Welsh Water CCJ for a debt not mine - consent submitted but judge wants clarification?

[Jessy90]

Hi,

I'm hoping someone can give me some advice.

 

To cut a long story short

 

I have a current complaint with Welsh Water regarding debt for a property I was not liable to pay the water bill for (ex partners house and landlord named me also while registering her name, after she took out the tenancy, and I ended up with a CCJ by default.)

 

My current complaint with them is in motion and I have provided 4 documents from different periods of time showing I lived at another address, and I believe they are reviewing these documents.

 

I had two accounts on my credit file, one of which they defaulted before opening a new account as they say it was for a new bill and they couldn't increase the balance of a defaulted account.

 

The second account shows arrears also at the beginning before showing as okay every month for the last couple of years (due to my ex paying her water bill)

 

Then this December gone due to the original defaulted account dropping off my credit report, they took the balance from the original account and added it to the current one, increasing the balance and therefore putting a 6 payments late marker on my credit file.(Straight to 6 from green)

 

Surely they cannot be allowed to get away with this?

 

My ex's credit file apart from the CCJ that was registered against us both shows green as she makes all her payments and on time now. Me on the other hand have now got late payment markers appearing on this account due to the balance from the old defaulted account being transferred across after dropping off my credit file.

 

Has anyone heard of a similar situation and are they even allowed to do what they are doing?

 

I'm hoping after they review my documents they will just agree to remove the accounts completely and also give me a consent form to remove the CCJ. However should they not agree I need to know where I stand with these new late payment markers.

 

Any advice appreciated, Thank You

[dx100uk]

if they consent to a set aside FOC to you then the CCJ entry should be removed from your file.

 

now im a bit confused.....

52 minutes ago, Jessy90 said:

I had two accounts on my credit file, one of which they defaulted before opening a new account as they say it was for a new bill and they couldn't increase the balance of a defaulted account.

 

is this defaulted account the one with the CCJ that you say was not yours?

 

53 minutes ago, Jessy90 said:

Then this December gone due to the original defaulted account dropping off my credit report,

and this defaulted account the same CCJ one?

 

 

[Jessy90]

Hi, thanks for your help

 

the first account was registered by the landlord of the property in may 2014 and no payments were made, and so it eventually defaulted.

 

Welsh Water then started reporting a new account to the credit reference agencies, to continue on from the defaulted date of the other account.(I've been told they report this second account as they cannot increase debt on a defaulted account)

 

To clarify neither of these accounts should have been on my credit file, the second one simply replaced the first one, after it defaulted.

 

I believe the CCJ covered both the accounts as it was heard in Nov 2017, but the amount was for all money owed from both accounts.

 

Yes the defaulted account that dropped off, would have been part of the CCJ amount, and the rest from the second account that was opened.

 

They were informed I didn't live at the address in 2017 but yet to this day are still reporting it on my credit file.

 

My ex's landlord when registering her (and mine for some reason) details, used my surname for her, and so they then got a CCJ against that name even though the person doesn't exist. I believe this is why they are so reluctant to remove this debt from my name, as they know the other CCJ is unenforceable.

 

Thanks

 

[dx100uk]

if you've proof they are not yours then get that CCJ set aside

if WW wont do a consent order FOC to you then threaten them with n N244 set aside and costs for the damage to your credit file typically £1000 a pop.

 

 

[Jessy90]

Yes thanks, I'll give them reasonable time to make a decision and then most certainly go down the set aside route.

 

With regards to them adding the balance from the original account to the current one, once the default from the original one dropped off, does it even seem likely that they are allowed to do this?

I know they have a CCJ for the entire amount but it appears they could now default me on a balance that they have already defaulted me on before

 

Thanks

[dx100uk]

but not a default notice.

just a 6 or D. ignore the calendar markers.

 

but yes should not be done.

did it hit your score and thats why you started the thread?

doubt it if you had a CCJ there anyway,.

