Statute barred?

[julian]

Re: Statute barred?

to sum up as you have not stated why but assume SB - It is over 6 years since the last payment was made or taken by Direct Debit. The debt has been defaulted for over 6 years. It is a debt covered by CCA. There is no CCJ. It is not a mortgage

Even if it is SB an the default has been moved, the DCA can continue trying for payment forever, but cannot take court action for enforcement. You need to be very sure that the has not been an acknowledgment to restart the clock. Only then can you try to stop the annoyance by waving the "SB Stop it!" card at the DCA. Then they may stop.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: Statute barred?

to sum up as you have not stated why but assume SB - It is over 6 years since the last payment was made or taken by Direct Debit. The debt has been defaulted for over 6 years. It is a debt covered by CCA. There is no CCJ. It is not a mortgage

Even if it is SB an the default has been moved, the DCA can continue trying for payment forever, but cannot take court action for enforcement. You need to be very sure that the has not been an acknowledgment to restart the clock. Only then can you try to stop the annoyance by waving the "SB Stop it!" card at the DCA. Then they may stop.

CONC 7.15.8

R

01/04/2014






A firm must not continue to demand payment from a customer after the customer has stated that he will not be paying the debt because it is statute barred.
[Note: paragraph 3.15b of DCG]

[julian]

Re: Statute barred?

Sometimes the firms do not demandbut just offer to help you address your responsibility to pay. Such requests can be equally upsetting, sadly, they employ law abiding semantics used to confound.

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: Statute barred?

if told not paying due to SB then they have to go forth and do one and desist or they get reported that is the rule

[alfie]

Re: Statute barred?

hi, thankyou for the replies.
A notified post referencing an attachment from Riz isn't showing. Is that relevant?
Yes, it is over 6 years since the last token payment made after a regulated default notice. I will check when the actual default was, but I had read and thought that it would run from that last payment date as it was after the default notice.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Statute barred?

There's an ongoing dispute regards SB and we have a couple of cases going to court this year so we should hopefully get some clarity then. People base SB as being 6+ years from date of last payment or signed acknowledgement. It's actually +6 years from the Cause of Action (CoA)...I therefore say to class it as +6 years & 1 month from date of first missed payment.

However certain DCA's are trying to say that SB occurs from after default & termination - which does constitute a Cause of Action (CoA) - however if a lender waits a year (or even 5) before issuing the required s.87 default notice then in essence they can defer & manipulate SB indefinitely and that is our argument. We argue that technically the Act stipulates that SB occurs after the last CoA but that a lenders obligation to supply s.87 etc should be considered from the first opportunity allowed which would be approximately +24 days from the date you breached the agreement; ie the date you missed your first payment.

So in layman we argue that if you last paid in Jan 2009 but the lender didn't default you (s.87) until say Jan 2010 the official CoA occurred approximately +24 days from the ORIGINAL CoA created by you when you missed a payment which presumably in this example would be Feb 2009 meaning you add 24 days to this and the lender *COULD* default / terminate by mid March 2009 so regardless that they didn't do it (default you under s.87) until a year later in Jan 2010 would not create a valid cause of action. It'd remain as being around March 2009 as being the first opportunity to default & terminate after the breach occurred.

Basically, the lenders & DCA's are taking the piss. There's case law backing our argument and really, the original CoA occurs when the debtor breached the agreement and the secondary CoA is when the lender is lawfully able to default and terminate which is at least +24 days from the first Cause of Action regardless when they actually issued s.87 notifications.

In your case, therefore, we need the definitive date that the DN was issued and the definitive date of last payment & payment due date - upon which I'll tell you the exact date the account became SB'd.

[alfie]

Re: Statute barred?

hi Never in Doubt. Thanks for the reply.
I agree. some terms do allow for a missed payment, and an applicable default notice should follow after about the second/third missed contractual payment month if required, after the arrears notices. But, as you say, the contractual missed payments should remain as the cause of action, the required default notice being procedural regarding the missed payments breach of contract.
The last payment for this though was a token payment (first week of september 2009) after the expiry of the unsatisfied default notice (last week of the preceding august). What do you think?

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Statute barred?

October 2009 would be the cause of action relevant for SB purposes. Wipe out September as default / termination period and I'd argue by now it's SB. I'd not tell them - but it should be regardless.

[Spent2much]

Re: Statute barred?

to sum up as you have not stated why but assume SB - It is over 6 years since the last payment was made or taken by Direct Debit. The debt has been defaulted for over 6 years. It is a debt covered by CCA. There is no CCJ. It is not a mortgage

Even if it is SB an the default has been moved, the DCA can continue trying for payment forever, but cannot take court action for enforcement. You need to be very sure that the has not been an acknowledgment to restart the clock. Only then can you try to stop the annoyance by waving the "SB Stop it!" card at the DCA. Then they may stop.

sorry for butting in on this , but when you say a dca can try to enforce a debt forever even when it becomes SB , does this mean we could be sending prove letters for the rest our lives ?

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: Statute barred?

No you send a letter to the effect that the debt is statute barred and you will not be paying it. they then should desist.

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Statute barred?

sorry for butting in on this , but when you say a dca can try to enforce a debt forever even when it becomes SB , does this mean we could be sending prove letters for the rest our lives ?

No. They can ask but you can say no thanks - cease & desist contacting me. if they don't you then go formal (FOS)

[Never-In-Doubt]

Re: Statute barred?

No you send a letter to the effect that the debt is statute barred and you will not be paying it. they then should decease.

desist

[The Tech Clerk]

Re: Statute barred?

desist

you passed the test = lol

[alfie]

Re: Statute barred?

October 2009 would be the cause of action relevant for SB purposes. Wipe out September as default / termination period and I'd argue by now it's SB. I'd not tell them - but it should be regardless.

Hi. thanks NeverInDoubt. and everyone for input.
there has been no developments. nothing sent to them.

happy christmas all.

[cymruambyth]

Re: Statute barred?

Thanks for the update and a happy Christmas to you.