# sumons for 10year old debt that was paid off



## old-debt (21 Aug 2009)

HI

wondering if I could get some advice.

I am being chased by Interim Justicia to pay a debt I do not owe.

I had an MBNA credit card I stopped using nearly 11 years ago.
I cleared all outstanding amounts roughly 9 years ago.

On and off I have had various debt collectors chasing me for this non existant debt which MBNA claimed I still owed.

On every occasion they contacted me I explicitly denied owed the money and asked for proof of the debt. This has continued for the last 10 years aproximately once a year.

When asked for proof I was always told proof would be sent and never received anything.

Now I have received a civil summons (I think, it has no record number and has not been filed) and I believe I have to return two copies of a notice to defend. One to the court one to the solicitor.

My worry is I have no proof of payment. It was over 10 years ago, I have moved house twice and could not produce any evidence of payment. The amount is reasonable over 2,000 Euro.

If I issue the notice to defend, I may be liable to costs if found owing, would be reliant on my sworn affadavit, which I am prepared to make, and would be risking serious financial difficulties.

However I have never acknowledged the debt, it is over 10 years old.

What do I do now? Fold, and capitulate to the extortion* or take the high ground and risk the courts?

Old-Debt

*Where extortion is defined as the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or *fear*, or *under color of official right*."


----------



## jhegarty (21 Aug 2009)

Sounds like a bluff to me.

Are you sure it's a real summons ?


----------



## old-debt (21 Aug 2009)

I've no idea.

There is no record number, it hasn't been filed. It states "True copy" Whatever that means.


----------



## MOB (21 Aug 2009)

A record number is not inserted on a District Court summons at date of service.  

Your options are:

1.  Defend the case - you may win or you may lose.
2.  Do nothing - in which case you certainly will have a judgement taken up against you.

I think you should get a solicitor.


----------



## old-debt (21 Aug 2009)

Can't afford a solicitor to be honest. However I can and will attend court if needs be.


----------



## jhegarty (21 Aug 2009)

MOB said:


> 1.  Defend the case - you may win or you may lose.
> .




How will he loose given the debt will not be too old to enforce (even if it existed) ?


----------



## old-debt (21 Aug 2009)

jhegarty said:


> How will he loose given the debt will not be too old to enforce (even if it existed) ?


 

I suspect the fact there have been ongoing letters, phone calls etc will have kept the debt "LIVE" for want of a better expression


----------



## Mr. C.J.H. (21 Aug 2009)

old-debt said:


> I suspect the fact there have been ongoing letters, phone calls etc will have kept the debt "LIVE" for want of a better expression


 
Not so, unless there was a written ackowledgment signed by the debtor confirming the debt 9per s.58(1) of the Statute of Limitations 1957. However, a part payment of the debt will also deem the debt to accrue on that date so the clock can start ticking again.

I agree entirely with MOB's summary of your options and I think that you should really consider getting yourself a solicitor. There really are no guarantees in litigation and this is particularly so in the District Court, so don't take anything for granted. It certainly is most unfortunate that you didn't retain evidence of discharging the debt.


----------



## old-debt (21 Aug 2009)

Mr. C.J.H. said:


> Not so, unless there was a written ackowledgment signed by the debtor confirming the debt 9per s.58(1) of the Statute of Limitations 1957.


Google is my friend
Never signed. So 6 year rule applies so?





Mr. C.J.H. said:


> However, a part payment of the debt will also deem the debt to accrue on that date so the clock can start ticking again.


No part payments or acknowledgement of the debt. I was always suspicious when the phone calls persisted in "Do you admit you owe the money?" type questions. I repeatedly denied the debt. I suspected that even a partial admission e.g. "I might, I can't remember" would be good enough for them.




Mr. C.J.H. said:


> I agree entirely with MOB's summary of your options and I think that you should really consider getting yourself a solicitor. There really are no guarantees in litigation and this is particularly so in the District Court, so don't take anything for granted. It certainly is most unfortunate that you didn't retain evidence of discharging the debt.


 
Unfortuanate is a bit if an understatement 

So to sum up regardless of the rights or wrongs I will have to pay a solicitor to represent me in order to defend myself. Can I apply for costs to the district court if I am successful? 
Question to myself, can I afford the costs of both sides if I am not successful?

Old-Debt


----------



## csirl (21 Aug 2009)

The onus is on MBNA to prove that you owe the money. Have they supplied proof? 

I would assume that it is impossible to prove something that isnt true.

Statute of Limitations would apply, so not only do they have to prove that you owe them money, they also have to prove that you have acknowledged the debt - would need to be in writing or recording, otherwise is hearsay. Again, I assume that it will be impossible for them to prove this. 

Would a phonecall or letter to MBNA reminding them that they will be liable for any legal costs you incur and telling them that you intend to sue them for defamation for telling third parties i.e. "debt collection" companies (remembering that these do not legally exist in Ireland) that you are debt etc. be out of order?


----------



## nuac (21 Aug 2009)

the Civil Summons should have been signed either by the creditor or by a solicitor on the creditor's behalf.

Some debt collectors use forms with headings which look like official court documents, but aren't.

A solicitor would not charge and arm and a leg to advise.

See a solicitor


----------



## csirl (21 Aug 2009)

> Some debt collectors use forms with headings which look like official court documents, but aren't.


 
Interesting point. I would imagine that its an offence to present someone with a document which impersonates a summons or an official court document. Anyone check?


----------



## jhegarty (21 Aug 2009)

csirl said:


> Interesting point. I would imagine that its an offence to present someone with a document which impersonates a summons or an official court document. Anyone check?



I would imagine the dpp would have a menu of charges to pick from.


----------



## bond-007 (21 Aug 2009)

Indeed he would.




> Would a phonecall or letter to MBNA reminding them that they will be liable for any legal costs you incur and telling them that you intend to sue them for defamation for telling third parties i.e. "debt collection" companies (remembering that these do not legally exist in Ireland) that you are debt etc. be out of order?


Nope. It would be no harm to show them you are serious in defending. 

The OP will get his costs if he wins.


----------

