Court refusing CCJ registration upon eviction?

I was shocked to discover that a CCJ for rent arrears does NOT mean that the CCJ is placed on the CCJ register! How can that be? I only found out when my former rogue tenant was constantly moving property and was obtaining these new abodes through estate agents, passing their credit checks. I called the court, and was told they don't routinely register CCJs for rent arrears unless the claimant requests it. I therefore had to write a letter specifically requesting them to register the CCJ, and a few months later (!) it was done. In some ways, in your first quote above, you did request this, but you stated you wanted a "CCJ judgement issued" which it not possible at this stage as you have already won the case. You could try again requesting that the judgement you have already received (quoting ref. nos etc) be placed upon the CCJ register. If this doesn't do the trick then what they are saying is you now need to enforce the judgement already again which could mean escalating it to the High Court and getting the High Court Sheriffs round there to ensure payment. Hope this helps.

Nothing new here. Usually they need to be enforced before they are entered on the CCJ register (with a few exceptions).
I'm surprised many landlords still don't know this.
Landlords who don't enforce are part of the problem.

Search the register here;
https://www.trustonline.org.uk/understand-judgments-fines/entries-on-the-england-and-wales-register/ccjs-and-the-register

Landlords need to be very, very careful who they select as tenants.

I was also told that getting a CCJ against the tenant (via the s8 route, which includes a money judgement order as part of the possession order) cannot be registered against the tenant/debtor until the creditor takes action to enforce the money judgement. This means that most tenant debtors do not get a CCJ registered against them, despite them having a CCJ issued against them.

In order to get the CCJ actually registered against the debtor you have to take enforcement action for the debt (not just enforce the eviction). For tenants who are unemployed and without assets, then it is simply adding to your costs as you are never likely to get the debt repaid (occasionally debt enforcement action may work, but this is the exception), therefore you would perhaps be paying out hundreds of pounds in enforcement costs simply to get the CCJ "registered" against the debtor.

Reply to the comment left by Robert Mellors at 25/08/2017 - 09:32
I'd agree with that Robert but yours is a niche area specialising in that market (not for the fainthearted!).

However most mainstream landlords select working tenants with a proven track record and history. If they go off the rails, there is a good chance they will get back on track within the next 6 years- the length of time a CCJ remains on the register.

County court bailiff cost £110 or £77 if MCOL. Or free if on a low income.
Not sure if the enforcement action of an order to attend court to provide information is sufficient to trigger an entry, if it is then it is only £55.

I've not had a claim for a while but something I've thought of trying is to request judgement for the payment to be made in instalments. The justification being the tenant is struggling financially therefore highly unlikely to be able to pay a lump sum. Payments by instalment is one of the few times rent debts are registered without enforcement AIUI.

The more tenants know their 'rights', and how to game the system, the more we will see unaccountable rogue tenants who can freely move from property to property, causing damage and racking up unpaid rent.

I would suggest that the cost of enforcement should be dropped to £1 with an automatic uplift of what is owed by £1000, by any enforcement process required, and 48 hours of unpaid work for the community.

Any tenant that spends their LHA or UC on anything other than their housing costs first, should have their benefits sanctioned for 20 years, their kids thrown into foster care, they should be made to do unpaid work for 5 months to enable them to get their kids back and no help with housing by any government organisation for a period of 6 years and the bill for all of that should be met by the Political party that introduced the CPR rules and other nonsense that we have to go through to get our property back.

Reply to the comment left by Gary Dully at 26/08/2017 - 21:22
Ie the scum that would now (as of about today) have us remain in the EU in all but name for an indeterminate period after we 'leave' the EU.

Reply to the comment left by Jay James at 27/08/2017 - 11:14
Not really bothered about the EU this week Jay,

As this coming Wednesday I'm in court again to evict another non paying tenant via Section 8, who appears to be a serial rent dodger, but, surprisingly, has a clean credit file.

It's ridiculous that this is still allowed.

Any money order granted with this repossession hearing should be registered, but instead I will have to bring a separate claim via MCOL for other contractual charges due that can't be brought up via PCOL, as under CPR rules PCOL can only deal with issues of rent and nothing else.

The whole judicial system is a money sapping scam.

If you watch Can't Pay We'll Take It Away on Channel 5, the figures are staggering.

200 repossession hearings a day, unpaid rents in the £Billions,
£60 billion in unpaid business invoices each year, 5 out of 10 businesses go bust within 5 years because of unpaid invoices and cash flow failure.

It's an absolute disgrace and the only ones that benefit are the non payers and the big cash rich businesses that can support the bad debt write offs, whilst they watch their new competitors get crushed.

Many of which have raised their invoice payment terms to 90 days to match their French counterparts.

3 months minimum to get paid? It's obscene!

Reply to the comment left by Gary Dully at 27/08/2017 - 13:04
Do me a favour Gary.

Ask if payment can be made by instalments- as the tenant is very unlikely to afford being able to afford a lump sum.
If allowed, my understanding is, because the judgement is in instalments, it will be entered on the CCJ register.

(Feeling really pissed off today as just turned down a lovely couple but can't risk giving them a chance due to the crap eviction laws)

Reply to the comment left by Monty Bodkin at 27/08/2017 - 16:12
Update: Mold County Court 30/08/2017 @ 11am
Possession granted in 14 days on Mandatory Grounds 8.
Instalment request denied (tenant didn't show up)
Money order raised for outstanding Rent Arrears ONLY
Expense granted for PCOL claim fee only.
Enforcement Upgrade via Section 42 denied.
Deposit number to be listed on the order, instructing the DPS to hand over the tenants deposit.
Other contractual charges will now require a separate MCOL case.
Judge wouldn't list Daily charge for continued occupation, he said it would be to much trouble to write it all down and it should be automatic anyway.

Time taken 2 minutes and 49 seconds.

Just got another 14 days until my next court case.

It's not much fun this week being a Landlord.