Even if you are living abroad, they can still come after you for a debt especially in the EU. Some UK Debt Collection Companies may have Partner Companies in the EU. Any agreement regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 is only enforceable in a British court.

A CCJ can only be obtained against a UK resident, if you are living outside the UK they cannot legally obtain one, although there are incidents where some creditors have obtained one using a previous known address, if this has happened it can easily be set aside see;

National Debtline England & Wales | Debt Advice | Factsheet 12 How To Set Aside A Judgment In The County Court

The EU has agreed a procedure known as an EPO -European Payment Order which came into force in January 2009 and can be used to enforce collection of a UK debt without the CCJ. The European Payment Order is only available for cross-border cases. It allows for citizens and businesses to use a simple method to enforce uncontested payments.

The important point to bear in mind is that the EOP is not, in the English sense of the word, a "proper" Court order to pay money, it is more of an invitation, which if not rejected, will lead to a formal Court order requiring the sum claimed be paid. Advice should be sought as early as practically possible, especially considering jurisdictional issues that may arise, which is a whole new set of issues to ponder over!

A reciprocal agreement in the UK means a UK Court can enforce a CCJ using the legal system of the other country. If there is no such agreement in place, a creditor can sell a debt to an agency in the relevant country and debt recovery procedures will commence under the law of that land. A creditor may have their own office in that country, or relations with other credit companies in that area.

If a creditor has taken legal action on an account, the debt can be legally recoverable indefinitely. This means that someone could start a new life abroad and work hard for the assets they accumulated, only to find a few years down the line that a creditor has traced them. Everything they have worked for is put at risk and could be taken from them to repay their debt.

The European Payment Order is under PART 78 EUROPEAN ORDER FOR PAYMENT AND EUROPEAN SMALL CLAIMS PROCEDURES - CIVIL PROCEDURE RULES

Link here:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/rules/part78

A CCJ cannot be obtained against a non UK resident, although it has happened when a creditor has used the last known address. If they do this an application to have the CCJ set aside can be made. National Debtline England & Wales | Debt Advice | Factsheet 12 How To Set Aside A Judgment In The County Court

Can I be sued for a debt if I live in another country?

A debt does not AUTOMATICALLY transfer to another country.

When considering whether to sue a few points the creditor might consider:

• Is it worth it? Amount (costs of enforcement)

• Where is the client living?

A MONEY JUDGEMENT MADE IN ENGLAND, WALES & SCOTLAND WILL ALWAYS BE ENFORCABLE IN ANOTHER COUNTRY!

The Judgement will be enforced in the law of the land that the debtor lives.

Under the Brussels Regulation and the Lugano Convention a creditor can enforce a debt in another country if that country uses the regulation or convention.

Brussels Regulation

Brussels Regime - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All EU countries except Denmark

Austria Lithuania

Belgium Luxembourg

Bulgaria Malta

Czech Republic Netherlands

Cyprus Portugal

Estonia Poland

Finland Republic of Ireland

France (including French Romania

Guiana, Guadeloupe, Slovakia

Martinique and Reunion) Slovenia

Germany Spain

Greece Sweden

Hungary United Kingdom

Italy

Latvia

Lugano Convention

http://www.ejpd.admin.ch/content/ejpd/en/home/themen/wirtschaft/ref_internationales_privatrecht/ref_lugue2007.html

Covers member of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA)

Iceland Liechtenstein Norway Switzerland

If both creditor and debtor are living/trading in UK (centre of main interest) then the creditor must use the court systems in the UK.

The Basic rule for Brussels and Lugano is that a debtor must be sued in the country in which they are domiciled regardless of nationality. Unless it’s a case of negligence, employment, insurance or land disputes.

• Countries covered by the regulation and convention will enforce judgments

made in other countries

• Procedure for this follows the same principals for enforcement in the uk

• The creditor needs to establish which court they must register the uk judgment

before it can be enforced. Embassies may be able to provide this info.

If outside a regulation or convention country, the creditor would need permission from the English or Welsh court to take action against a debtor

If outside the UK and regulation or convention countries then a reciprocal agreement will be needed

• A UK money judgment must be obtained

• The judgment must be final and conclusive and for a definite sum

• The debtor must have received notice of the original proceedings

Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1933/cukpga_19330013_en_1

Australian Capital Territory

Austria

Belgium

Canada - Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, North West Territories, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan and the Yukon Territory - and any judgment made by the Federal Court of Canada France

Germany

Guernsey

India - States of Andhra Pradesh (excepting the Scheduled Areas), Assam (except the Tribal Areas), Bihar, Bombay, Kerala, Madhya, Pradesh, Madras, Mysore, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and West Bengal; and the Union Territories of Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Tripura, Manipur and Andaman and Nicobar Islands and any judgment made by the Federal or higher courts

Isle of Man

Israel

Italy

Jersey

Netherlands including the Netherlands Antilles

Norway

Pakistan

Suriname

Tonga

If no reciprocal agreement, convention or regulation then it may be possible to enforce using the rules of the particular land.

