Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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
      • 160 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

CCJ over 6 years advice please


reverof
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4054 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

Hi,

 

I’ve been looking at forums all day long regarding statute barred status and really need a tiny bit more help

 

I understand the process if its a defaulted account over 6 years UK that it will be statue barred status so hopefully some of my debts should fall into this arena.

 

My question is regarding CCJ's, I need to check but have 2 old ones over 6 years for sure from my stupid uni days - I knew nothing about finance and it was available everywhere - hell I didn’t even know I had to make monthly payments at that time!

 

If anyone would be so kind to help. Been a rollercoaster of emotions for me today thinking I may have light at the end of the tunnel then realising CCJs are slightly different :

 

- I understand they fall off your credit report once 6 years 1 month is up ? Does this mean my credit rating will improve? (unless they put them back on)

 

- What I cant seem to find is how likely they are to be reapplied as from what I’ve read if its unsatisfied it does come off after 6 years but can be applied back on if DCA's go back to court - does anyone have experience of this?

 

- Another post touched on the fact that if its been passed around to other DCA's they are less likely to push for another CCJ due to needing original court paperwork?

 

 

Any advice would be greatly appreciated its because of forums like this us as consumers get some power and I’ve got my fingers crossed for some good news. Thanks so much in advance for helping.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, if you have unacknowledged debts over 6 years old they are statute barred and as such unenforceable in Law and should also dissapear from your Credit File.

In the unlikely event of another DCA chasing the debt you should send them a letter requesting a True copy of the original CCA which probably doesn't exist any more.

If you need a letter you will find one in the template section on the site, just follow the instructions when you do it and remember all the rules.

 

1. All communications in writing - No telephone.

2. Send all communication by Recorded Delivery.

3. Always print your name - Never Sign (or use a signature diff than you usually do)

 

They have 12 + 2 days to comply with your request if they dont, no case to answer.

If you need more help keep posting and help will follow.

 

B

  • Haha 1

If I have been helpful please tickle my scales or better still contribute to CAG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, if you have unacknowledged debts over 6 years old they are statute barred and as such unenforceable in Law and should also dissapear from your Credit File.

In the unlikely event of another DCA chasing the debt you should send them a letter requesting a True copy of the original CCA which probably doesn't exist any more.

If you need a letter you will find one in the template section on the site, just follow the instructions when you do it and remember all the rules.

 

 

B

 

 

Thankyou so much for the reply really apprecaited.

 

I understood most of this orginally but I was under the impression CCJs (unpaid) are not statute barred?

 

This is the main area I couldnt find info on - maybe you could shed some light on this. Want to know more about chance of them re-applying the CCJ if unpaid?

 

Youve also made me think are you saying to send out the 12+2 etc letters if they try to reapply it as they may not have the required credit agreement anymore as debt has been passed around?

 

Thanks again to anyone that can help

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, Once a CCJ has been issued then any question of an enforceable CCA is completely irrelevant, so it is completely useless asking for a CCA once a CCJ has been granted.

 

Any entry on your credit file, will automatically drop off after 6 years.

Once you have been granted a CCJ then the only real way of getting it removed is to pay, failure to do so can result in bailiffs etc.

Are you saying that you were unaware of the CCJ being issued? Did you fail to defend it in Court?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

What i mean is, a CCJ will no longer appear on your Credit File after 6 years. I had 2 and they dissapeared.

It is the debt that is SB after 6 years and because it is unlikekely another DCA will try to pusue it, but you can never be sure with them.

Some dimwit of a firm may try your ignorance of the Law to make you pay and if they do send them an appropriate letter from the Templates on this site in response to whatever they send to you.

Because of the time lapse it is most unlikely the original is available and for them to re-apply the CCJ they will need all the original docs.

If I have been helpful please tickle my scales or better still contribute to CAG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thankyou for you advice boswell and Bazakoo.

 

The CCJ to be tottally honest were on before I knew about it as I was away at uni and the letters came home address. It happened before I even had chance to read thier letters - I accept I am responsible for this to some degree.

 

So to confirm : The CCJ drops off after 6 years, the debt then carries on which is why you say it is statute barred (wierd because i thought CCJ debts didnt fall under SB?)

 

In terms of reapplying CCJ this is a low possibility if its been passed around because of time lapse they may not have original documents in order to apply for CCJ again?

 

So the debt carries on Statute barred status - if i receive any letters from DCAs the satndard statute barred letters are the ones I need not the 12+2+30 day ones?

 

So with the usual SB threads where (non-CCJ) 6 year period is up they cant apply a CCJ so you simply tell them so.

In cases like mine where its a unpaid CCJ the difference is that the CCJ can possibly be reapplied (but not likely after 6 years)?

 

In both cases the debt goes on under SB status?

 

Sorry for all the questions but im sure this will help some others out, been online for around 12 hours today finding out all the info and not found the great insight you kind people are giving.

 

 

edit: just seen your link boswell philapines but its interesting. The nets wierd really ive read so many threads and majority today made me feel depressed as they never mentioned the debt goes on under SB - they just said CCJ not covered and didnt expand.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, did you read post 6 and the link i attached?

