Glass v Swansea City Council

[Paul.]

Ok, attached is a case that assists with limitation debates that can arise.

Many DCAs will argue that limitation accrues from the time when the "default notice" is issued. It does not. Simple as that.

Limitation clock starts ticking from when the payment is due and not paid not when they send a default notice.

We see often that CRA entries will date 5 or 6 months ahead of when the payment was missed.

People need to be sure that they arent being hoodwinked and that the DCA is extending limitation so they can sue when they are not allowed to.

[Riz]

Re: Glass v Swansea City Council

Very clear cut when you are taking about a default registered with the CRAs. That can be a long time after the accrual of the cause of action.

But how about default notices etc under s87 CCA on a regulated agreement?

Some argue that the cause of action is still the date of the last payment regardless?

Some argue that the cause of action accrues on the first missed payment?

Some argue that the cause of action does not accrue until the creditor issues a default notice or terminates the account as that is the first point that they can legitimately issue a claim?

Any opinion?

[Paul.]

Re: Glass v Swansea City Council

Held - The council's cause of action to recover the expenses incurred by it accrued when the works were completed and
not when the demands for payment were served since on the true construction of s 10 of the 1957 Act the requirement to
serve a demand was a procedural condition precedent to the bringing of proceedings and was not an inherent element in
the cause of the action

says it all i think

to add,

It is my view that the breach of contract is the point that creditor could bring proceedings, to recover the arrears, that starts the limitation clock ticking.

So it is the first missed payment in my view that starts the clock

[Riz]

Re: Glass v Swansea City Council

says it all i think

Teaches me to skim read too early on a Saturday morning.

[Riz]

Re: Glass v Swansea City Council

It is my view that the breach of contract is the point that creditor could bring proceedings, to recover the arrears, that starts the limitation clock ticking.

So it is the first missed payment in my view that starts the clock

That seems the most sensible conclusion.

The common theme being that it runs from the first point that payment was due/outstanding (demand issued or not), and you did not pay.

I think many people on forums confuse the initial cause of action with every subsequent fresh accrual due to acknowledge or part payment. Or I should say, they mistakenly treat them as the same. i.e runs from last payment. They just say "6 years from last payment", end of.....

[garlok]

Re: Glass v Swansea City Council

Hi Guys,

A very interesting discussion. I have always understood and believed that the clock started ticking from the last payment made or the last time that an acknowledgment of the debt was made by the debtor. From what is being said here that seems to be not far out, in that it is the date of the first payment being missed and becoming due.

I have been berated in other places in the past for making such statement as many seem to believe that it is the issuing of a default notice and subsequent entry on a credit reference file that starts the clock running. Logically I would and did ask why would a creditor ever issue a default notice then?

Thanks for bringing some further clarity.

regards
Garlok