Repaid CCJ - Creditor wants More!

[restless]

Hello, this is my first post here so I hope this is in the correct place.

I could really do with advice on this please.

A brief history of time.
2006 – take out loan of 10k.
2007 – default.
2009 – receive CCJ, but Judge agrees with me that the Claimant “reconstituted” the default notice in such a way as to strengthen their claim against me. Awards Claimant significantly less than sum claimed. I am Ordered to repay monthly.
2020 – Final CCJ monthly repayment made, all repayments made by standing order and can be evidenced through Bank statements.
2009 – 2020 The debt is bought & sold 4 times.

I notify the current owner (H) that the CCJ has been repaid in full.
They say that I still owe more. They state the balance still owing is the original amount due under the agreement, and they know nothing of the CCJ.
I send them some evidence, which is ignored & their demands for payment continue. Dealing with H is like being in an alternate universe, they are children.

This email tennis has been going on for 2 and a half years now, and I would like some advice on how to stop it.

It appears to me that the Original Creditor sold the debt (at the full agreement value) and “forgot” to mention there was a CCJ for significantly less value in effect. I have contacted the OC directly, and unsurprisingly, they have no records now.

I have thought about applying for a Declaration of satisfaction of CCJ, but the evidence bundle would be quite large. Is this a possibility, and if so, does the Court require agreement from the current creditor?
To be successful, I suspect this would require a hearing, and I would need to attend in person to walk the Judge through the evidence.

Is there any other possibility, other than wait for them to issue a claim and have to defend (Res Judicata)?

Thank you.

[pt2537]

Did the Court Judgment say anything about post Judgment Interest? Did the default notice mention judgment following on after proceedings?

The rules were quite strict on Post Judgment interest on regulated debts, so, if the Court has ruled on what you have to pay, and youve paid it, i fail to see how they could say you still owe.

If they did sue again it would be an abuse of process

[restless]

The Judgement had the standard "Where judgment is entered for more than £5000 or includes a sum in respect of contractual or late payment interest, the claimant may be entitled to further interest" clause printed, but the Judgment text itself didn't mention interest.

The Judgment sum was below £5000, but with the costs was over £5000.

[restless]

I think I should add that they are not seeking interest, they don't acknowledge the CCJ at all.

They are seeking the full amount that was due under the original agreement.

[pt2537]

oh, i wonder if it was just arrears that they got, in which case they may be able to pursue the remainder, a point worth noting.

[restless]

Yes, the claim was originally for arrears and (as the agreement had been terminated by then) sums not yet due. Which totalled the full amount due under the agreement.

However, on the day of the hearing, their barrister changed it to arrears only, as all the payment dates had elapsed. This also amounted to the full amount due under the agreement.

So either way, the claim amount being contested at the hearing was the full amount.

[R0b]

oh, i wonder if it was just arrears that they got, in which case they may be able to pursue the remainder, a point worth noting.

Well PT, not sure there would be a case for that on the principles of res judicata. If they issued a claim for recovery of arrears based on a default, then they should have brought proceedings at the same time for recovering the remainder of the debt under the agreement since that could have been dealt with at the same time (per Henderson v Henderson). Even if the new creditor can overcome that hurdle I assume they would have nowhere to go on the basis that a default notice issued in 2007 would make the remaining debt time-barred, unless I've misread something.

I would put them on notice for harassment and if they continue down this path then you will consider claiming compensation for making demands they are not legally entitled to make. As the purchaser and creditor of the debt which has moved hands several times, it's their job to satisfy themselves they are entitled to pursue you. You've given them the necessary information (and if you haven't give them the court claim number and the court which heard it) so they can't say they weren't informed. Obviously you don't have to take legal action for harassment but sometimes slapping it in there can make creditors back down a little, though not always if their mind is already made up.

Also worth raising the point the debt is statute barred, because you can then refer them to their obligations under the FCA CONC Rules:

7.15.4 Notwithstanding that a debt may be recoverable, a firm must not attempt to recover a statute barred debt in England, Wales or Northern Ireland if the lender or owner has not been in contact with the customer during the limitation period.

