Creditors refusing to revisit debt /CCJ

[tedd4]

In 2015, I was practising Medicine privately and opened an account with a Laboratory for the provision of investigations conducted on patients.

Initially, the account opened was in my name but latterly, I had created a limited company and notified the accounts department of this change.

 

Two years in, my account fell into arrears as a result of peculiar circumstances with a private medical insurance company that held back my payments.

The amount claimed that was outstanding was approximately £5600 though I had disputed this to be £3700. 
 

Nevertheless, I tried to negotiate with the company to give me time but they held the belief that I had been paid by the insurance company though never presented evidence to support this and pursued legal action. The county court business centre issued a CCJ to the sum of £6376.27, inclusive of late payment charges and interest. 
 

Given their intransigence, I pointed out that the court order was made against me personally when it should have been against the Limited company.

The company continued further legal action and issued an order to attend for questioning.

 

On the day there was no hearing listed though I managed to get the court to perform the interview given the ever climbing debt the company claimed I owed.

A formal notice with the intention to take control of goods valued at £9835. 
 

However, despite showing willingness to settle this debt at its original level by my attendance for questioning and fully cooperating I never heard from the court or the company. 
 

The CCJ remains on my credit file and the company has a very dominant presence in the public and private sector making it exceptionally rich with the senior directors taking home salaries in excess of £1million per year. Thus, their services are integral to any practice set up. 
 

In an attempt to settle the matter, I proactively contacted the court to inform me of the outcome following questioning and I was directed to the creditor as no further court action had been requested.

 

In following their advice, I had asked that the case be looked at and stated that I was in a position to address the debt pending an agreed arrangement.

The company replied that under the circumstances around the case, they felt it wasn’t feasible to revisit it and therefore wouldn’t allow me to open another account with them. 
 

The implications being that my attempt to get a mortgage is hampered, my private practice made almost impossible and my credit score still being effected for a further 2 years. 
 

Are they within their right to refuse to revisit this debt when an offer to settle is made? Please note that not at any time was arbitration offered or appear to be an avenue they were willing to persue. 

[dx100uk]

well unless they agree to remove the CCJ

which they wont.

its there for 6yrs paid or not.

 

 

[tedd4]

So despite offering to settle the debt they can refuse to accept thus keeping the CCJ active which is in place to penalise you for failing to pay your debt. It seems as though they are being vindictive

[ericsbrother]

the questioning is done by the court manager or senior clerk and ahs a fixed set of questions plus any the company wishes to ask. It is a precursor for bankruptcy or getting the company struck off at Companies house so wheh you answer the questions you are assuring them you can pay the debt and they dont seek to ruin you  by way of a further order.

 

They have used their greater experiance and no doubt a decent solicitor to get the better of you,

 

your initial defence should have been they were suing the wrong entity and forced a determination on that point but you are where you are, you cant force them to allow you to open an account.

 

have you the means to purchase what you need as a cash customer and still service the debt?

[tedd4]

I did state that they were enforcing this debt on the wrong entity but the order for questioning still proceeded. The enforcement in the form of the notice of intention to remove my personal belongings didn’t materialise and their actions stopped there. Unfortunately, the system doesn’t operate on a cash payment basis as the bill comes from the doctor who is then reimbursed by the insurer or the patient. 
 

I’m trying to buy a property from where I can operate and the CCJ is preventing me from getting a mortgage. There lies my more serious problem. (As these orders / notices are against the wrong entity, can they be struck out?)

[BazzaS]

You should have defended the original claim on the grounds that they were pursuing the wrong entity.

 

Once you had the CCJ against you personally (and didn't get it set-aside at the time), they are entitled to pursue you personally, including the order for questioning.

 

An application for a 'discretionary' set aside (which is what you'd now be seeking, as you don't have grounds for a 'mandatory' set-aside) must be made 'promptly', and if (as seems the case from what you have posted) you were aware of the CCJ, I doubt an application for set-aside would succeed.

 

Paying off the CCJ would just mean it showed as 'settled', but it would still appear on your credit report.

 

Sadly, this seems that you have done 'too little, too late', and it will be hard for you to do much beyond:

a) settling the CCJ (if you want to see if the status change helps), or

b) waiting until the CCJ drops off your credit report.

[BazzaS]

3 hours ago, tedd4 said:

So despite offering to settle the debt they can refuse to accept thus keeping the CCJ active which is in place to penalise you for failing to pay your debt. It seems as though they are being vindictive

 

You can settle the debt, and seek a certificate of satisfaction from the court.

The CCJ then shows as 'settled' on your credit report, but still shows there was a CCJ.

Since this is an accurate reflection of the situation : it isn't vindictive, but reflecting the fact that you did have a CCJ issued against you that you didn't:

a) settle, before it reached the register, or

b) get set-aside.

 

Regarding them refusing to have you as a customer currently: entirely within their rights, and if looking at it from their viewpoint, how can you blame them?

Edited November 5, 2019 by BazzaS

[tedd4]

I would understand if I didn’t offer to negotiate repayment but they refused to enter any form of arbitration and refused to acknowledge the fact they had served it upon the wrong entity. I didn’t have the money for legal representation to know how to contest the CCJ and that a prompt action was required. As a Limited Company at the time, the debt should be associated with it and not me. How is it that can’t be corrected? Isn’t the purpose of it to protect one from this sort of action?

[AndyOrch]

Thread moved to General Legal Issues Forum...please continue to post here to your thread.

 

Thread title updated 

 

Andy

[BazzaS]

The courts don’t like endless litigation / uncertainty for years.

 

You had your opportunities (including taking legal advice) to defend the County Court claim, or seek a set-aside at the time.

 

You are claiming unfairness, but how is it fair that you want to re-open this years later, when you had 2 bites at the cherry at the time?

[tedd4]

I became unwell to the point of not being able to work for two years. I could only cope with this issue now.

[BazzaS]

Were you so unwell that you didn’t have capacity to instruct a solicitor or other advocate?

If so, the court might consider you had acted not “promptly”, but “as promptly as could reasonably be expected, in the circumstances”.

Likely you’d need to evidence such, e.g. with a report from your psychiatrist.

 

Otherwise, even if you “could only cope” now, you could have had someone else “cope with it, for you”, if you had capacity / ability to instruct them.

[tedd4]

Unfortunately I had a nervous breakdown and signed off work. Placed on heavy medication and had to deal with a repossession order and other debts therefore this wasn’t a priority at the time and there’s only so much you can expect others to do on your behalf. 

 

I am not quite sure how to proceed other than point out the points we’ve discussed with the creditor and if they refuse to cooperate instruct a solicitor though I gave to keep that cost to the minimum. 
 

I appreciate your assistance.