Jump to content


Overdrafts -Stat Barred?


vengeancedemon
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4088 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

It is a debt, so am sure this would be subject to normal SB legislation, not 100% sure, interesting question.

Every journey begins with a single step :):)

 

Please note: I have no qualifications in this area - my advice is learned from the wonderful members of this Forum. Thanks to you all for your help.

 

If you have found my post helpful please leave a short message by clicking the star to the left of my profile - Thank You

 

The only person entitled to your Personal Finance details is a Judge not a DCA

 

Move all banking activity to another banking group if you have a dispute - your funds can be used to offset debts within the same group.

Be careful with Banking details (card/account numbers) as these can be used to take unauthorised payments.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my opinion, but I wouldn't think that SB applies in the case of an overdraft. Although it's a loan of a kind and as such, attracts interest and charges, it's a different kind of contract isn't it? I mean, in the same way that a CCA request can't be made for an overdraft... I would think that the banks would have covered themselves on this matter - afterall, they've had plenty of practice fleecing people unfairly.

 

As HS said, an interesting question and it would be good to have a definitive reply!

Please note, I am not professionally qualified in legal matters. Should you have any doubts, you should contact a legal expert.

However, I can and will help with matters regarding payroll as I am fully qualified.

 

If I've helped in any way, you're welcome to click on my "star" and thanks, but I gain the most satisfaction simply by helping/reassuring :O)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

An overdraft is very unlikely to be an overdraft after 6 years. A bank would nearly always call it in and terminate your agreement in a year or less, certainly not much longer. Once they have terminated your agreed overdraft it is no longer an overdraft. It then becomes subject to the limitations act like any other debt. That's the way I see it anyway. Maybe someone knows better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick question

I understand about loans and Ccards being SB after 6 years of no payments/not acknowlgment etc, but does the same criteria apply to overdrafts?

 

Many thanks

 

Yes, don't see why it should'nt.

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at your credit report (get it free online) and see if the account(s) is/are marked as defaulted. Once in default it is a debt and after 6 years becomes statute barred as long as there has been no contact. Banks can be very slow in registering defaults, but I'd be surprised if they've let it go 6 years without doing anything. Have you not had any letters from DCA's etc.... re these debts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Im sure I read not so long ago on another forum a post by a legal practitioner of some sort stating fairly clearly and confidently that overdrafts are bound to the statute of limitations just like any other consumer debt.

 

In the 'eyes' of the limitation act its irrelevant whether the money is owed as a result of a credit agreement (CCA) , loan, or an overdraft. And I also recall the poster saying that the limitation period commences the day the creditor/bank sends a request for repayment having exceeded the agreed overdraft amount.

 

i hope somebody can confirm this is correct information?

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to my little black book, there are only 3 categories that have a SB limit of 12 years and overdrafts aren't one of them. Everything else is 6 years or under.

 

It does say, "Recovery of a sum due under statute-6 years"

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

So assuming the 6 year sb rule applies, would this be from the date of last payment or from when the bank decided to default with the cra? The reason for the question is i had a joint bank account, i had the basic hole in the wall card and my ex had the multifunction cheque card, when we split she had a spend up before leaving the country and me with the bank to deal with any way there is nearly 18 months discrepency between date of last payment and default notice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Date of last payment.

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Limitation Act 1980

5. Time limit for actions founded on simple contract.

An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

 

A simple contract is any contract not contained within a deed. When you take out an overdraft, you enter into a simple contract - albeit a regulated contract. On that basis, there can be no argument, in my opinion, against the fact that an overdraft is statute barred pursuant to S5 Limitation Act 1980 after 6 years.

 

Cheers.

UF

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has issued Debt Collection guidance which looks at whether a debt is being collected fairly. They say:

  • It is unfair to pursue the debt if you have heard nothing from the creditor for 6 years.