In most cases the defendant will need to be served documents in their own country in accordance with the law of the land. The documents will need to be served through official channels and this can take several months.

See also;

Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters

http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=conventions.text&cid=17

The Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments (Australia) Order 1994

The Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments (Australia) Order 1994

Enforcing foreign judgments in England & Wales

http://www.pinsentmasons.com/PDF/EnforcingforeignjudgmentsinEngland.pdf

ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENTS IN DIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS

http://www.justice.gov.uk/civil/procrules_fin/contents/parts/part74.htm#IDA3ZWQ

Reciprocal enforcement; the Administration of Justice Act 1920 and the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933

Publications - Guidance - Queen's Bench Division

Useful references:

Australian Bankruptcy Act 1966

ComLaw Act Compilations - Bankruptcy Act 1966 (33)

Queensland Consumer Credit Code

http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/CURRENT/C/ConsumCredCode.pdf

Credit Reporting Code of Conduct

http://www.privacy.gov.au/materials/types/codesofconduct/view/6787

Collecting statute-barred debts Australia

http://www.asic.gov.au/asic/pdflib.nsf/LookupByFileName/statute_barred_debts_report.pdf/$file/statute_barred_debts_report.pdf

Debt collection guideline: for collectors and creditors

http://www.accc.gov.au/content/item.phtml?itemId=733222&nodeId=ce639366376131f07fef508852fe1833&fn=Debt%20collection%20guidelines.pdf

Privacy Act 1988

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/pa1988108/

New Zealand Insolvency Act 2006

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2006/0055/latest/DLM385299.html

Court Procedures for Debt Recovery and Enforcement NZ

http://www.cab.org.nz/information/4%20Court%20Procedures%20for%20Debt%20Recovery%20and%20Enforcement.pdf

The Canadian Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act

Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act (BIA) of Canada

Irish Consumer Act 1995

Consumer Credit Act, 1995

UK Legislation

The Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983

http://www.johnpughschambers.co.uk/Consumer_Credit_(Agreements)_Regs_1983.pdf

Consumer Credit Act 1974

Fisa.co.uk - fisa Resources and Information.

The Money Laundering Regulations 2007

The Money Laundering Regulations 2007 No. 2157

Data Protection Act 1998

Data Protection Act 1998 (c. 29)

Unfair Contract Terms Bill

http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/docs/lc292bill.pdf

Limitations Act 1980

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1980/cukpga_19800058_en_1

Banking Act 2009

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/2009/cukpga_20090001_en_1

Civil Evidence Act 1995

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1995/ukpga_19950038_en_1#Legislation-Preamble

The Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgments (Australia) Order 1994

This is used in conjunction with the Foreign Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act 1933

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/SI/si1994/Uksi_19941901_en_2.htm

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/RevisedStatutes/Acts/ukpga/1933/cukpga_19330013_en_1

European Small Claims Procedure

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200506/ldselect/ldeucom/118/118.pdf

European order for payment procedure (Regulation)

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/justice_freedom_security/judicial_cooperation_in_civil_matters/l16023_en.htm

Other

To check if a CCJ has been obtained in England/Wales

http://www.trustonline.org.uk/

To check in Scotland

http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinionsApp/index.asp

The English court has a long history of recognising and enforcing foreign judgments. English common law does not rely, as some jurisdictions do, on the question of reciprocity for such enforcement. However, there are a number of statutory regimes in English law which do require reciprocity that have been added to the English common law, making the entire question of enforcement a somewhat complex area.

Essentially, the position is that the English court will enforce judgments from an EU court though a process of registration which is straightforward and therefore relatively inexpensive and quick. Not only are money judgments enforceable, but so are injunctions. There are also very limited defences. For example, if it would be contrary to public policy to enforce the judgment or if the defendant was given insufficient time to put in their defence. That the original court lacked jurisdiction is no basis to resist enforcement.

Money judgments from many Commonwealth countries are also enforceable through registration. Here, the grounds of challenge are somewhat wider (although still fairly limited) and include the foreign court acting without jurisdiction, a defendant not having been duly served and not appearing, the foreign judgment having been obtained by fraud or an appeal pending.

Finally, there are foreign judgments from countries with whom there is no enforcement treaty, most notably the United States. In this case the English court will enforce the foreign judgment by way of a new action in England designed primarily to test the jurisdiction of the foreign court and with no review of the underlying merits. Usually a judgment creditor will proceed by way of summary judgment.

