Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About fox11

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. thanksfor that,I'll keep it in mind if they try to claim it's enforcable. They have just sent a letter asking him to ring them to arrange apayment plan if he cannot pay it back in one go, despite telling him originally payment plans were not acceptable, so perhaps they arefeeling the shaky ground?!
  2. Dh checked his credit file which is clear, we also hadchecks done in 2005 and 2010 when we took out a mortgage.
  3. Thanks, I've written a letter asking for proof so will see what they come up with. My husband was homeless for the first few years but has been on the electrol roll since 2004 and we got a mortgage in 2005 with no problems so he has certainly been traceable. Is the issue of the payment relevant to whether the ccj is still enforcable or not then?
  4. Hi All, I've had a read of some threads which have given me some really helpful advice, but I was hoping someone could offer something more specific to my husband's situation. My husband recieved a letter from Link a couple of months ago regarding an old (pre 1998) student loan. We sent off a statute barred letter only for them to reply saying the account was subject to a ccj and so cannot be sb'ed. I do not think they knew about the ccj to start with as the original sum they were asking was about £3300, and this dropped to £2400 in the ccj letter. My oh has no knowledge of the ccj (Link claim he has paid £104 towards it but as he didn't know about it this is unlikely!), but rang the county court who confirmed a ccj was given to the slc in 2000 (Link had ref no of the ccj). The lady dh spoke to at the court was quite helpful and told dh it would no longer be enforceable but would speak to the Judge. I assume she got 'told off' for discussing it with dh as he recieved a strangely short email from her saying Judge said they would need to seek permission to enforce but this is likely to be given! We were planning on replying to Link just asking them to prove the ccj, that they are the claimant etc - not telling them we had spoken to the court and see what they come up with. The debt helpline suggested we could offer 30-40% of debt as settlement - is this a good idea? Reading on here we assumed it would be unlikely to be re-enforced, but the reply from court suggests it could be likely. Can anyone suggest what would be the sensible way forward here? Thanks
  • Create New...