 

i can't really understand why they created a new a/c as the old one that has the CCJ they can adjust the amount.

 

dx

 

[Jessy90]

So would the calendar markers not be seen on future credit applications?

 

I will be taking out a mortgage in September and although the CCJ will not stop me from getting the mortgage as I am using a specialist broker and a high deposit anyway, any late markers in the previous month's will affect my eligibility.

 

It does appear to have hit my score although I'm not worried about that as much as it affecting the eligibility criteria, eg no missed payments in previous 6 months before application, no defaults in previous 12 months

 

Thanks

[dx100uk]

23 minutes ago, Jessy90 said:

So would the calendar markers not be seen on future credit applications?

correct only you and the original creditor can see them.

 

23 minutes ago, Jessy90 said:

any late markers in the previous month's will affect my eligibility.

only if you show the lender them...don't!!

be very careful of brokers wanting to see your file

don't let them!! they can search your file themselves if they have a CCL !!

they are only after more commission from sub prime lenders by viewing the file as you see it 

 

sorry but many brokers and IFA's are scammers!! they get better backdoor commission through recommending sub prime deals ratherthan main stream prime lenders

don't get had!!

 

dx

 

 

[Jessy90]

I'm certainly learning something new here.

 

So what information would a lender actually see regarding this account when they run they're own search?

I imagine ww are going to continue marking the calendar with a 6 every month, although there hasn't been an update from them since December

 

Thanks

[dx100uk]

They only see the status or summary line of each account on your file.

They do not see the monthly breakdown.

 

And to be honest a credit file is only one of many systems they use to decide.

 

Dx

[Jessy90]

Time to bring this thread up to date:

 

The CCJ is still currently being reviewed.

 

The late payment markers have continued every month since December.

 

Below is a message regarding the markers:

 

"It may be useful to explain that when a Default is reported, the balance is ringfenced (credit entryxxxxx), and a new entry is created on a credit file for any charges raised after (xxxxxx). 

 

The Default entry has been deleted from your credit file because of the six-year rule, although we still needed to report that the balance hasn’t been paid.  As such, the balance owing has been added to the second credit entry (_001), which is why you can now see this on your credit file.  The late payment markers being reported, reflect the age of the debt.  I’d like to reassure you that this does not subject the outstanding balance to a further Default.

 

To summarise, whilst the Default is no longer showing on your credit report because of the six-year rule, we are accurately reporting that the balance remains unpaid.  We’ll continue to share information about account activity (account balance and payments / missed payments) until the balance is paid"

 

 

So my question is, are they legally allowed to do what they have stated above?

They are just going to mark the account with a 6 payments missed marker every month forever if the alleged debt is not paid?

 

All help very much appreciated

[dx100uk]

1 hour ago, Jessy90 said:

The late payment markers being reported, reflect the age of the debt.  I’d like to reassure you that this does not subject the outstanding balance to a further Default.

 

To summarise, whilst the Default is no longer showing on your credit report because of the six-year rule, we are accurately reporting that the balance remains unpaid.  We’ll continue to share information about account activity (account balance and payments / missed payments) until the balance is paid"

 

the above comments are absolute BS.

 

if a debt is older than 6yrs it should NOT be reported upon, nor should be showing regardless to it not being paid or by it being merged to another newer account . what utter fleecers.

 

dx

[Jessy90]

Thanks dx 

 

Can you advise on what I could do from this point or anything I should say in my response to them?

 

I have the consumer council for water involved but they have given Welsh water a chance to sort out the issue, but this is what they have come back with

 

Thank you

 

 

 

 

[dx100uk]

complain to the ICO.

 

dx

 

[Jessy90]

Hi all,

I had a CCJ  incorrectly awarded against me which the claimant agreed was a mistake and provided a consent order which I signed and they filed at the County Court business centre.

I've had a letter today to say the deputy district judge has deferred the case as what is being requested is unclear to him.

