Court Orders for enforceing a debt after a late CCA req: Help Please!!

[sequenci]

There is LOADS of talk on here about a creditor needing a court order to enforce a debt if they furnish a correct agreement/statement under a CCA request. Can someone please direct me to the legislation becuase I cannot find it within the CCA.

 

I appreciate that an offence is commited after the 12+30 days period but I can't find head nor tail about the leave of the court being needed.

 

Thanks!

[wobbles1914]

There is LOADS of talk on here about a creditor needing a court order to enforce a debt if they furnish a correct agreement/statement under a CCA request. Can someone please direct me to the legislation becuase I cannot find it within the CCA.

 

I appreciate that an offence is commited after the 12+30 days period but I can't find head nor tail about the leave of the court being needed.

 

Thanks!

 

Sequenci, I am one of the least experienced on here but I seem to recall CAG bigwigs saying that as soon as the correctly executed original agreement is produced, the debt is enforceable, even if it produced beyond 42 days.

 

See this post by Gizmo

 

Wobbles

[sequenci]

thanks

 

i've seen people speak about it many times, however I cannot find any reference to it in legislation, none at all.

 

maybe i'm just being blind, it's usually the case!

 

i'm really keen to find some fact about it as it would be something really good to use in my day job.

[gizmo111]

There is LOADS of talk on here about a creditor needing a court order to enforce a debt if they furnish a correct agreement/statement under a CCA request. Can someone please direct me to the legislation becuase I cannot find it within the CCA.

 

I appreciate that an offence is commited after the 12+30 days period but I can't find head nor tail about the leave of the court being needed.

 

Thanks!

 

 

Not sure what you mean here - if they furnish the agreeement then the debt is enforceable.

[sequenci]

Not sure what you mean here - if they furnish the agreeement then the debt is enforceable.

 

MANY people on here are saying that a creditor will need a court order to enforce an agreement if they do not furnish the agreement until after the 12+30 days.

 

I cannot find anything about this anywhere within the act.

 

Is it true or just an urban myth.

[Guest sihum]

They'll need a court order to enforce the agreement if they dont supply it ...ie if they produce it after the 12+30 they dont need a court order, but if they wanted to enforce it after the 12 days, before they supplied it, they would need a court order.

 

This is where the new rules will have an effect - will make it easier for enforcement action to be taken even where an agreement has not been produced - BUT its not retrospective so won't affect agreements signed prior to April.

 

Legislation wise I'll have a hunt - I'm sure it is in the CCA 1974 somewhere in the depths.

[gizmo111]

The legislation says that the agreement cannot be enforced whilst the default continues. Therfore when the agreement is produced the default is over and the agreement is enforceable. Therefore a court order is nto required, any action the creiditor takes will be valid and they will simply produce the agreemtn in their court bundle.

The offence has been comitted and if it has been reported to TS etc then it is up to them to impose sanctions, but has no bearing on the enforceability of the agreement.

[payingonlyencouragesthem]

This is where the new rules will have an effect - will make it easier for enforcement action to be taken even where an agreement has not been produced - BUT its not retrospective so won't affect agreements signed prior to April.

 

One would have thought (hoped:shock: ) not - but are the new rules going to have any effect on agreements signed before April?

[sequenci]

The legislation says that the agreement cannot be enforced whilst the default continues. Therfore when the agreement is produced the default is over and the agreement is enforceable. Therefore a court order is nto required, any action the creiditor takes will be valid and they will simply produce the agreemtn in their court bundle.

The offence has been comitted and if it has been reported to TS etc then it is up to them to impose sanctions, but has no bearing on the enforceability of the agreement.

 

This is precisely what i thought. a few people on here think differently. thanks for the heads up. :)

[sequenci]

One would have thought (hoped:shock: ) not - but are the new rules going to have any effect on agreements signed before April?

 

not with regards to the request for info under s77-79

[make them aktiv runners]

They'll need a court order to enforce the agreement if they dont supply it ...ie if they produce it after the 12+30 they dont need a court order, but if they wanted to enforce it after the 12 days, before they supplied it, they would need a court order.

 

This is where the new rules will have an effect - will make it easier for enforcement action to be taken even where an agreement has not been produced - BUT its not retrospective so won't affect agreements signed prior to April.

 

Legislation wise I'll have a hunt - I'm sure it is in the CCA 1974 somewhere in the depths.

 

I agree there are a lot of false statements about 12/30 days, Gizmo's is right. I have noticed the mods have entered a few threads at the point of discussion and corrected some people but unfortunately others have already read what was there up to that point and then repeated it elsewhere. If you do see threads with wrong information on, point it out so eventually everyone will know.

 

The statement quoted above looks a little misleading too. Sorry. A court does have the power to enforce any agreement but it is very difficult to prove without a CCA.

 

The new rules cover disputes arising after 5 April that the DCA cannot resolve to the consumers satisfaction via its own internal complaints procedure (letter must be marked complaint and issued to the DCA's appointed complaints officer). Providing your complaint is made after 5 April and you are unhappy with reply (or lack of it) you can then complain to FOS (DCA then gets a bill irrespectiveof the outcome).