Second CCJ for the same debt

[Morena]

Hello there

Good afternoon.

I have an old debt from about 2002, in 2012 there was a CCJ against me for this debt which I couldn't defend because I was out of the country. This debt has been passed on to so many different debt collectors (none of which I have ever contacted) that I have lost count.

About a month ago I received a letter from Drydens Fairfax - who I have never heard of saying they were going to apply to the county court on behalf of Arrow Global. 2 days ago I received a claim form from the County Court for this debt. My confusion and question is - there is already a CCJ in place for this debt - from about 5 years ago, therefore how can they apply for another one for the same debt. It was a different debt company at the time or it may have been from Sainsburys directly - so does that mean that any debtor for the same debt can apply again?

Any help and guidance would be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks

[MIKE770]

Re: Second CCJ for the same debt

have they bought the CCJ? if they have they may be requesting to act on it against you, or is it a proper county court Blue N1 form, more detail would help the confusion from you originator who issued CCK in the 1st place. any chasing you since it was issued etc etc etc

[Morena]

Re: Second CCJ for the same debt

since the first CCJ was issued - there has been chasing from lots of different debt companies as I believe it keeps getting sold on to other people. The original CCJ I believe was from Sainshurys themselves - which is who I took the loan out with. These Drysden people are the first that have made an application to the county court. It is an N1 claim form yes. They are acting on behalf of Arrow Global Limited.

[charitynjw]

Re: Second CCJ for the same debt

If there is already a CCJ for the same (or substantially the same) cause of action, I believe the appropriate way to 'displace' the original Judgment Creditor is to make an application to the court.
As this may be more expensive to do, I suspect it could be that they are trying a sneaky.

[Morena]

Re: Second CCJ for the same debt

What would you advise the best way to proceed from here, contact them and say there is already a ccj in place or file a defence saying this?

[charitynjw]

Re: Second CCJ for the same debt

Personally I would do both.
Defend on the stated basis, & then send the Claimant/sols a letter advising them to discontinue as the caim is an abuse of process.

[Morena]

Re: Second CCJ for the same debt

are there any sample letters for this type of thing or should I just write what has happened?

[Morena]

Re: Second CCJ for the same debt

im thinking would a better way to defend this to say it is statute barred? The original CCJ was made under 6 years ago - but the original loan was taken out nearly 16 years ago - and I have not acknowledged the debt in well over 6 years. Im thinking they couldnt point to the original CCJ and say that was under 6 years ago - because then they would be shooting themselves in the foot.

[Morena]

Re: Second CCJ for the same debt

I was thinking something like this

In response to the Particulars of claim.


1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague
and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case
below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any
particular allegation to which a specific response has not been
made.


2. Paragraph 1 is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any
monies to the Claimant. The claimant has failed to provide any
evidence of agreement/contract/breach as requested by CPR 31.14
and is in default of a Section 78 request.


3. Paragraph 2 is denied the Claimant is put to strict proof that
a notice of assignment was issued to, and received by the
Defendant. The Defendant maintains that a notice of assignment was
never received.


Regarding paragraph 2, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt,
it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to
contraventions of Section 136 of the Law ofProperty Act and
Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974.


4. Paragraph 3 is denied as The Defendant maintains that a default
notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to
that a default notice was issued to and received by the
Defendant.


5. I made a legal request by way of a section 78 request to the
Claimant. The Claimant has not yet produced the requested
documents therefore I am currently unable to fully defend this
claim.


6. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the
Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed and evidence
any breach and notice of breach by way of a default notice or
notice of sums in arrears.


Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:


(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement; and
(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and
(c) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under
statute or equity to issue a claim.


7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied
that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.


The Defendant has not acknowledged the debt in writing in the last
six (6) years.


The Defendant has not paid any part of this debts in the last six
(6) years.


The Defendant has reminded the Claimant that the debt has become
statute barred in accordance with THE LIMITATION ACT 1980 (SECTION
5)


The Defendant has requested copies of documents (agreement,
default notice, assignment) mentioned in the particulars of claim
in accordance with CPR 31.14 but the claimant has failed to comply
with this request.


ACCORDINGLY THE Defendant seeks the Claimants claim to be
dismissed by the court as the debt is a statute-barred under the
Limitations Act 1980, Section 5


The claim is denied.


Statement of Truth


I, XXXXX the Defendant, believe that the facts stated in
this Defence are true.


Signed …………………………………………


Dated

[Morena]

Re: Second CCJ for the same debt

bump