The main grounds of challenge are that the foreign court acted without jurisdiction, that the foreign judgment was not final and conclusive or that it was obtained by fraud. The foreign judgment must be for a debt or definite sum of money.

Three recent cases on which Wragge & Co has advised demonstrate the importance of this subject at different points in time. All happen to involve the US.

The first case relates to how the law on enforcing foreign judgments impacts on the negotiation of the contract right at the outset. An English vendor was negotiating a non-disclosure agreement with a US purchaser, which agreement was to be governed by English law. The US party wanted the non-exclusive jurisdiction clause in favour of the English court removed. Did that matter? Given that the English company would be the likely claimant and the US company had no assets other than in the US, it was likely that any injunctive relief would be sought in the US rather than in the English court. This isbecause an English injunction would not be easily enforceable in the US. Without a jurisdiction clause, the English claimant would still have the ability of suing in England and obtaining permission to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction on the US defendant, albeit with no jurisdiction clause the US defendant might more easily be able to argue the US was a more appropriate forum.

The second example is perhaps the most stark. We acted for an English company that had been sued in the US by a US claimant in relation to various non contractual claims. The question arose as to whether our client should in fact participate in those proceedings. Ultimately, they decided not to do so on the basis that they had no "presence" within the US. Given this was a non contractual claim, so there was no jurisdiction clause in favour of the US, any default judgment that the US claimant might obtain would not be enforceable in England on the grounds that the US court would be treated as lacking jurisdiction. This was a bold but ultimately justified approach to take.

Finally, in enforcement proceedings brought in England to enforce a Floridian judgment, the judgment debtor relied on an appeal in the Florida proceedings. The English Court entered judgment. The interesting question here was whether the court would order a stay of the English proceedings pending the outcome of the appeal (it being well settled law that an appeal of itself will not prevent the judgment being final and conclusive and therefore enforceable). In this case, the English court ordered a conditional stay, the condition being payment of the judgment sum into court, ie, effectively not ordering a stay.

The law in relation to enforcing foreign judgments continues to develop. Cases such as the long-running and much reported Munib Masri v Consolidated Contractors International Company SAL, relating to the enforcement of an English judgment against Lebanese companies by way of the appointment of a receiver over the defendant's interests in foreign assets, provides a perfect example of how important it is to have clear and expert advice on enforcing forgeign judgments.

Serving Statutory Demands on someone living abroad

see pages 4 & 5 http://www.insolvency.gov.uk/pdfs/guidanceleafletspdf/statdemand.pdf

A statutory demand is not a document issued by the court. Leave to serve out of the jurisdiction is not therefore required. When a statutory demand is served outside the jurisdiction, the time limits for compliance (21 days) and for application to set aside (16 days) must be amended. This is done with reference to the Extra Jurisdiction Tables (Time for Acknowledgement of Service) in the Supreme Court Practice 1997, and the time is altered with reference to each particular country. [see Practice Direction (Bankruptcy: Service Abroad (No 1 of 1988 [1988] 1 WLR 461.]

There are some restrictions on you being

able to present a bankruptcy petition if a

debtor who lives abroad fails to comply with

a statutory demand:

 

• If the debtor lives in one of the member

states of the European Union (apart from

Denmark), you will not be able to present

a bankruptcy petition against that person

if they carry on business or earn their

living in that EU country.

 

• If the person is retired or unemployed, the

court will look at the place where they

normally live. You have to make the

person bankrupt under the law of the

country where they normally work or live.

 

• If the debtor lives in a country that is not

in the EU, or if they live in Denmark, then

you will be able to present a bankruptcy

petition only if they have lived or had a

residence here, or carried on business

here, at any time in the 3 years before the

date you present the bankruptcy petition.

The only exception is if they are in

England and Wales on that day.

Other Useful Links;

Expat Focus - Forums - Expat Issues (scroll down for country specific forums) - Credit and Debt Management

June 7, 2010

National Credit Code registrations closing date

 

ASIC has issued a reminder that anyone who is currently engaged in credit activities (as defined by the National Consumer Credit Protection Act) who is yet to register must do so before 30 June 2010, and ideally, by 18 June 2010, to ensure they can continue offering credit activities after 1 July 2010......

 

 

Registered persons’, and prospective licensees who are yet to register, must apply for a credit licence between 1 July 2010 and 31 December 2010, or become a representative of a registered person or a credit licensee if they wish to continue engaging in credit activities beyond 31 December 2010.

Attached are several files which may be of interest;

ACCC-ASIC_Debt_Collection_Guideline.pdf

ACCC - DealingWithDebtJune07.pdf

BFSO Bulletin+57.pdf

presentation_essential_banking_law_and_practice_bfso.pdf

RG-National Consumer Credit Reform.pdf

And;

commonwealth regulation of credit.pdf

Singapore Law http://www.singaporelaw.sg/content/CivilProcedure.html

The jurisdiction of a court is the territory over which a court has power to make and enforce orders. When it is used in this sense, it is a geographical area. The jurisdiction of English Courts is England and Wales and any part of the territorial waters of the United Kingdom adjoining England and Wales.

