Debt Age

Author
Discussion

tinman0

Original Poster:

18,231 posts

241 months

Tuesday 13th March 2007
quotequote all
How old does a debt have to be before you are unable to chase for it? I thought there was a limit...

stevieb

5,252 posts

268 months

Tuesday 13th March 2007
quotequote all
6 years IIRC but i dont know how the 6 years are applied if its from:

6 years signing of the credit agreement
or
6 years from the last date of non-payment
or
6 years from the last point of recorded contact


Edited by stevieb on Tuesday 13th March 11:58

justinp1

13,330 posts

231 months

Tuesday 13th March 2007
quotequote all
stevieb said:
6 years IIRC but i dont know how the 6 years are applied if its from:

6 years signing of the credit agreement
or
6 years from the last date of non-payment
or
6 years from the last point of recorded contact


Edited by stevieb on Tuesday 13th March 11:58


The Limitations Act is 6 years from the last point of contact or payment.

However, there are exceptions to this for example if a court judgement has been entered against the debt etc.

mcflurry

9,102 posts

254 months

Tuesday 13th March 2007
quotequote all
At the moment its 6 years after the last contact or payment, BUT there are moves afoot to change the law, so if the creditor can show they chased you then the clock doesn't stop...

fourmotion

1,026 posts

221 months

Tuesday 13th March 2007
quotequote all
Time-barring in England is a Prescription limit rather than an Extinction limit, the difference being that Extinction will automatically wipe out the debt, whilst Prescription merely means the debt is not (always) enforceable in Court. You can still be chased for debts, and the Creditor is within its rights to charge interest as per your contract. It would be very hard to argue time-bar if they had been chasing you, as they could show they had actively been trying to recover the debt, and you were ignoring them. There can also be issues if you have moved address or changed your company name, which they can argue in court has slowed their recovery. It is ultimately the Courts decision if Time-Bar applies, so consult a lawyer before using it as defense outside of Court.

stevieb

5,252 posts

268 months

Tuesday 13th March 2007
quotequote all
fourmotion said:
Time-barring in England is a Prescription limit rather than an Extinction limit, the difference being that Extinction will automatically wipe out the debt, whilst Prescription merely means the debt is not (always) enforceable in Court. You can still be chased for debts, and the Creditor is within its rights to charge interest as per your contract. It would be very hard to argue time-bar if they had been chasing you, as they could show they had actively been trying to recover the debt, and you were ignoring them. There can also be issues if you have moved address or changed your company name, which they can argue in court has slowed their recovery. It is ultimately the Courts decision if Time-Bar applies, so consult a lawyer before using it as defense outside of Court.


But if they have been atctively been chasing then they would not leave this 6 years to get to court to make a judgement.


why would they run the risk of going into this Time-bar if there was no need to. why give the debtor a chance to get out of it all.


Edited by stevieb on Tuesday 13th March 13:25

justinp1

13,330 posts

231 months

Tuesday 13th March 2007
quotequote all
stevieb said:
fourmotion said:
Time-barring in England is a Prescription limit rather than an Extinction limit, the difference being that Extinction will automatically wipe out the debt, whilst Prescription merely means the debt is not (always) enforceable in Court. You can still be chased for debts, and the Creditor is within its rights to charge interest as per your contract. It would be very hard to argue time-bar if they had been chasing you, as they could show they had actively been trying to recover the debt, and you were ignoring them. There can also be issues if you have moved address or changed your company name, which they can argue in court has slowed their recovery. It is ultimately the Courts decision if Time-Bar applies, so consult a lawyer before using it as defense outside of Court.


But if they have been atctively been chasing then they would not leave this 6 years to get to court to make a judgement.


why would they run the risk of going into this Time-bar if there was no need to. why give the debtor a chance to get out of it all.


Edited by stevieb on Tuesday 13th March 13:25


Agreed.

I think the main reason for the rule is for debts which have been forgotten about and then 'refound'.

A possible reason why a CCJ would not be issued would be if the debtor was deliberately evasive, thus without an address there can be no judgement.

superlightr

12,861 posts

264 months

Tuesday 13th March 2007
quotequote all
stevieb said:
[
why would they run the risk of going into this Time-bar if there was no need to. why give the debtor a chance to get out of it all.


Edited by stevieb on Tuesday 13th March 13:25



It has been know to leave the debt until as late as possible to rack up the charges.

