a bankruptcy on your record (which is permanent, it is listed forever in the OR database) is far worse than the CCJ

If a firm refused to deal with you for having a CCJ, they would have for having a bankruptcy

That's not a hard and fast rule.

E.g. Nationwide will entertain a mortgage application from someone who's been bankrupt over three years ago and Skipton someone over four years ago - however, neither will entertain an application from someone who's had a recent CCJ.

So in that case, absolutely not, the Bankruptcy would not have been more detrimental to the OP than the CCJ.

mlt said:

Its always caused me stress even more now knowing i was lied to over 5 years ago when they gave me this ccj. The damage a CCJ does to your credit report is immense and from that point i've had to deal with the fact that i could not work on customers accounts as those customers deemed me untrustworthy. After the bankruptcy ended i thought then another three years it will be on my report but no I get given a CCJ which I had put as part of my bankruptcy. I started throwing up at work first of all thought it was a bug and then it kept happening where a headache would start and then the feeling of wanting to be sick. Then i would be sick repeatedly this i realised was migraines brought on by the stress of being in debt. My company didnt understand they told me to work through it as no one else knew the job. I have a video of me at work throwing up into the sink and then you see my right hand going in and out of the sink where im pushing the sick down the plug hole. Do you have any idea the stress debt can do your body from your first words what stress i dont think you do. The bankruptcy was supposed to end one chapter and start a new one not for a company to ignore and give me a CCJ.

This is why you should have defended the case when it went to court. You had the opportunity to seek legal advice at the time, or to speak to the court, the insolvency service, your official receiver, or even post here, but you didn't, and this was the result. No one else can be held responsible for your inaction.

In future, if you have any issues, deal with them when they are presented to you. We, and many other resources, are here to help. 

I've suffered from anxiety in the past and I long since realised that the symptoms you speak of are as a result of not addressing something which you know to be wrong.

[Deleted User]

Fighter1986 said:

Deleted_User said:

Having a bankruptcy on your record (which is permanent, it is listed forever in the OR database) is far worse than the CCJ

If a firm refused to deal with you for having a CCJ, they would have for having a bankruptcy

That's not a hard and fast rule.

E.g. Nationwide will entertain a mortgage application from someone who's been bankrupt over three years ago and Skipton someone over four years ago - however, neither will entertain an application from someone who's had a recent CCJ.

So in that case, absolutely not, the Bankruptcy would not have been more detrimental to the OP than the CCJ.

The OP is complaining about not getting work in his job as the customer wouldn't allow him to deal with the case due to a CCJ, nothing to do with a mortgage application, not sure where you got that from?
As the OP is a bankrupt (even discharged), the fact they also had CCJ is neither here nor there, the bankruptcy is a permanent record and can rule out clearance / security checks while the CCJ would disappear. The point here is that them getting a CCJ and not getting some work isn't a reason for compensation when the bankruptcy would likely have caused the clients to reject them anyway.

Fighter1986

Deleted_User said:

Fighter1986 said:

Deleted_User said:

Having a bankruptcy on your record (which is permanent, it is listed forever in the OR database) is far worse than the CCJ

If a firm refused to deal with you for having a CCJ, they would have for having a bankruptcy

That's not a hard and fast rule.

E.g. Nationwide will entertain a mortgage application from someone who's been bankrupt over three years ago and Skipton someone over four years ago - however, neither will entertain an application from someone who's had a recent CCJ.

So in that case, absolutely not, the Bankruptcy would not have been more detrimental to the OP than the CCJ.

The OP is complaining about not getting work in his job as the customer wouldn't allow him to deal with the case due to a CCJ, nothing to do with a mortgage application, not sure where you got that from?
As the OP is a bankrupt (even discharged), the fact they also had CCJ is neither here nor there, the bankruptcy is a permanent record and can rule out clearance / security checks while the CCJ would disappear. The point here is that them getting a CCJ and not getting some work isn't a reason for compensation when the bankruptcy would likely have caused the clients to reject them anyway.

1. The OP is not a bankrupt, the OP is a discharged bankrupt. There is a big difference.
2. You didn't say "In terms of employment" having a CCJ isn't as bad as a history of bankruptcy. you said:

Deleted_User said:

Having a bankruptcy on your record (which is permanent, it is listed forever in the OR database) is far worse than the CCJ

I was illustrating that this isn't always the case.

In respect of the following:

Deleted_User said:

If a firm refused to deal with you for having a CCJ, they would have for having a bankruptcy

This is also not a hard and fast rule.

Firms regulated by the FSA are required to vet their employees, in what's known as a "Financial Probity" check. A successfully completed insolvency from several years ago is less of an issue than a recent outstanding CCJ. 

