Saturday, 24 September 2016 02:43

Didn’t Know I Had a CCJ – Really?

One story that is big right now is about the people who claim that they have received a County Court Judgement without any type of notification. Yet we know this isn’t possible, so why is it being spun like this?

This story starts out only a few weeks ago, before that we had never even heard of there being an issue. Apparently though, the Prime Minister Theresa May is concerned about it and this seems to have tied in with many of the mainstream media outlets highlighting it.

The basic premise for the story is that people are applying for credit (mortgages or loans) only to be declined and later find out that they have a CCJ on their records. They will often deny having any knowledge of it. This isn’t particularly abnormal in anyway, in fact it is pretty common. They often deny it because they have been caught out lying. Rather than admit that they always knew about the CCJ, they claim they have no idea.

Here is one example

Whilst the media lap it all up and believe every word, we find these stories somewhat questionable. For a start, the Court doesn’t just add a CCJ onto someone’s credit file. They go through a whole process and procedures that must be followed before they will grant a judgement. These are called Pre Action Protocols.

Without going into massive legal detail about the procedures, they include several letters being sent and several phone calls being made. It is only as a last resort that a lender will ever attempt legal action. They must show what attempts they have made to resolve the situation to the court. The action has to be proportional.

A letter before action must be sent to the defendant. This gives them at least 14 days to reply to the letter. If they do not respond, the claimants (usually lender) will file a claim with the court. The Court will then send out details of the claim and notice to the defendant’s address. This gives them up to 28 days to reply with a defence.

To claim that they were unaware of any of this and never received any phone calls or letters is difficult to accept.

The exception is where they may have moved address. First of all it is the debtor’s responsibility to inform creditors where they have moved to. Secondly, if a CCJ has been granted against a debtor and the paperwork has been sent to the previous address – the Court will take another look at the judgement if the debtor appeals the original verdict. Finally, debt collectors will usually track down the new address through various means and alert the debtor that way.

We just don't think it is possible these days, for someone to claim they had no idea.

Alternative solution?

From our point of view, there is no better solution to reclaiming a debt if the debtor simply has to ignore all letters from us and a Court about the debt. That seems to be what is being proposed. A debtor can just ignore us, never tell us where they have moved to and the whole system of credit comes crashing down. 

At the end of the day it is our customers that do pay on time that will have to cover the debt of those that just ignore their responsibilities if changes are made to the way CCJ are entered onto the register.


  • Comment Link Monday, 01 October 2018 18:33 posted by Mo Ney

    Interestingly most loan company's only need to put aside for "damage control" 10% of the full amount loaned to customers.

    Your saying that the customers paying on time have to cover the debt of these payments missed from other customers.

    I would love to see how much these paying customers are covering in terms of debt from none paying customers. I cannot comprehend a loan company only taking back the 10% they've lost from non paying customers rather than taking the 100% loan company's try to convince us there laying out.

    This isn't a safe system for capitalism or a safe system for anything.
    Banks need to stand up and take responsibility for the cracks in our current society, lay aside full damage control meaning 100% of the money "the people" loan and stop creating artificial money.

    If someone takes out a loan of 1000 pounds and pays back only 100 then they've covered all costs, anything more then that is profit for the bank. this is NOT sustainable

  • Comment Link Wednesday, 03 October 2018 13:06 posted by

    You are right in a way. There are some small things we'd disagree with you on but you are 100% right in that the fractional lending system is going to come crashing down. When it comes crashing down we don't know, in fact it's a miracle that it's still going. When it comes down, it will be a few years of pain but then many years of growth in the economy.

Leave a comment