This is quoted direct from the insolvency hepline site so will be correct. So basically the clock starts ticking when you last made contact with them in form of payment, phone call, letter etc.... If they "hear from you" the clock starts all over again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has issued Debt Collection guidance which looks at whether a debt is being collected fairly. They say:

  • It is unfair to pursue the debt if you have heard nothing from the creditor for 6 years.

This is quoted direct from the insolvency hepline site so will be correct. So basically the clock starts ticking when you last made contact with them in form of payment, phone call, letter etc.... If they "hear from you" the clock starts all over again.

 

Not entirely true, strictly speaking. Firstly, simply hearing from a debtor, for example in a telephone call, is not enough to restart the clock. To restart the clock, an acknowledgement of the debt has to be made. This acknowledgement must be in writing and should be signed by the debtor if it is to effectively restart the "clock".

 

Limitation Act 1980

30.— Formal provisions as to acknowledgments and part payments.

(1) To be effective for the purposes of section 29 of this Act, an acknowledgment must be in writing and signed by the person making it.

 

A simple letter, unless upon construction it can be said that the letter actually acknowledges the debt, cannot restart the clock.

 

Also, whilst the 6 year time limit may be accurate for the majority of cases seen on these forums, it is not fair or true to say this is always the rule. As has been noted previously in this thread, there are some instances where the limit will be set at 12 years - for example money being claimed as owing under a mortgage.

 

Cheers

UF

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for your helpful observations, particularly that of any vcommunication, I have always understood that irrespective of the source of the account, an actual aknowledgement of an account or debt will "start the clock" but a question/letter of dispute/letter for evidence etc does NOT start the clock per se

Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly right. Despite what creditors and DCA's might try and make you believe, a telephone call or letter of dispute/denial are not capable of restarting the clock. S30 is very clear about what can constitute an acknowledgement for the purposes of setting a new starting date for limitation.

I am rarely around these parts any more. I only stop by when something has come to my attention that has sufficiently annoyed me so as to persuade me to awake from my nap and put in my two pence.

 

I am a final year law student; I am NOT an expert in law. All of my posts are just my opinion. I cannot be held responsible for any outcome whatsoever resulting from any person following the opinions or information contained within my posts. Always seek professional legal advice from a qualified lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently (according to some lovely DCA's) I had a Lloyds TSB account with an overdraft, a personal loan and various late charges etc added to the outstanding sum. Ist Crudit and Con-nowt sent me a SD after six years of no contact and I sucessfully got it set aside. I was unaware at the time that the alleged debt was statute barred and it was due to the SD that I SAR'd the OC and discovered that it was SB'd. Originally I had the SD set aside because the alleged debt was in dispute and Ist Crudit and side kick Con-nowt had not supplied any paperwork. It was during the SD set aside hearing that I introduced the fact that the alleged debt was SB and the Judge agreed, not only was it SB but that they were very naughty lumping the OD and the loan together as they were different but still both covered under the statute of limitations act at six years.

Advice given is my opinion only, I am not a legal or financial expert (far from it).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Limitation Act 1980

5. Time limit for actions founded on simple contract.

An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

 

 

A simple contract is any contract not contained within a deed. When you take out an overdraft, you enter into a simple contract - albeit a regulated contract. On that basis, there can be no argument, in my opinion, against the fact that an overdraft is statute barred pursuant to S5 Limitation Act 1980 after 6 years.

 

Cheers.

UF

 

Hi there

I assume therefore that a Mortgage does not fall under this -- but does the 12 year rule apply?

 

This is only of "Theoretical interest" since I doubt if a Mortgage company would wait 3 weeks never mind 12 years before investigating "delinquent accounts".

 

Just a final Q -- if a property is re-possessed and there is a shortfall -- how long can they chase you up after they have sold the property.

 

(My view would be to say STUFF THEM since if you don't have any more assets what could a Court do -- also Bailiff's would be pointless since nothing to sieze so I doubt that they would bother with a Court).

 

Cheers

jimbo

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...