The presence of a more recent CCJ, especially if not settled yet, is absolutely likely to be a bigger issue than a successfully satisfied insolvency dating back from years prior. 

If you have outstanding debts, especially outstanding court judgements, you are more succeptible to bribery and more likely to commit acts of embezzlement etc than if you don't. 

What's important in a financial propbity check is:

> Whether the applicant has been absolutely honest in disclosing questions asked about their past and present
> How much the applicant owes
> How long it has been since the last adverse entry on the applicant's credit file
> Whether old adverse events have since been settled / satisfied

I have been through this process myself with Security Watchdog. 

From a legal and regulatory standpoint, there are no jobs from which a discharged bankrupt is prohobited from working within. Certain sectors require enhanced background checks, and every application is treated on merit. Where no legal or regulatory prohibition exists in employing a discharged bankrupt, the vetting process will treat every application on it's own merits and asess each case individually. 

[Deleted User]

Fighter1986 said:

Deleted_User said:

Fighter1986 said:

Deleted_User said:

Having a bankruptcy on your record (which is permanent, it is listed forever in the OR database) is far worse than the CCJ

If a firm refused to deal with you for having a CCJ, they would have for having a bankruptcy

That's not a hard and fast rule.

E.g. Nationwide will entertain a mortgage application from someone who's been bankrupt over three years ago and Skipton someone over four years ago - however, neither will entertain an application from someone who's had a recent CCJ.

So in that case, absolutely not, the Bankruptcy would not have been more detrimental to the OP than the CCJ.

The OP is complaining about not getting work in his job as the customer wouldn't allow him to deal with the case due to a CCJ, nothing to do with a mortgage application, not sure where you got that from?
As the OP is a bankrupt (even discharged), the fact they also had CCJ is neither here nor there, the bankruptcy is a permanent record and can rule out clearance / security checks while the CCJ would disappear. The point here is that them getting a CCJ and not getting some work isn't a reason for compensation when the bankruptcy would likely have caused the clients to reject them anyway.

1. The OP is not a bankrupt, the OP is a discharged bankrupt. There is a big difference.
2. You didn't say "In terms of employment" having a CCJ isn't as bad as a history of bankruptcy. you said:

Deleted_User said:

Having a bankruptcy on your record (which is permanent, it is listed forever in the OR database) is far worse than the CCJ

I was illustrating that this isn't always the case.

In respect of the following:

Deleted_User said:

If a firm refused to deal with you for having a CCJ, they would have for having a bankruptcy

This is also not a hard and fast rule.

Firms regulated by the FSA are required to vet their employees, in what's known as a "Financial Probity" check. A successfully completed insolvency from several years ago is less of an issue than a recent outstanding CCJ. 

The presence of a more recent CCJ, especially if not settled yet, is absolutely likely to be a bigger issue than a successfully satisfied insolvency dating back from years prior. 

If you have outstanding debts, especially outstanding court judgements, you are more succeptible to bribery and more likely to commit acts of embezzlement etc than if you don't. 

What's important in a financial propbity check is:

> Whether the applicant has been absolutely honest in disclosing questions asked about their past and present
> How much the applicant owes
> How long it has been since the last adverse entry on the applicant's credit file
> Whether old adverse events have since been settled / satisfied

I have been through this process myself with Security Watchdog. 

From a legal and regulatory standpoint, there are no jobs from which a discharged bankrupt is prohobited from working within. Certain sectors require enhanced background checks, and every application is treated on merit. Where no legal or regulatory prohibition exists in employing a discharged bankrupt, the vetting process will treat every application on it's own merits and asess each case individually. 

1) You deliberately cut out some of my post to make it read differently, it was clear from the context of WHOLE post it was about jobs, not in general
2) You're talking out of the top of your hat about "no jobs". The police, as an example - a discharged bankrupt CANNOT be considered until 3 YEARS AFTER discharge, yet someone with a discharged CCJ can immediately be considered. Membership of the ICAEW (for accountants) is not guaranteed for discharged bankrupts and many firms won't allow applications from bankrupts, even discharged ones.
3) My point is correct, a firm that would not appoint someone because of a CCJ wouldn't appoint someone with a bankruptcy either, so arguing they are due compensation because of a CCJ is nonsensical

If the CCJ was invalid and shouldn't have been applied, that's a different matter 

Fighter1986

Deleted_User said:

Fighter1986 said:

Deleted_User said:

Fighter1986 said:

Deleted_User said:

Having a bankruptcy on your record (which is permanent, it is listed forever in the OR database) is far worse than the CCJ

If a firm refused to deal with you for having a CCJ, they would have for having a bankruptcy

That's not a hard and fast rule.

E.g. Nationwide will entertain a mortgage application from someone who's been bankrupt over three years ago and Skipton someone over four years ago - however, neither will entertain an application from someone who's had a recent CCJ.

So in that case, absolutely not, the Bankruptcy would not have been more detrimental to the OP than the CCJ.

The OP is complaining about not getting work in his job as the customer wouldn't allow him to deal with the case due to a CCJ, nothing to do with a mortgage application, not sure where you got that from?
As the OP is a bankrupt (even discharged), the fact they also had CCJ is neither here nor there, the bankruptcy is a permanent record and can rule out clearance / security checks while the CCJ would disappear. The point here is that them getting a CCJ and not getting some work isn't a reason for compensation when the bankruptcy would likely have caused the clients to reject them anyway.

1. The OP is not a bankrupt, the OP is a discharged bankrupt. There is a big difference.
2. You didn't say "In terms of employment" having a CCJ isn't as bad as a history of bankruptcy. you said:

Deleted_User said:

Having a bankruptcy on your record (which is permanent, it is listed forever in the OR database) is far worse than the CCJ

I was illustrating that this isn't always the case.

In respect of the following:

Deleted_User said:

If a firm refused to deal with you for having a CCJ, they would have for having a bankruptcy

This is also not a hard and fast rule.

Firms regulated by the FSA are required to vet their employees, in what's known as a "Financial Probity" check. A successfully completed insolvency from several years ago is less of an issue than a recent outstanding CCJ. 

The presence of a more recent CCJ, especially if not settled yet, is absolutely likely to be a bigger issue than a successfully satisfied insolvency dating back from years prior. 

If you have outstanding debts, especially outstanding court judgements, you are more succeptible to bribery and more likely to commit acts of embezzlement etc than if you don't. 

What's important in a financial propbity check is:

> Whether the applicant has been absolutely honest in disclosing questions asked about their past and present
> How much the applicant owes
> How long it has been since the last adverse entry on the applicant's credit file
> Whether old adverse events have since been settled / satisfied

I have been through this process myself with Security Watchdog. 

From a legal and regulatory standpoint, there are no jobs from which a discharged bankrupt is prohobited from working within. Certain sectors require enhanced background checks, and every application is treated on merit. Where no legal or regulatory prohibition exists in employing a discharged bankrupt, the vetting process will treat every application on it's own merits and asess each case individually. 

2) You're talking out of the top of your hat about "no jobs". The police, as an example - a discharged bankrupt CANNOT be considered until 3 YEARS AFTER discharge, yet someone with a discharged CCJ can immediately be considered. Membership of the ICAEW (for accountants) is not guaranteed for discharged bankrupts and many firms won't allow applications from bankrupts, even discharged ones.

What I stated was true, there are no legal restrictions on discharged bankrupts taking up any paticular occupation.

I didn't say how individual employers would treat applications from such individuals; as stated, they're asessed on merit.

What you state about the police is untrue.

This is an excerpt from https://recruit.college.police.uk/Officer/Pages/eligibility.aspx

"Financial status

Applicants will have their financial status checked.  These checks are carried out because police officers have access to privileged information, which may make them vulnerable to corruption.  Applicants with outstanding County Court Judgments, who have been registered bankrupt with outstanding debts will be rejected.  If you have any discharged bankruptcy debts then you will need to provide a Certificate of Satisfaction with your application.  If you have any concerns, contact your chosen force for more information."

The only requirement is that the applicant no longer has any outstanding liabilities. 

Deleted_User said:

3) My point is correct, a firm that would not appoint someone because of a CCJ wouldn't appoint someone with a bankruptcy either, so arguing they are due compensation because of a CCJ is nonsensical

I agree with what you say about compensation. OP had the opportunity to argue the CCJ at the time the claimant applied for it.

However, it is absolutely true that an outstanding CCJ would be more of a concern than a discharged bankruptcy - employers, security watchdog, SC vetting, and such forth are interested about an applicants honesty, and their succeptibility to bribery and embezzlement. 

Someone who was once bankrupt but donesn't owe a penny to adam any more isn't under any financial stress and therefore, isn't as succeptible; but someone who has an outstanding CCJ is under more financial stress and therefore, is more suceptible to nefarious activities - so in that example, exactly as the Police themselves state on their recruitment webpage, absolutely a CCJ can be more of an issue than a historic insolvency from years past. 

I won't entertain any further discussion with you on this paticular matter now; it's upto the readers to digest all the information on this thread and take away what they will.