Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

can an acount re-appear if a CCJ is issued?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2178 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

as explain in 2012 cabot cant file a default - only update it

but as both the CCJ and the default have reached their 6th birthday they and the whole account on your file vanish never to return.

 

Good Evening, Can i check something with experts on here.

 

I now have a clear Credit Report with lots of nasties now dropped off.

 

Some of my old debts were pre 2007 and are no longer pursued after a CCA request, apart from the odd call and letter telling me i am morally obliged to pay them and i am a bad person etc etc.

 

I have 2 debts from 2008 which were defaulted but have now dropped off. I have the standard re-constituted CCA and have made nominal payments for 10 years.

 

My question is can a defaulted debt re-appear on your credit report if the DCA decides to go for a CCJ for money i still owe? Will the CCJ show on the credit report even though the debt has long since dropped off nearly 2 years ago?

 

Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CCJ would show but the account entry can't comeback no

 

Who said the recons you have are enforceable??

I can't see a thread of yours to ref too

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CCJ would show but the account entry can't comeback no

 

Who said the recons you have are enforceable??

I can't see a thread of yours to ref too

 

Hi DX, Thanks for quick reply.

 

There probably isn't a direct thread, i just used all the great advice on here to sort everything out myself.

 

So the CCJ would still show and ruin my decent credit report if they went down this line?

 

I probably just assumed the recons were enforceable as they were after 2008.

 

It is a copy of the agreement with my name and address on plus a copy of the T&C's for the old account.

There was also an accompanying letter saying they have complied with relevant sections of the CCA 1974 etc and the agreement is enforceable and they are able to obtain a CCJ against me etc.

 

I just continued the same nominal payments of a few pounds a month and have heard nothing for a few years until a few recent calls and a letter giving exactly the same recon agreement that they sent out 2 years ago.

 

They are probably just fishing but i wanted to know if the CCJ could come back to haunt me after all this time.

Edited by dx100uk
spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

Even a reconstituted version of an agreement must have all the prescribed inclusions to make it enforceable...and fit for purpose.Most uploaded here to the forum contain errors and are therefore not enforceable.

 

The important question to consider is if the agreement is post 2007...why are they sending a reconstituted version on a agreement that is less than 10 years old ?

 

Possibly because they dont have the original ?

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for reply, Andy.

 

I thought that post 2007 they only needed a reconstituted copy?

 

They do......but it still has to be correct and be an accurate copy of the original agreement at the time of inception with the correct T&Cs....the amount of uploads we see.... some have the posters new address on an agreement taken out 6/7 years ago whilst living at a previous address.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

own thread created.

 

please tell us the full story.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you any idea what a CCJ actually is?

It is a report that shows you have lost a court claim and then failed to pay the sum ordered in the time allowed.

 

If you were taken to court you have several options,

admit you owe the money and pay up,

deny you owe the money and lose the claim and then pay up

or deny you owe the money and defeat the claim and dont have to pay up.

 

None of these ever appear as a CCJ or even a marker on your credit file.

A DCA cant take you to court because they have no locus standi.

The original creditor can sell the debt on if done properly and then the new creditor can sue you

but DCA's as the name suggests are AGENTS so have no say in any matter at all.

Same as an estate agent, they cant force you to buy or sell a house and cant sue you for not accepting their agency should you decide to sell it.

 

Now, as you have made nominal payments then the debt is undoubtedly still live so the owner of the debt may well have a right to sue but they are unlikely to have the necessary details to make it a certainty should you stop paying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for reply.

 

Just to add more details.

 

I am unfortunately well aware of exactly what a CCJ is and agree with all of your comments above.

 

I am probably being over cautious but just wanted to make sure of a few points which DX answered such as how a CCJ for an old defaulted debt over 6 years old can reappear on a credit report.

 

I take all of your points above on board but in the back of my mind there was that chance the owner of the debt can still go for a CCJ after 10 years. If they then win and i cant afford the full amount, my good record is scuppered for another 6 years!

 

To give you a fuller story. I have 7 of these old debts and still 'owe' approximately £20K. Most of the debts weren't even mine but are in my name so that bit is irrelevant although it makes me feel better that i am no longer paying money i never even had to a toerag DCA who bought the debt for pennies.

 

All but 2 of them were pre 2006 and after CCA requests i was informed that the paperwork wasn't available and collection would no longer be pursued. Although apparently they still 'legally remain' and i get offers of FFS from time to time, last one was 50% a few weeks ago. I obviously ignore these. If they haven't found the signed agreement in 3 years it is unlikely they will find it?

 

The other 2 debts total approx £5K were post 2007 and i have recons for these. I have checked them and all details unfortunately look spot on. I have been paying nominal payments for these for as long as i can remember. I recently received 50% FFS offers on both of these (different DCAs) so i am assuming if they are willing to offer this the likelihood of them being confident of going back to court for the full amount is unlikely.

 

I will continue to ignore the debts with no CCA and tread slightly more carefully with the other 2, again probably being over cautious! With my new clean credit report i am now a house owner with a mortgage so that aspect is also a bit worrying but again they would need to follow the same unlikely process to get any kind of attachment.

 

All of the expert help on here is greatly appreciated. I would still be in a complete mess without it. I don't like the fact i have the outstanding balances but i am now in a much better place. The over cautiousness is probably born out of a desire of wanting to stay there.

Edited by dx100uk
quote
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am probably being over cautious but just wanted to make sure of a few points which DX answered such as how a CCJ for an old defaulted debt over 6 years old can reappear on a credit report.

 

.

 

just incase its not just your English that's bad...A CCJ can't re-appear, neither can the old debt 'entry' that's already gone because the default reached its 6th birthday..

IF they get a CCJ , the CCJ itself is listed for 6yrs, which refers to the 'debt' but doesn't make the debt re-appear, just shows in the relevant 'judgements' section of the CRF report

 

on these debts you say the recon was enforceable..who said?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks, DX.

 

I know exactly what you mean but unless i am missing something i don't see what difference it makes?

 

OK, you have an old defaulted debt. It drops off after 6 years never to reappear. All understood.

 

But the debt owner goes for a CCJ which shows for a further 6 years in the judgements section of your credit report.

Let's just imagine they win and you can't pay.

Your credit report is then ruined for a further 6 years.

 

The original point of my first post was just to ask the question as i was unsure if after the 6 year period of a defaulted account a CCJ would actually show.

 

I now know the answer, many thanks.

Edited by dx100uk
quote/spacing
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...