If they have recently purchase the alleged debt from the previous creditor, then they are certainly almost out of time based on what I mentioned earlier, so they should not be pursuing or making demands. If they continue, then you can report them to the FCA who will make a note and pass the information on to the enforcement team.

Also the below is self-explanatory

7.15.8 A firm must not continue to demand payment from a customer after the customer has stated that he will not be paying the debt because it is statute barred.

It also begs the question, whether the creditor is actually registered with the FCA. You can check the FCA register (FCA Register) and confirm if they have the right permissions to pursue the debt in the first place or, if they're not registered they may not even have a right legally since this kind of debt collection is a regulated activity that requires permission from the FCA.

[restless]

Hello

Yes, I have given H the claim number and court.

It hasn't stopped them from making demands for the balance though!.

I'm pretty sure H is FCA registered, H is a large debt purchaser.
Just checked, yes they are on the register.

[restless]

So as I see it, I have 4 possibilities.

1, Ignore H and await a claim.

2, Negotiate a F & F with H. Any further sums paid would be over and above what the Court ordered.

3, Pray H doesn't try and claim interest for 12 years of outstanding debt. I'm not absolutely certain either way if they can, but I wouldn't want to find out.

4, Obtain a Declaration of Satisfaction of the CCJ from the Court.

Am I overlooking anything?

[pt2537]

Well PT, not sure there would be a case for that on the principles of res judicata. If they issued a claim for recovery of arrears based on a default, then they should have brought proceedings at the same time for recovering the remainder of the debt under the agreement since that could have been dealt with at the same time (per Henderson v Henderson). Even if the new creditor can overcome that hurdle I assume they would have nowhere to go on the basis that a default notice issued in 2007 would make the remaining debt time-barred, unless I've misread something.

I would put them on notice for harassment and if they continue down this path then you will consider claiming compensation for making demands they are not legally entitled to make. As the purchaser and creditor of the debt which has moved hands several times, it's their job to satisfy themselves they are entitled to pursue you. You've given them the necessary information (and if you haven't give them the court claim number and the court which heard it) so they can't say they weren't informed. Obviously you don't have to take legal action for harassment but sometimes slapping it in there can make creditors back down a little, though not always if their mind is already made up.

Also worth raising the point the debt is statute barred, because you can then refer them to their obligations under the FCA CONC Rules:



If they have recently purchase the alleged debt from the previous creditor, then they are certainly almost out of time based on what I mentioned earlier, so they should not be pursuing or making demands. If they continue, then you can report them to the FCA who will make a note and pass the information on to the enforcement team.

Also the below is self-explanatory



It also begs the question, whether the creditor is actually registered with the FCA. You can check the FCA register (FCA Register) and confirm if they have the right permissions to pursue the debt in the first place or, if they're not registered they may not even have a right legally since this kind of debt collection is a regulated activity that requires permission from the FCA.

I was just thinking out loud, i have seen it argued where a claim succeeded on the arrears only, and then they reissued for the outstanding balance after service of a compliant default notice.

[jaguarsuk]

Ask them to prove they are legally entitled to pursue you pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925 s.136 by evidencing the five notice of assignment from each creditor to you as you do not recall receiving any of them or else go away until they can prove they legally own the alleged debt.

If they can provide a notices of assignment from the original creditor, the debt purchaser who claimed against you and the subsequent three others that purchased the debt prior to them I'll be amazed.

If (highly unlikely they will be able to) can't expect them to write back with a copy of the letter they sent you themselves only, that is the point at which you point out that section 136 states the 'assignor' not the 'assignee' is obliged in law to provide notice and their 'Welcome Letter' is irrelevant.

You then reiterate your request.

I would say the debt might not be statute barred because the last payment to the debt may be judged as the repayments to the CCJ, I wouldn't want to rely on it as a sole defence and it might be a matter of opinion? No harm in saying it to them though to muddy the water.

[restless]

Thank you all for the comments & strategies.

I was hoping there might have been an official / binding procedure to prove the payments have been completed as per the judgment. This is probably not an issue when both (or multiple) parties have kept accurate records.