Set aside an old CCJ

[mrjon]

I wish to ask your opinion on setting aside a default CCJ in this scenario, if a claimant brought to my attention a default CCJ that was 24 years old, and asked me for payment, would the claimant need to have a copy of the original CCJ? As the court would no longer have any records, does the claimant have to prove the existence and monetary value of the judgment? if the claimant attempted to ask the court permission to reissue enforcement? again would they need the original copy of the CCJ?

If a claimant were to simply state a claim number and a date be sufficient to convince a court that a CCJ does exist?

Would all this be a barrier to the claimant?

Thanks

[R0b]

Hi

I think the claimant might struggle here. If I was unaware that legal proceedings had been issued and a default judgment had been granted, then someone told me they have a judgment against me 24 years later, my starting position would be to deny any liability and get them to prove it.

I don't think a claim number or a date is sufficient, because that number could be a fake one, or a claim that started but was discontinued or a genuine claim. Without an order of the court confirming default judgment, I don't think a judge would be able to verify and ascertain that there was indeed a valid judgment 24 years ago.

Even if the claimant could get over that very high hurdle of proving the existence of a valid default judgment, you rightly state that permission would be required to enforce. The starting point is that permission should not be granted unless there is a demonstrable reason why it should be. Three questions need to be considered by the court:

1. The reasons why the judgment was not enforced during the six years when it could have been without permission.

2. The explanation for any delay after the expiry of the six year period in making the application for permission.

3. The prejudice caused to the debtor if permission was granted.

On the face of it, I cannot think of any reason why someone would wait 24 years to enforce a money judgment and there is, quite frankly, no excuse why they shouldn't have taken enforcement action at an earlier stage. The only possible example where an explanation might be plausible, is if the debtor has been deliberately evading the claimant, moving from house to house, out of the country etc. such that the claimant has spent significant time trying to trace the debtor but without luck and only now they have finally pinpointed the debtor to a specific residence. I'm sure you can see how extreme this kind of explanation is in order for a court to maybe think about granting permission.

[mrjon]

Dear Rob

Many thanks for your detailed explanation, I certainly was not avoiding anybody at this time and had moved to a new address and was on the electoral roll and had my bank account and tax records at my new address, thanks again.