The judge has requested 'Please file an application notice clarifying the history of events

This is understandable as its a complicated situation whereby my partner and I were both given a CCJ by default, however I was not liable for the bill but she was which she admitted. The complication comes due to her CCJ being filed with the incorrect surname.
Therefore the consent order states that the CCJ against me be set aside and the filed CCJ against my partner is updated to reflect the correct surname.

My issue now is I am unaware of how the claimant goes about 'filing an application notice' to make the situation clear to the judge.
Is this like starting all over again, as the CCBC took around 6 weeks before the original consent order was even looked at due to a back log.

I'm really concerned that once the claimant has 'filed an application notice' that the CCBC will take another 6 weeks to look at it again.

Any advice or understanding of this will be much appreciated 

[dx100uk]

was this one claimform with you both named on it as defendants

or you EACH got a sep claimform

each filed defence

 

even more complicated neither of you knew about it and it was a backdoor CCJ to an old address?

 

dx

 

[dx100uk]

old and new threads merged to make sense of your recent new thread

please ask for a thread to be reopened in the future if you cant post on it because of forum no activity locking timelimits.

 

dx

[Jessy90]

Thanks @dx100uk

 

I believe the original claim form would of likely been in both names and so the consent order is also

 

My partner was still living at the address but at the time made the silly decision to ignore it so no defence was ever filed

 

My concern is the process of 'filing an application notice clarifying the history of events'

I am waiting on this set aside to apply for a mortgage and I'm starting to think that once the claimant has done the above, it'll be put back to the start of the queue, meaning it'll be six weeks before the CCBC even look at it again

 

I really hope I'm wrong

[dx100uk]

Unknown sadly.

 

Maybe the consent order you agreed too was too confusing for the judge to understand?

 

Dx

[Jessy90]

Yes it certainly appears to be the case

 

I just wish I understood the process after the order has been deferred, as if the judge is waiting on a response I'm hoping the new consent order does not have to go back to the beginning of the process

[dx100uk]

as far as i can see an application notice is an N244 

which is a set aside and not a very quick process at all

 

most detailed here take months.

 

/assets/static/govuk-opengraph-image-dade2dad5775023b0568381c4c074b86318194edb36d3d68df721eea7deeac4b.png

Make an application to a court ('application notice'): Form N244 - GOV.UK

WWW.GOV.UK

---

Use this 'application notice' to ask a court to set aside or vary a judgment, or suspend an enforcement process.

 

[Jessy90]

Thanks @dx100uk

 

Does there being a DX number on the letter mean anything (sorry if I sound stupid but I'm just unaware of what this is)

 

The letter states:

 

Please liaise with the other party then together submit a response, including an ammended draft of the tomlin/consent order (if necessary) signed by both parties or their representatives, along with any additional information/evidence required as per the instructions 

 

 

[dx100uk]

thanks for tell us .

 

poss scan up the letter to PDF in full so we can advise correctly then?

read upload carefully one multipage PDF only please

 

sounds like as i guessed the tomlin was craply worded and was not clear.

 

the DX number is simply the court postal system number for the comms

 

dx

 

 

[Jessy90]

Thanks @dx100uk

 

Does the DX number mean it will be dealt with faster than a new application do you think? 

 

20220928_163431.jpg.PDF

 

Sorry forgot to rename the pdf

Edited September 28, 2022 by Jessy90
Explanation

[dx100uk]

ok thats alot clearer.

 

he doesn't understand why the 2nd defendant need a surname change

so that needs to be explained.

 

something like....

the original claim stated 2 jointed defendants, xxxx, and xxxx.

the claimant agrees to set aside the judgement concerning xxxx totally.

the claimant does not require a set aside for xxxx, however, due to an administration error somewhere in the claim process, an erroneous surname for xxxx was recorded. This defendants surname is to be amended to read xxxx.

 

i would p'haps also contact the court directly by phone as stated and clarify if an application notice means an N244 form be used or if an amended consent from the claimant and signed by both parties is all that is needed?

 

dx