Injunction for debt that would seem prescribed


I just received (November 2018) an injunction order for a debt contracted with a financial company (Linea) which was then sold twice to others (Locam and Itacapital of the Kruk group). The debt, of 10,500 euros, dates back to January 2002, I only paid it for 2,078 euros. I was sent only a few simple letters of invitation to pay, but never a registered letter, and I’m sure; so the debt would be prescribed today, or am I wrong? In addition, also the assignments of the debt were communicated to me only by regular mail. Is it possible that an injunction has been issued despite this defect?


You can not be sure that you have ever received a registered letter: when the postman has to deliver a registered letter, it may happen that the recipient or a person legitimated to sign the receipt (a family member) is not identified for collection. In this hypothesis, the postman fills out a notice of stock, which may be lost due to the large amount of paper advertising notices that now clog up our mailboxes, and report the missive in the office. If the recipient does not go to collect the notification, the notification will be completed correctly after 10 days of storage (completed).

Fortunately, you have at least received the injunction: you have 40 days, starting from the date of notification of the order to pay, to oppose and, therefore, to plead the allegedly imposed limitation to the right of reimbursement of the alleged action, to complain presumed absence of any communication recommended to notify you of the assignments of credit carried out from 2002 onwards, to contest the presumed legitimacy of the chronological account statement presented by the creditor at the time of appeal by injunction.

But, unfortunately, it will need the technical support of a lawyer and will have to consider the risk that the counterparty can show, in the opposition, receipts of delivery or full stock related to the communication of interruption of the limitation periods as well as the assignment of credit .

However, we must not believe that the judges who authorize an injunction are too careful to the documentation attached by the creditor and often the creditors also hope in the natural predisposition of the debtor, who renounces to oppose conscious not to have complied: therefore, it will agree that his lawyer or, if you prefer, proceed preliminarily to examine the documentation necessarily filed in the Court by the other party and together evaluate the convenience of hearing opposition. It may be that the creditor holds the winning cards: by reading them first, one may perhaps avoid spending more money on the unified contribution and the lawyer’s fee for judicial assistance.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.