Statute Barred Debts and Court

[Wombats]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

can you find the info you need from your credit file - re SB debt. or at least get a good indication as to when the last payment was

Your credit file shows the default date. This is usually different to the 'cause of action' which is the start of the 6 year SB period. Having it within a few months isn't good enough, as often in the cases going to court, these few months can be critical.

With phantom payments I think the judge may well be tempted to see SB as debt avoidance, which it can be. What irritates me is that regardless of whether it is debt avoidance or not, the Limitations Act states it is SB after 6 years and cannot be enforced in a court of law (except it can now). What is the point of the legislation if the court is going to ignore it?

I don't think a stat dec would do it. I do think there must be a solution, but it is evading me at present and certainly for me, I need to learn a LOT more about court procedures which I'm trying to do bit by bit.

[seduraed]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

Nope - nor would I. :beagle:

It's a tricky one. They seem to have switched from going for the SD as the threat to this, probably with a view to getting CO's on property owners to secure the debt. That's where I'm lucky as I own nothing worth taking anymore, and making me BK would genuinely help me. I can't afford to make myself BK. Been in this same position for about 4 or 5 years now since CAB advised me to stop paying anyone and let my creditors make me BK. I've asked 3 to, but they wouldn't. It puts me in a reasonable position.

Others are different, and it's them (as well as me obviously) I'm primarily thinking about - those for whom it would be a disaster.

Another part of me thinks a defended CCJ is no bad thing as you only pay what you can afford to pay. Your CRF is screwed for 6 years anyway, so a CCJ on there for 6 years is going to make little difference. Next is the issue of the means enquiry for the court - do you put down SB debts or not? If you do the court may make you bankrupt. Catch 22 again ...........

Loads of issues to think about about for people, and very tricky to decide what to do. It has to be each case on its own merits as no two will be the same.

I need a better brain!

When I worked for Welcome finance there was fund administered by Anglian water IIRC which provided funds specifically aollowing debtors to go bankrupt . There may be some others as well .

[skilganon]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

just thinking out loud here,

if you are certain that this 'debt' is SB'd but the system pushes the claim to a hearing instead of filing just a WS could you, or would it be wise to, file an affidavit of truth stating that this 'debt' is SB'd ?

makes it more difficult for the judge to ignore ?

[Wombats]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

just thinking out loud here,

if you are certain that this 'debt' is SB'd but the system pushes the claim to a hearing instead of filing just a WS could you, or would it be wise to, file an affidavit of truth stating that this 'debt' is SB'd ?

makes it more difficult for the judge to ignore ?

Maybe combine that with the Statutory Declaration mentioned by Ame re not having made any payments and we begin to get a cheap way of at least making the judge look at it. It has to be worth a try in the absence of further ideas.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

It appears to me that a lot of DCA's are currently issuing claims for SB debts, and often ignoring 31.14 requests and even CCA requests.

I've always taken the view it's best to keep quiet once a debt goes SB lest it come back to haunt you.

Given so many are now coming back to haunt people, should we be advising people to send the SB letter as soon as they know for sure it is SB to the creditor at that time, in order to try to pre-empt any potential action later on?

I don't know how these claims are doing in court, but if they were all failing, I assume the DCA's would stop issuing the claims.

Any thoughts / comments anyone? :beagle:

I've just seen this thread today and this poster had sent the SB letter, yet they've received a claim.

http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...131#post485131

So we have to assume that a SB debt is not SB as the courts might ignore legislation.

In light of this, how best do we protect ourselves and others when a debt is coming up to SB or we know it to be SB?

I guess the answer is get the evidence in advance of it going SB via a SAR (given most, like me, would not have past paperwork). After it goes SB give it 3 or 4 months to be extra sure, run it past the forum to be extra extra sure, then write to the current creditor stating it is SB and ask for confirmation of this. Would the creditor confirm it? Has anyone tried? I'm thinking out loud for ways to protect people with SB debts.

Sadly most banks will only send data for the past six years, so you may not get very much if you wait till the debt is SBd, as it will be over six years since your account was active.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

It appears to make the entire post 2007 unenforceability argument totally pointless.

Unenforceability applies mostly to pre-2007 accounts rather than post-2007, due to the repeal of s.127 of the CCA with effect from 6th April 2007.

The argument is not pointless, on the contrary, if you don't make payments after default you can be sure the debt will be SBd six years later.

I sent SARs to my creditors right after I stopped paying them, at the same time as my CCA requests. Obviously that wouldn't cover the last few years but it means I have the data I wouldn't be able to obtain now, going back to 2004. It always pays to be prepared. Sadly most people who come here with court claims didn't know any of this before.

TOugh to get the evidence without acknowledging the debt and thus resetting the clock. Evidence AFTER it has gone SB would be better. But BEFORE the COURT CLAIM.

You may not get much from a SAR after six years because most banks only claim to have data for the past six years.

That leaves a bit of a Catch 22 situation then, as without the info you can't be sure it's SB, but until it's SB it's unwise to send for the info.

Hmmm....... thinking time. There must be a way to protect people, it's finding it. It sort of affects me directly, though I don't care if I'm made BK. Obviously it would be better not to be BK'd. I'm thinking more of thousands of others who are in this situation and whose lives would be turned upside down by BK.

Is there a SAR which is generic and doesn't acknowledge a debt? It must be possible to ask for information about yourself without mentioning a specific account, thus acknowledging a potential debt. If there isn't one, I'm very happy to try to write one if it would help?

A SAR doesn't acknowledge the debt because it's a request under the DPA for all data held about you, not about a specific account.

Another one here http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...ted-14-10-2014

Yes you can send a SAR without acknowledging the debt, but there's always the risk it will alert the companies to it's near stat barrededness so they take action sooner. If you're going for stat barred and you've got 5 years 8 months along the road, then I wouldn't want to recommend any one pokes the hornets nest until they are safetly over the six years.

I agree with this and I certainly wouldn't be contacting anyone if they don't contact me, however, one thing to bear in mind is that most debts (with a few exceptions such as my own :noidea get sold on to debt purchasers. SARs are normally sent to the original creditor rather than the DCA because DCAs don't tend to have any historical data. However, it is the debt purchasers who have been making up those phantom payments, so a SAR to, say, Lloyds or HSBC wouldn't prove you didn't pay Lowell or Arrow. You'd need to SAR the debt purchaser.

can you find the info you need from your credit file - re SB debt. or at least get a good indication as to when the last payment was

CRA files are not reliable in this respect, especially when people have been making token/reduced/DMP payments after defaulting.

[Wombats]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

Unenforceability applies mostly to pre-2007 accounts rather than post-2007, due to the repeal of s.127 of the CCA with effect from 6th April 2007.

The argument is not pointless, on the contrary, if you don't make payments after default you can be sure the debt will be SBd six years later.

I sent SARs to my creditors right after I stopped paying them, at the same time as my CCA requests. Obviously that wouldn't cover the last few years but it means I have the data I wouldn't be able to obtain now, going back to 2004. It always pays to be prepared. Sadly most people who come here with court claims didn't know any of this before.

You may not get much from a SAR after six years because most banks only claim to have data for the past six years.

So (with more than a little Devil's Advocate possibly!:tinysmile_twink_t2::beagle::tung someone fighting UE now on the internet for a post April '97 debt, of whom there are many, are technically not fighting UE, they're practising debt avoidance (and I'm not casting judgments on anyone for doing that - I admit openly to not paying debts for the simple reason I don't have any money or belongings, if I did I'd be paying them! I lost my ability to bring in an income)?

Maybe UE now is seen as playing letter tennis on technicalities without acknowledging the debts in the hope of getting them passed round and round until such time as they become UE.

On a separate tack, do any figures exist for people who've been in debt and come out of it, whether through SB or some formal solution up to and including BK, saying whether they have'learnt a lesson' or not? I'm not aware of any existing, though I've read many posts from people who say they'll never again take out credit. I just wondered if there's anything official to show whether or not these posts turn into reality?

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

So (with more than a little Devil's Advocate possibly!:tinysmile_twink_t2::beagle::tung someone fighting UE now on the internet for a post April '97 debt,

Presumably you mean April 2007... :confused2:

of whom there are many, are technically not fighting UE, they're practising debt avoidance (and I'm not casting judgments on anyone for doing that - I admit openly to not paying debts for the simple reason I don't have any money or belongings, if I did I'd be paying them! I lost my ability to bring in an income)?

'Fighting' is probably the wrong choice of words in the post-Carey age, since you can no longer 'fight' your creditor in court for not having a properly executed agreement as you used to.

You can call it 'debt avoidance' or whatever name you want, it doesn't alter the legalities and practicalities of it which was the subject of this discussion. I am also openly not paying debts for the simple reason that the banks were responsible for a lot of us falling into debt in the first place, then for the credit crunch and resulting global economic meltdown and never ending recession.

Maybe UE now is seen as playing letter tennis on technicalities without acknowledging the debts in the hope of getting them passed round and round until such time as they become UE.

That has been the case all along, unless you were one of them people trying to have your debts ruled UE in court through a CMC or the infamous Credit Card Killer site (I'm a self-confessed user of such site ). But that was years ago!

On a separate tack, do any figures exist for people who've been in debt and come out of it, whether through SB or some formal solution up to and including BK, saying whether they have'learnt a lesson' or not? I'm not aware of any existing, though I've read many posts from people who say they'll never again take out credit. I just wondered if there's anything official to show whether or not these posts turn into reality?

I very much doubt there would be any statistical data, who would be collecting it?

As for bankrupts, I suspect most will tell the OR that they have no intention of taking credit again for the same reason people applying for parole say they don't intend to re-offend. That doesn't mean they'll actually do as they say!

[Wombats]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

So, reflecting on all the above, it's very much a case of someone deciding in the early stages which way they want to play it. They have two paths - one is to arrange payment through one means or another depending on the size of debt; the other is to try to delay getting into court for 6 years using a vast array of technicalities and other options.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

So, reflecting on all the above, it's very much a case of someone deciding in the early stages which way they want to play it.

The majority of people we see here with court claims were not aware of their options in the early stages, most of them either made payments here and there or just ignored everything.

They have two paths - one is to arrange payment through one means or another depending on the size of debt; the other is to try to delay getting into court for 6 years using a vast array of technicalities and other options.

That would depend on a number of factors which is why whenever someone posts with debt problems we have to ask for more details. :typing:

Not everyone can afford to make payments, circumstances do change and also bear in mind that just because you are making payments it doesn't mean they can't issue court papers. There have been cases where the defendant had been keeping up with payments agreed with the creditor yet they were still taken to court.

[Amethyst]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

That has been the case all along, unless you were one of them people trying to have your debts ruled UE in court through a CMC or the infamous Credit Card Killer site (I'm a self-confessed user of such site ). But that was years ago!

We have a victim of Basil Rankine in the VIP forum at the moment dealing with a £20k + claim against them for a debt they ''sold'' to the b*stard in 2009/2010.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

We have a victim of Basil Rankine in the VIP forum at the moment dealing with a £20k + claim against them for a debt they ''sold'' to the b*stard in 2009/2010.

Yes, I remember posting on that thread. The thing is, they appeared on Panorama, and you wouldn't expect scammers to be featured on such a program, which is why I looked at them and not any of the ones who rang and advertised at the time.

They started 'buying' debts after they got an injunction against them using the courts to have agreements ruled unenforceable.

[skilganon]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

just to add another little twist to this 'argument' regarding UE, if the 'judge' rules that it is enforceable, then there is still the argument ( in most cases but not all ) that the claimant has full right, title and interest to have any lawful right to issue a claim in the first place.

which is a reason i would always advise anyone defending a claim, to pick up on dodgy N of A 's and to always require sight of the D of A, having received one and digested the contents there are a number of terms and conditions laid out in this agreement between the OC and DCA, which must be adhered to by the DCA when trying to collect, most dont follow these.

brings to the case and indeed the defence a whole new 'argument'

just my thoughts

[Wombats]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

Interesting, but how the hell do you get hold of the actual Deed of Assignment which is a private contract between creditor and buyer?

[skilganon]

Re: Statute Barred Debts and Court

Interesting, but how the hell do you get hold of the actual Deed of Assignment which is a private contract between creditor and buyer?

By requesting it in a letter, cpr request, a defence, if the debt has been 'purchased' by a DCA then there must be an agreement between the two parties this agreement is executed as a deed and is the document which proves that the DCA has full rights, title and interest to pursue or enforce any alleged debt.

unfortunately many judges will allow a simple piece of paper known commonly as a notice of assignment to be enough to prove that the DCA now 'own' the alleged debt, many of which have been simply ' concocted' by the DCA on their own computers made to 'appear' as though they have been created and sent by the OC, whats more worrying is that when this happens the DCA are copying and pasting a signature or they are indeed 'forging' signatures.

i have 4 N of A's all 'supposedly' sent by a well known bank, from 4 different DCA's and all signed by the same person, and guess what all 4 signatures are completely different !!!!