 

 

Yeah i actually edited my post to let you know ;)

 

Wierdly enough the last post on that thread says the same as i read elsewhere - no the debt is not SB and then poster talks about the fact debt agencies may not know about the CCJ - what if they do?

 

If you could extend your kindness to confirming my previous post I can rest at ease tonight and stop bothering you all :oops:

Link to post
Share on other sites

The CCJ will dissapear after 6 years.

For it to be re-applied to your CF it will have to be proved to be a debt that is still pending, ie, under 6 years old. As it is over that time,the debt not the CCJ, is SB.

I cant see how it can be re-applied to your CF twice if the debt is SB.

It has probably been written off by the Lender anyway as unenforceable and will cost another DCA money and time to try to re-apply it knowing it is SB.

Has anyone contacted you about the debt and have you checked your CF?

If I have been helpful please tickle my scales or better still contribute to CAG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again - I am in process of getting it online via Trust Online (as i believe they wont notify DCA's of search). Im pretty sure the CCJs were back from 2002/2003 but of course will check it out by tommorrow.

 

I then will marry this up with the letters I have to see which are over 6y.

 

I would be the happiest guy alive if they do fall off and not reapplied, I can then get work (as financial institutions offer good pay for what I do) and pay it off.

 

Thanks so much for your help Boswell much apprecaited will report back when ive checked it out tommorrow

Link to post
Share on other sites

reverof, records of CCJs disappear from all official records (including Trust Online) after six years. In effect you don't have the CCJ anymore - it has disappeared in a figurative puff of smoke.

 

If a creditor or debt collecting agency tried to enforce repayment of the debt after the six years they would need need to obtain permission from the court and be able to show good cause why they didn't attempt to collect within the six year time frame.

  • Haha 1

I really do appreciate all those 'thank you' emails - I'm glad I've been able to help. Apologies if I haven't acknowledged all of them.

You can also ding my gong if you prefer. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Palomino Have pmed you - but would just like to say I am not proud of these issues I have been a real tough few years for me as im sure some of you users on this forum have had . Really appreciate all the help especially for a new poster like me full credit to the community for that. I will be checking my credit file with Trust Online shortly and will post back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears you are now pretty much sorted with this?

There's a few links here that you might like to read also.

Legal Issues Explained - County Court Judgements

 

Removal of CCJ's - A guide to CCJ Removal

 

The second one won't really be relevant as it is over 6 years, but it's food for thought if anyone else is in the same situation.

 

Boo;)

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Those old ccj's don't come under the statute of limitations , they come under court cpr rules to be (re) inforced . I'm in the same position as you . Old (over 6 year ) CCJ's from Uni days that seem to be forgotten about . I kind of think of these ccj's also in the same light as most people here look on the absence of a true copy of their credit agreement . If they don't have the original court documents anymore , and going by the way they tend to lose cca's thats a distinct possibility , then the ccj doesn't exist either in any enforceable sense . But as mentioned , over 6 years and they'll need to go to the court for permission and with a good reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It shouldn't because a personal search on your Credit file is only visable to you and not others even if they perfom a search on your file. But for some time now many are of the opinion that the CRA's are exchanging information with the DCA's.

 

A whistleblower could prove this as certain CRA files would be "flaged" IF information was being shared.

Edited by 247orbital
Link to post
Share on other sites

It shouldn't because a personal search on your Credit file is only visable to you and not others even if they perfom a search on your file. But for some time now many are of the opinion that the CRA's are exchanging information with the CRA's.

 

A whistleblower could prove this as certain CRA files would be "flaged" IF information was being shared.

 

Sorry... but you have a lot to learn about how these industries work. One of the CRA's owns at least one of the well-known DCAs on here and as you become more familiar with the industry, you'll realise that there are loads of incestuous links between the lot of them.

 

Whistle-blowing has already been done and has no effect at all....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

Thanks for all the replies - ive tried to get the details and found that they are also registerd against an old address - no wonder I got the letters alot later they must have been sent to our old family home!

 

Also wierd you should say some are linked I used the Trust One link which I believe was safe - tried using Equifax and got message online to say I have to phone them up witha reference number for some final questions - is this normal? My brother used his card details to pay for free trial for me , maybe thats why?

 

Thanks again all

Edited by reverof
Link to post
Share on other sites

hi reverof

 

post no 12 answers your questions correctly,

 

 

 

 

if theplaintiff hasn't physically got his copy of the ccj he cant do anything and the court certainly won't have a copy

 

nothing in this life is certain but it is highly unlikely that the creditor will pursue this now

 

I would let sleeping dogs lie

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
Be very careful when requesting your credit file.... as it often tips various DCAs off to your new whereabouts.

 

If no-one is currently chasing you, why worry about it anyway?

 

This is quite frightening - just looked at my credit file via equifax - will post if I receive any further contact from DCA - I've heard nothing for years - discovered 'default date goes back to 2008 so I'm wondering if it will tickle anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...