Congested courts the only option for debt enforcement

While the restricted use of statutory demands and winding-up petitions will provide a lifeline for many struggling companies, the move also forces creditors chasing overdue debts into an already overburdened court system.
As it stands, the only remedy to enforce payment of a debt is through a High Court enforcement officer. You may send out a bailiff or arrange a third-party debt order.
Alternatively, you may apply to the court to put a charge on any fixed property owned by the debtor. You will get an interim charge if you already have a judgment.
But a final charge may prove more difficult to obtain. This is because all the other creditors must be notified, and any 1 of them might object.
Whereas the consequences of Formal and Statutory Demands can encourage a debtor to pay quickly, county court proceedings take much longer, especially if the defendant tries to frustrate the proceedings by filing a contrived defence.
Weak defence
If the defence is weak, you can make an application for a summary judgment. But if the defence has merit, the court will give directions to set a timetable for the:
- Exchange of evidence
- Taking of witness statements
- Preparation of a trial
This process usually takes around 6 to 12 months. But a determined defendant can easily string that out for 12 to 18 months or more.
With only 54% of court and tribunal buildings in England and Wales currently open, legal experts predict the backlog of cases that built up during the first half of 2020 could take up to 12 months to clear.
In the long run, the changes being introduced to Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunal Service, including video and phone calls, benefit everyone as better use of technology should vastly improve productivity.
But for now, creditors chasing overdue debts are faced with little option but to litigate and accept that payment is many months away.
79th Group Update: The Webster Family Freezing Order – Decisive Action or Delayed Optics?
A worldwide freezing order (WFO) was recently granted against David Webster and his sons Jake and Curtis. Long‑time directors and central figures in the 79th…
Read MoreThe 79th Group: When Law Meets Accountability- Why Creditors Deserve Their Day in Court
The story of The 79th Group is no longer just about a failed investment scheme. It is about what happens to ordinary people when the…
Read MoreAfter the Tide Turns: Accountability and Silence in the Armstrong Infrastructure & Property Finance Loan Note Collapse
When the tide goes out, we see who’s been swimming in borrowed confidence, and for investors in Armstrong Infrastructure & Property Finance Limited (AIPF), the…
Read MoreThird-Party Actions Part Two: How Creditors Build Real Recovery Claims
In Part One, we explained what third-party actions are and why they matter in insolvency. This second part focuses on how creditors actually build those…
Read More