We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
CCJ judgement in default from unpaid phone bill - what are my options?
Comments
-
Okay - thanks for clarifying that! We'll give Lowell a call this morning then and go from there.
Thanks for all the help - fingers crossed!0 -
So! we've spoken to Lowell now and they've offered her a much lower monthly amount (£20) and she's able to pay extra as and when she can which is also helpful. Obviously it's better to pay it quicker as the CCJ ends 6 years after being "Satisfied".
Only thing is, they did warn her that her CCJ would show as "in arrears" as it's not being paid off exactly as the court ordered. I wondered if we should use the court form to ask the CCJ to be varied to match the new repayments (with the letter to evidence this potentially) so that her CCJ would then not show as in arrears? Or whether Lowell are able to do this (guess it's not really in their interests too)?
0 -
The ccj ends when it is paid off.
The entry on your credit file disappears 6 years after the date of judgement. Nothing changes that
There is no 'in arrears' mark on your credit file. Technically you are in breach of the court order if you are paying less than was ordered and so enforcement could be used. But if you are paying with the agreement of the creditor then that would not happen.
If you pay it off within the 6 years you can get it marked 'satisfied'
It sounds like Lowell have not been too difficult in this case.1 -
Oh, interesting. Okay, so we're good then in that case - the CCJ will be gone probably after 2-3 years (my partner intends to overpay about £50 per month most months), and the credit report marker disappears after 6 years from when the CCJ was served.
And because we're in breach of the court order we could have enforcement used against us, but since that is triggered by the creditor it's not in their interest to do that and in practice will be fine.
Is that all correct?
They were very reasonable actually, which is why I'm looking for any edge-cases or problems which we might have missed
0 -
That's correct. There's no point in them pushing ,and paying, for enforcement if money is coming in.1
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards