Why do some loans/CC end up in court, and others don't?

Jeekah

Just wondering really as I noticed some people can claim statute barred if they have not acknowledged a debt for over 6 years and others can't if there was ever a CCJ registered against them. Surely all loan or CC companies would take you to court if you didn't pay wouldn't they?

Like I said, just something I have been wondering about.

stapeley

If the paperwork they hold , the CCA is questionable or is lost they will try everything to make you pay. But without a valid CCA a court will not endorse the debt IF you defend a claim .

Ames

I've never been taken to court, I think it's because the amounts I owe on each debt are so small, and I'm on income support, that they wouldn't get the court costs back let alone the debt. It depends on individual circumstances I think.

Broken_hearted

Stapley they said CCJ not CCA totally different things.

Jeekah

Thank you for the replies.

The reason I asked was because a friend has received a letter from a DCA for a debt that is over 6 years old. I have the link to the Statute Barred letter that she could send but as she moved house just after she went into arrears on her debt, she has no idea if it ever went to court or not. It was a credit card for about £4000. She has checked her file but being over 6 years old she can not tell if there was a CCJ on there or not and obviously if there was, the statute barred would not apply.

After reading this forum I have seen that a lot of people's debts are unenforcable because it has gone over the 6 year period (so they couldn't have gone to court) so that just lead me to ponder why nonpayment of some debts (mainly loans and CC's) end up with a CCJ and others don't leading you to be able to Statute Barred.

Has that made any sense?

J

stapeley

Broken_hearted wrote: »

Stapley they said CCJ not CCA totally different things.

Were they not asking why some companies will take you to court and other won't? Thought I answered that .

Broken_hearted

Nope not one company has taken us to court and I'm sure they all have full CCA's

stapeley

Is it because they believe there are no assets and will only get a token payment ?

Broken_hearted

Wrong again assets total over £90,000 but they will only get token payments.

MrsTinks

Depends on the company quite often As far as I can there there is no minimum or maximum amounts they have in mind for "deciding to take it to court" - although I think often if you have made a decided effort to stick to a payment plan - even if only token payments then they know this will be seen as being willing to repay by a court and therefor less likely to acchieve a CCJ - If you have provided a SOA and they can see you're paying all you can then what is the point of taking you to court? Granted that isn't always the case and some companies will go as far as getting a charging order on your home sometimes.
There seems to be no hard rules about when and why unfortunately...

stapeley

Broken_hearted wrote: »

Wrong again assets total over £90,000 but they will only get token payments.

hello again , can I ask your reasons for non payment . Or should I ask what you grounds for non payment are? Mine are I,m skint ! And I KNOW that on one account I did not sign a CCA . CHEERS