DCBL letter relating to a parking charge back in 2015! SAR received back

M7R

Coupon-mad said:

So basically once 6 years is up, if they send anything else return to sender with after 6 years, no longer valid. Written on the envelope? 

No, obviously not.

DO NOT return letters with some words scrawled across the envelope if they are asking for money, that's just naive (no idea why people do this; it leaves them with no paper trail or evidence of anything).  You'd be emailing (a proper reply) telling them to cease and desist and threatening to report the solicitor to the SRA and the parking firm to the Scrutiny Panel the MHCLG are going to set up.

Okay dokie no problem, I understand, let’s see what happens I guess 

Jenni_D

Bear in mind that (in E+W, in Scotland it is different) a claimant can still raise a claim more than 6 years from the date of the event. The 6 years limit simply means that a defendant has a statutory defence. If the defendant doesn't respond then the claimant can still get a default judgment.

Fruitcake

Jenni_D said:

Bear in mind that (in E+W, in Scotland it is different) a claimant can still raise a claim more than 6 years from the date of the event. The 6 years limit simply means that a defendant has a statutory defence. If the defendant doesn't respond then the claimant can still get a default judgment.

I don't think that is correct.

In Scotland the debt ceases to exist after five years.
In England and Wales, the debt still exists, but the claimant is statute barred from pursuing the debt through the courts if a court claim has not been commenced before six years have passed.

Jenni_D

Fruitcake said:

Jenni_D said:

Bear in mind that (in E+W, in Scotland it is different) a claimant can still raise a claim more than 6 years from the date of the event. The 6 years limit simply means that a defendant has a statutory defence. If the defendant doesn't respond then the claimant can still get a default judgment.

I don't think that is correct.

In Scotland the debt ceases to exist after five years.
In England and Wales, the debt still exists, but the claimant is statute barred from pursuing the debt through the courts if a court claim has not been commenced before six years have passed.

I know we're discussing pedantry ... ... an MCOL is filed online and is processed by the CCBC office. I somewhat doubt they look at claim filing date vs date of event and automatically bar the claim. (Maybe I'm wrong - happy to be so).

Umkomaas

Fruitcake said:

Jenni_D said:

Bear in mind that (in E+W, in Scotland it is different) a claimant can still raise a claim more than 6 years from the date of the event. The 6 years limit simply means that a defendant has a statutory defence. If the defendant doesn't respond then the claimant can still get a default judgment.

I don't think that is correct.

In Scotland the debt ceases to exist after five years.
In England and Wales, the debt still exists, but the claimant is statute barred from pursuing the debt through the courts if a court claim has not been commenced before six years have passed.

Of course, you're correct @Fruitcake, but I'm not sure what automatic checks and balances are in place at the CCBC to weed out statute barred claims.  

Given the robo nature of issuing claims, with little care or concern paid when confetti-ing them out, there's a more than fair chance of some slipping through the net with an ensuing CCJ. Which then leaves the motorist holding the baby and having to jump through all the hoops (and with the costs) of getting it set aside.  Maybe that is what @Jenni_D is referring to?

Jenni_D

Umkomaas said:

Fruitcake said:

Jenni_D said:

Bear in mind that (in E+W, in Scotland it is different) a claimant can still raise a claim more than 6 years from the date of the event. The 6 years limit simply means that a defendant has a statutory defence. If the defendant doesn't respond then the claimant can still get a default judgment.

I don't think that is correct.

In Scotland the debt ceases to exist after five years.
In England and Wales, the debt still exists, but the claimant is statute barred from pursuing the debt through the courts if a court claim has not been commenced before six years have passed.

Of course, you're correct @Fruitcake, but I'm not sure what automatic checks and balances are in place at the CCBC to weed out statute barred claims.  

Given the robo nature of issuing claims, with little care or concern paid when confetti-ing them out, there's a more than fair chance of some slipping through the net with an ensuing CCJ. Which then leaves the motorist holding the baby and having to jump through all the hoops (and with the costs) of getting it set aside.  Maybe that is what @Jenni_D is referring to?

Exactly that ... as per my post above which appeared whilst you were typing.

Le_Kirk

Umkomaas said:

Fruitcake said:

Jenni_D said:

Bear in mind that (in E+W, in Scotland it is different) a claimant can still raise a claim more than 6 years from the date of the event. The 6 years limit simply means that a defendant has a statutory defence. If the defendant doesn't respond then the claimant can still get a default judgment.

I don't think that is correct.
In Scotland the debt ceases to exist after five years.
In England and Wales, the debt still exists, but the claimant is statute barred from pursuing the debt through the courts if a court claim has not been commenced before six years have passed.

Of course, you're correct @Fruitcake, but I'm not sure what automatic checks and balances are in place at the CCBC to weed out statute barred claims.  

Given the robo nature of issuing claims, with little care or concern paid when confetti-ing them out, there's a more than fair chance of some slipping through the net with an ensuing CCJ. Which then leaves the motorist holding the baby and having to jump through all the hoops (and with the costs) of getting it set aside.  Maybe that is what @Jenni_D is referring to?

There are none as witness the number (small) of recent cases where the PPC has actually started a claim (and CCBC have issued the N1) for a statute barred "debt".

Umkomaas

Le_Kirk said:

Umkomaas said:

Fruitcake said:

Jenni_D said:

Bear in mind that (in E+W, in Scotland it is different) a claimant can still raise a claim more than 6 years from the date of the event. The 6 years limit simply means that a defendant has a statutory defence. If the defendant doesn't respond then the claimant can still get a default judgment.

I don't think that is correct.
In Scotland the debt ceases to exist after five years.
In England and Wales, the debt still exists, but the claimant is statute barred from pursuing the debt through the courts if a court claim has not been commenced before six years have passed.

Of course, you're correct @Fruitcake, but I'm not sure what automatic checks and balances are in place at the CCBC to weed out statute barred claims.  

Given the robo nature of issuing claims, with little care or concern paid when confetti-ing them out, there's a more than fair chance of some slipping through the net with an ensuing CCJ. Which then leaves the motorist holding the baby and having to jump through all the hoops (and with the costs) of getting it set aside.  Maybe that is what @Jenni_D is referring to?

There are none as witness the number (small) of recent cases where the PPC has actually started a claim (and CCBC have issued the N1) for a statute barred "debt".

I expect the nearer they get to the actual bottom of the barrel (and they're plumbing some very murky depths already), the more the chances of some slipping through. 

M7R

Oh good so we may still be back on here then asking about what to do when a court case lands on the mat after the 6 years is up.