PRA group (appealed) on limitation

[MIKE770]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

what have I been saying for a long time now about DJs etc and legislation?? ummm =Treason

[thedirtyhound]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

What would the scenario be if a debt owner didn't do anything for six years? Would the statute of limitation still apply?

I get the point that this case affirms that the limitation period does not start until after a default notice has been issued. Theoretically a lender could wait 5 years 364 days before issuing the default notice and would then have six years from that date. But if no default notice was issued in the six year period, surely they would not be allowed to carry on after that?

The scenario that they can still enforce after say 20 years can't be right?

[Amethyst]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

I'd guess it would be different for say a credit card vs a fixed term loan / HP as they terminate at the end of a certain period whereas a credit card wouldn't terminate until a default notice is sent and not complied with ?

[warwick65]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

If I have read this correctly, this judgement has harmed the consumer and definitely the LiP. While it was argued that unfair relationships could be used as a defence if the creditor did not default for a long time, how many LiPs would be able to argue this.

All in all a terrible day for consumers

[Nibbler]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

I have no doubt DCAs will try to quote or refer to this to mislead consumers or even other judges, but AFAIK there is nothing about this that prevents another judge on another day making a less loony decision (i.e. does not set precedent).

[Amethyst]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

Nope, it's still county court - annoying though.

BMW v Hart has been a thorn for ages so the issue needs sorting out, hopefully the further appeal will do that.

[warwick65]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

I have no doubt DCAs will try to quote or refer to this to mislead consumers or even other judges, but AFAIK there is nothing about this that prevents another judge on another day making a less loony decision (i.e. does not set precedent).

I get that it is not a precedent just persuasive but when DCA's try to use it to confuse LiPs and quite possibly DJ's with less than stellar knowledge of consumer credit, it will make things more difficult - possibly even more so when they tread that fine line between fact and fiction and say it was an appeal judgement. OK I realise a judge worth his salt would want to know at what level this judgement was at but maybe not all judges are that meticulous.

I think it is also the case that many claimants already argue that limitations start from the default date

What it does reinforce is that only using a statute barred defence is going to be more difficult for now at least.Defendants need to be encouraged to use a full range of defences such as S77-79, DN's , assignments and anything else they can legitimately use. Lets just hope permission to appeal is granted and the appeal won- surely it is too important to be left alone

[EXC]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

OK I realise a judge worth his salt would want to know at what level this judgement was at but maybe not all judges are that meticulous.

To be fair I doubt that there are too many judges that don't know a county court judgment when they see one.

[warwick65]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

To be fair I doubt that there are too many judges that don't know a county court judgment when they see one.

Point taken but I do feel not all judges look at us (debtors) as having equal rights to creditors - after all 'we used the facility so we should pay it back' or well versed in CCA matters. I suppose what i am saying is, if they can use this as a persuasive argument against a LiP , I personally suspect some might . After all, they may not want to be stuck on one case all day when they have a long list to get through.

I am not questioning the integrity of Judges, just the real life pressures and gaps in their knowledge. A Judge can not be a master of all areas

[Nibbler]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

To be fair I doubt that there are too many judges that don't know a county court judgment when they see one.

Indeed. Until a firm conclusion is reached, my main concern is that this decision will be used to mislead and coerce consumers in any pre-claim or pre-judgement interactions.

Even for the more litigious DCAs, getting people to pay up then is where the real money is.

[warwick65]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

Wasn't the ruling by a circuit judge who has greater authority than a mere DJ or DDJ- at least that is what the original tweet said

[pt2537]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

OK I realise a judge worth his salt would want to know at what level this judgement was at but maybe not all judges are that meticulous.

I think the top left would give it away, where it says IN THE COUNTY COURT AT CENTRAL LONDON, so if a judge were confused as to the level of the judgment then he shouldnt be a judge

- - - Updated - - -

Wasn't the ruling by a circuit judge who has greater authority than a mere DJ or DDJ- at least that is what the original tweet said

A circuit judge sitting as a judge of the County Court is still a circuit judge in the County Court and as far as the decision goes, it carries as much weight in real terms as a DJ or DDJ decision really. Only if its a CJ sitting as a deputy High Court or High Court Judge does it make it more binding.

[Nibbler]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

I think the top left would give it away, where it says IN THE COUNTY COURT AT CENTRAL LONDON, so if a judge were confused as to the level of the judgment then he shouldnt be a judge

Like one that falls asleep during submissions?

[pt2537]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

If I have read this correctly, this judgement has harmed the consumer and definitely the LiP. While it was argued that unfair relationships could be used as a defence if the creditor did not default for a long time, how many LiPs would be able to argue this.

All in all a terrible day for consumers

It wasnt our argument, it was their QC who put that point forward, just to be clear, and we had no choice with this appeal, we won in the county court, they appealed, our hands were tied

[warwick65]

Re: PRA group lose on limitation

It wasnt our argument, it was their QC who put that point forward, just to be clear, and we had no choice with this appeal, we won in the county court, they appealed, our hands were tied

Yes I understood all that- their QC used the unfair relationship to say we had enough protection anyway and I also understand that it was PRA that appealed.

All I was saying is that it is a bad day for debtors as the pendulum moves ever so slightly further towards the creditors side