The word is used in another sense to indicate whether or not a court has power to adjudicate a dispute. If the court is competent to hear a dispute, it is said to have jurisdiction. Jurisdiction may be disputed on the basis of the nature or characteristics of the parties to the litigation or the characteristics of the dispute before it.

Whether or not a court has power to hear international disputes, parties may bring a challenge as to whether the court does have power hear and determine dispute. For example, if the dispute has no nexus with England or Wales, an English court is likely to decline to hear the matter, as the dispute and associated litigation has no business before English court. Some other court would be a more appropriate forum for the parties to resolve and determine their disputes.

Also, it may be that a claimant is not recognised by English Courts as having say, locus standi, or capacity to sue (such as a minor), or a defendant enjoys immunity from suit (such as a diplomat).

English courts will have jurisdiction against foreign defendants (whether a company or individual) where:

1. the defendant submits to the jurisdiction;
   
2. the defendant is in the jurisdiction, even on a transitory basis, and they are properly served in accordance with the Civil Procedure Rules. The court may decide at a later date that English courts and the lex situs is forum non conveniens;
   
3. a rule of law permits the claimant to serve the defendant out of the jurisdiction. For commencement of proceedings in most countries (the notable exception is members of the European Union) is subject to the discretion of the court. The court will consider whether England is the most appropriate forum for a trial on the issues to be litigated (a forum conveniens).
   

These rules are generally relied upon when no treaty or convention exists to serve proceedings out of the jurisdiction.

Usage: A supplier from France to the UK market submitted to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England on the basis of its contracts entered into with UK companies.

"When a person out of the jurisdiction voluntarily enters an appearance before a court of England (other than to contest jurisdiction of the court), the court has jurisdiction over the defendant. The principle applies whether or not there is a previous agreement between the litigants. The rationale is based on the theory that a person who would otherwise not be subject to the jurisdiction of the courts consents to the jurisdiction by challenging the merits of the case.

Usually the first form of communication with a court by a defendant will be by filing an acknowledgment of service. It is at this point that the defendant notifies the court that it intends to contest the jurisdiction of the court. By failing to file an acknowledgment of service (assuming service has been properly effected), the claimant may proceed to obtain Summary Judgment on the claim. Any other step that amounts to a recognition of the court’s jurisdiction in respect to the particular claim will be taken to be a submission to the jurisdiction, such as filing a Defence or requesting an extension of time for filing a Defence. "

Procedure for disputing the court’s jurisdiction

11

(1) A defendant who wishes to –

(a) dispute the court’s jurisdiction to try the claim; or

(b) argue that the court should not exercise its jurisdiction

may apply to the court for an order declaring that it has no such jurisdiction or should not exercise any jurisdiction which it may have.

(2) A defendant who wishes to make such an application must first file an acknowledgment of service in accordance with Part 10.

(3) A defendant who files an acknowledgment of service does not, by doing so, lose any right that he may have to dispute the court’s jurisdiction.

(4) An application under this rule must –

(a) be made within 14 days after filing an acknowledgment of service; and

(b) be supported by evidence.

(5) If the defendant –

(a) files an acknowledgment of service; and

(b) does not make such an application within the period specified in paragraph (4),

he is to be treated as having accepted that the court has jurisdiction to try the claim.

(6) An order containing a declaration that the court has no jurisdiction or will not exercise its jurisdiction may also make further provision including –

(a) setting aside the claim form;

(b) setting aside service of the claim form;

© discharging any order made before the claim was commenced or before the claim form was served; and

(d) staying the proceedings.

(7) If on an application under this rule the court does not make a declaration –

(a) the acknowledgment of service shall cease to have effect;

(b) the defendant may file a further acknowledgment of service within 14 days or such other period as the court may direct; and

© the court shall give directions as to the filing and service of the defence in a claim under Part 7 or the filing of evidence in a claim under Part 8 in the event that a further acknowledgment of service is filed.

(8) If the defendant files a further acknowledgment of service in accordance with paragraph (7)(b) he shall be treated as having accepted that the court has jurisdiction to try the claim.

(9) If a defendant makes an application under this rule, he must file and serve his written evidence in support with the application notice, but he need not before the hearing of the application file –

(a) in a Part 7 claim, a defence; or

(b) in a Part 8 claim, any other written evidence.

So 14 days after AoS you then file an application N244

Consumer Credit Act, 1995 (Eire) http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1995/en/act/pub/0024/index.html

German Debt Collection;

german debt law.doc

german_civil_code.pdf