Slightly O/T With a defamation claim its limitation period is 12mths, where again the 'victim' if often advised to wait to the 11th mth so as to 'allow' the defamation to be spread/published as far and wide as it will go because that directly affects the amount of damages/compensation/awarded if the case is won by the defamed.

fourmotion

1,026 posts

221 months

Wednesday 14th March 2007
quotequote all
stevieb said:

why would they run the risk of going into this Time-bar if there was no need to. why give the debtor a chance to get out of it all.


Edited by stevieb on Tuesday 13th March 13:25


Very often small businesses do not have the funds or legal resources to take someone to court, or it is simply not financially viable. eg. letter of intent to prosecute written on solicitors headed paper £85, cost for representation (or at a minimum some legal consultation prior to hearing) is a c£300 (depends on location, seniority of solicitor, complexity of case). If the debt is only £500 then its probably not worth taking them to court, especially discounting its value for your time and effort.

FunkyGibbon

3,786 posts

265 months

Wednesday 14th March 2007
quotequote all
justinp1 said:


A possible reason why a CCJ would not be issued would be if the debtor was deliberately evasive, thus without an address there can be no judgement.

slightly off-topic and apologies to the OP...

Is a CCJ tied to a name AND and address then? We moved house 4 years ago and found out recently that 3 years ago FGEss had a CCJ against her at the old address - a year after we had moved.

thanks

FG

tinman0

Original Poster:

18,231 posts

241 months

Wednesday 14th March 2007
quotequote all
fourmotion said:
stevieb said:

why would they run the risk of going into this Time-bar if there was no need to. why give the debtor a chance to get out of it all.



Very often small businesses do not have the funds or legal resources to take someone to court, or it is simply not financially viable. eg. letter of intent to prosecute written on solicitors headed paper £85, cost for representation (or at a minimum some legal consultation prior to hearing) is a c£300 (depends on location, seniority of solicitor, complexity of case). If the debt is only £500 then its probably not worth taking them to court, especially discounting its value for your time and effort.


Thats what small claims are for.

justinp1

13,330 posts

231 months

Wednesday 14th March 2007
quotequote all
FunkyGibbon said:
justinp1 said:


A possible reason why a CCJ would not be issued would be if the debtor was deliberately evasive, thus without an address there can be no judgement.

slightly off-topic and apologies to the OP...

Is a CCJ tied to a name AND and address then? We moved house 4 years ago and found out recently that 3 years ago FGEss had a CCJ against her at the old address - a year after we had moved.

thanks

FG


No, its tied to you, the reason that they need a current address though is to send you the summons correctly. If you did not receive the summons and you did not have a chance to defend the claim then you can apply to the court to have the case annulled.

FunkyGibbon

3,786 posts

265 months

Wednesday 14th March 2007
quotequote all
justinp1 said:
FunkyGibbon said:
justinp1 said:


A possible reason why a CCJ would not be issued would be if the debtor was deliberately evasive, thus without an address there can be no judgement.

slightly off-topic and apologies to the OP...

Is a CCJ tied to a name AND and address then? We moved house 4 years ago and found out recently that 3 years ago FGEss had a CCJ against her at the old address - a year after we had moved.

thanks

FG


No, its tied to you, the reason that they need a current address though is to send you the summons correctly. If you did not receive the summons and you did not have a chance to defend the claim then you can apply to the court to have the case annulled.

cheers - we'll be doing just that then.

FG

justinp1

13,330 posts

231 months

Thursday 15th March 2007
quotequote all
FunkyGibbon said:
justinp1 said:
FunkyGibbon said:
justinp1 said:


A possible reason why a CCJ would not be issued would be if the debtor was deliberately evasive, thus without an address there can be no judgement.

slightly off-topic and apologies to the OP...

Is a CCJ tied to a name AND and address then? We moved house 4 years ago and found out recently that 3 years ago FGEss had a CCJ against her at the old address - a year after we had moved.

thanks

FG


No, its tied to you, the reason that they need a current address though is to send you the summons correctly. If you did not receive the summons and you did not have a chance to defend the claim then you can apply to the court to have the case annulled.

cheers - we'll be doing just that then.

FG


However, this is not a guarantee that the court will agree. Similarly, it will most likely be the case that person who is still owed will start legal proceedings again. However, if you pay them there will be no CCJ.