Doyle v PRA Group (UK) Ltd [2019] Questions

[whitelist]

Is there a thread that debated this issue?

That being cause of action being default date and not when the account was last breached such as missed contractual repayment

[AndyOrch]

 

[dx100uk]

very much depends on the type of your account

 

spill the beans what is your real issue..

tell us your full story please

 

name names dates etc etc

 

dx

 

[whitelist]

Have no issues myself. Currently doing a Law Degree with the Open University and this forum debates the finer details of legislation outside of personal opinions.

[Peterbard]

Hi Yes indeed, subject of much debate  look at my threads and posts.

 

Situation is that the cause of action occurs when the creditor can enforce for a repududiatory breach of contract. This right lasts for six years, unless the right is reset by the debtor providing an indication that he still  acknowledges the debt via payment or plain written acceptance..

[whitelist]

Many thanks.

Nice to get an objective viewpoint in arguing the finer details

 

Just a quick one with the default notice.

Will the cause of action start after 14 days when the notice expires, or when the creditor actually registers the account in default with the Credit Reference Agencies?

[dx100uk]

Twill be notice expiry...

However, it is worthy to note that if the creditor too k months/years from the actual last payment /use date to issue the dn then they are very open to question, as that gives them the power to control/run the statute of limitations to infinity. .....

 

Dx

[whitelist]

 We can then bring s.140 CCA into the equation??

[dx100uk]

Or more the point the dn is invalid.

 

Dx

[whitelist]

So what will be a reasonable time for a Default to be recorded on the credit file after expiry of the Default notice?

 

You can be put into a position as an example of the default registered three years after the expiry of that default notice?

[dx100uk]

A creditor does not have to register the default at all. A dn gives them the option too..they do not have too.

 

Dx

[whitelist]

Agreed, but registering the Default with the credit agencies as an example two or three years after last action on the account, such as expiry of that default notice, can be seen as an unfair relationship with enforcing the agreement.

We then utilise 140 CCA as a defence?

[AndyOrch]

Its only unfair to a debtor wishing to run down the limitations ASAP......Judges will argue that you have had the benefit of a clean default file for an extra 2/3 years ?   playing devils advocate here  

[whitelist]

Good point, but is it unfair on the debtor?

The credit file would not be clean though as the creditor would still register late payment markers, as the account would not have been terminated on the back of that default notice. These are just as bad as the default being recorded.

[dx100uk]

No calendar markers are not. Ap markers are mind.....

but only the creditor and debtor can see them anyway. Bar the crap score.

 

a dn is not auto termination either.

 

 

[whitelist]

But is does not alter the fact the debtor has received no advantage with credit status.

So can you use s.140 CCA if the creditor registers an official default years after that default notice has expired?

 

 

[AndyOrch]

Quote

So can you use s.140 CCA if the creditor registers an official default years after that default notice has expired?

 

You could try but I doubt it would fly Sec140 predominantly deals with unfair aspects of the actual credit agreement...not default and termination.

[whitelist]

Just thought of another dilemma

 

What would be the situation with any account that was defaulted prior to 2019 before they set this legal precedent, as in retrospect? Would the civil judgement only apply after 2019?

[dx100uk]

a DN does not 'expire' - not sure what you mean by that?

 

Doyle v PRA Group (UK) Ltd [2019] was made against a 1997 agreement. 

but we've certainly not seen any 'wins' here for claimant using it, in fact its been surprisingly quiet, a bit like the Hart v BMW case i think.

both were trumpeted as game changing, but seem to have actually changed little.

nor on the similar scottish court case .

 

 

 

[whitelist]

My reference to the default notice expiring was regarding six years passing from time of issue. As in statute barred if no contact made between creditor and debtor.

[dx100uk]

the dn can be registered on your credit file anytime they like or a debt buyer likes, but of course it will be always show as the date of the issued dn, not the date they registered it.

 

it still falls off after 6yrs taking the whole account with it from its date but that might not be the sb date if payments or use were made of the credit after it's date.

 

contact between creditor/debtor doesnt really come into SB at all and there are no cases i've seen here whereby a letter from the debtor about the debt, signed or otherwise has been used to solely and successfully beat off a claim of it's statute barred m'lud.

 

for want of clarity, there are numerous threads here whereby the relevant authorities like the FOS/ICO have ruled in favour of the debtor that a DN was issued unfairly late and changed to an earlier correct date, though again to be clear, the actual 'guidelines' issued by the ICO, changed in i think 2014 , removing the 3-6mts timing.

 

dx

 

[Peterbard]

I think the op needs to be aware that there are two different notices. One under section 87 and one under ICO and FCA guides.

One gives two weeks grace before the debtor can enforce, this runs after the 87 notice is issued by the creditor, the other has 28 days before the data can be recorded on your credit file   they are separate and should not be confused.

The case referred to by dx  was an important one  in that it defined the start of the SB date as the day after the section 87 fails to be paid. This cannot be anything to do with recording of data

Firms like Vanquis and Lowell are getting away with murder miss-quoting the regulations and sorry excuse for the advice they give.

I have just won 2 complaints against these firms, and they came out with the most appalling tripe. 

I had two accounts against one families debts just last week, both had their balances written off some £4k , this after a five year struggle. Even the ombudsman was proven to not understand the new provisions. I am expecting a large bottle of Merlot for that one.

[whitelist]

So to bring this to a conclusion?

 

All the Debtor needs is to request from the creditor is a copy of the dated default notice issued under s.87 CCA 1974?

 

The cause of action will then start 14 days after that notice expires, and not when the creditor eventually records the default on the debtors credit file?

[dx100uk]

No already answered that whitelist....

 

On 10/03/2022 at 23:21, dx100uk said:

the dn can be registered on your credit file anytime they like or a debt buyer likes, but of course it will be always show as the date of the issued dn, not the date they registered it.

 

 

[whitelist]

Sorry to sound as though this is not sinking in but, what needs nailing down with my question is enforcement and Section 5 Limitations Act (LA) and taking the debtor to court

 

1. Does that cause of action with section 5 (LA) start after the 14 days expires with the s.87 notice, or?

 

2. The date the creditor finally registers the default on the credit files on the strength of that s.87 notice?