Advertisement

What is a Vesting Order obtained by AIGON? Can I make a negotiated settlement (with discounts) for 8 year old Debt? Can the 6 years Limitation apply?

5356 Views  ⚫  Asked 1 Year Ago
asked on Sep 7, 2020 at 21:44
by  
edited on Sep 7, 2020 at 23:23
by   jeff005


Pic of a  VESTING ORDER  (Courtesy of @Keribang).

There are discussions under these threads :

1.  Ref :  https://www.lawyerment.com/answers/questions/13770/forewarning-cimb-selling-debts-to-debts-collector-aiqon?g=1#tab-top

2.  Ref :  https://www.lawyerment.com/answers/questions/13790/settlement-to-a-14-years-dept?g=1#tab-top

3.  Ref :  https://www.lawyerment.com/answers/questions/13839/receiving-calls-from-aiqon-capital-saying-i-owe-money

Readers may ask Qs in this thread..
4 had this question
Me Too
2 favorites
Favorite
[ share ]
59 Answers
 1   2   3   4   5   6   Next »  Last »

answered on Sep 7, 2020 at 23:00
by  
Hi,

I am looking for some assistance.

I have some questions as follows:

1) May I please know is it still true that if a creditor does not initiate a bankruptcy notice (open up a case at the court) against a debtor within 6 years of debtor's last payment, then the creditor has forfeited its legal rights to sue in Court?

2) Does the 6 years Limitation Act start counting down from the last payment made to the creditor or the day you first defaulted the payment?

3) How does the recent amendment on Limitation Act 1953 (Act 254), which I believe it was amended in or around September 2019 favours towards the creditors?  

Many thanks for your assistance.  

Wai
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 8, 2020 at 00:18
by  
Preface :

Law of Limitation – An Amendment to the Limitation Act 1953

Pursuant to section 6 of the Limitation Act 1953, an action founded on contract or on tort must be brought within six years from the date on which the cause of action accrues.

The Parliament of Malaysia passed a Bill known as the Limitation (Amendment) Act 2018. The Limitation Act 1953 [Act 254], referred to as the principal Act was amended by inserting after section 6, section 6A.

The new section 6A comes into force in September 2019. Section 6A applies to any action for negligence not involving personal injuries. Section 6A brings about the following effect:

1.  The six-year limitation period is extended by section 6A. The starting date to calculate the limitation period falls beyond the date of which the cause of action accrued. An action in negligence (not involving personal injuries) to which this section applies shall not be brought after the expiration of three years from the starting date. Starting date has been defined under the Act to mean earliest date on which the plaintiff possessed the requisite knowledge required for bringing an action for damages in respect of the relevant damage and a right to bring such action.

2.  This Act only applies if the three-year period expires later than the period of limitation under the Act as prescribed by section 6(1).

3.  A further caveat as provided by the Act is that no action shall be brought after the expiration of 15 years from the date in which the cause of action accrued.

Further illustrations have been provided under the Act but it is in no way exhaustive of the application of section 6A. Section 6A is a remarkable addition as it safeguards the rights of plaintiff to bring an action under the ambit of negligence.
1 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 8, 2020 at 00:22
by  
edited Sep 8, 2020 at 02:19
by   jeff005
@ Wai Wai

My personal view /opinion /interpretation as a Layman (also as a newbie).

For elaborate definitions please consult a professional lawyer.

My answers to your Qs. Do note that I am basing my answers for initial debt litigation to make a debtor officially termed as Judgement Debtor  (First Lawsuit by creditor).

1)   May I please know is it still true that if a creditor does not initiate a bankruptcy notice (open up a case at the court) against a debtor within 6 years of debtor's last payment, then the creditor has forfeited its legal rights to sue in Court?

Not true. Wrong interpretation. For bankruptcy, it is now 15 years. Read  Preface (3) above.
For defaulted date, with reference to "last payment" it is now (6+3) years on certain conditions.

2)  The date of the first default (scheduled payment). Partial repayments do not count. People have been wrongly taught to make RM50 monthly payments (for credit cards) to avoid a lawsuit.Similarly to making a RM 10 to defeat /invalidate a Bankruptcy Notice.

Ref :  https://www.lawyerment.com/answers/questions/13825/some-issues-with-bankruptcy-notice

Ref :  https://www.lawyerment.com/answers/questions/13828/your-questions-to-harapan-besar

Note : First a Bankruptcy Notice then next a Bankruptcy Order.

3)  favours towards the creditors? 
It is so obvious now, 15 years instead of 12 years as in the past ACT.

Read :  "under the ambit of negligence."

Read @rajf1's case carefully : 

https://www.lawyerment.com/answers/questions/13823/dalam-proses-bankrup?g=8#tab-top

Applications were made under Bkcy Act 1967 and Bkcy (Amended) Act 2017.

(Caveat : The above comment is written by a Q&A registered User. It represents a personal point of view and is in no way associated with others in this forum nor be regarded as legal advice)
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 8, 2020 at 01:37
by  
1) May I please know is it still true that if a creditor does not initiate a bankruptcy notice (open up a case at the court) against a debtor within 6 years of debtor's last payment, then the creditor has forfeited its legal rights to sue in Court?
Please know that the lawsuit and bankruptcy proceeding are different stages of court action.
If creditor did not file a lawsuit within 6 years, then it is over in 6 years from last payment, meaning can no longer sue.
If creditor did file a lawsuit, then it is over 12 years from the lawsuit win, meaning cannot initiate bankruptcy proceeding.

2) Does the 6 years Limitation Act start counting down from the last payment made to the creditor or the day you first defaulted the payment?
Both, whichever is later.

3) How does the recent amendment on Limitation Act 1953 (Act 254), which I believe it was amended in or around September 2019 favours towards the creditors?
2019 Amendment is only for negligence cases, it doesn't affect you at all.
0 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 9, 2020 at 12:41
by  
edited Sep 9, 2020 at 14:51
by   jeff005
Wai Wai

(Part 1)

Thank you very much for your trust and faith in my postings. We do learn from each other and "may" be able to help others in the same predicament.

First I explain why I did not reply to your email of 2 weeks ago :
1.  I had too many emails of many sorts
2.  Your email was not thru my Author's Profile but "direct"( https://www.lawyerment.com/library/kb/authors/10 )
3.  I'm transparent with Lawyerment and do not hide things
4.  My comment /answers can help those who is scared to post online.
5.  Since you have posted here, and have given me PoID (Proof of Identity) by email, a good  chronology of your case, I'm more comfortable to comment and share to the best of my knowledge on your case and for the benefits of others..

I can understand you as I had been in a similar situation before. Know that you are under tremendous stress and waiting for a solution. There is no good solutions. Off hand I would advise you to go for Debtors Petition  (personal opinion) to avoid the banks who is after your blood now. No wonder dengue and malaria is on the rise now..!! I'm of the O-group, mosquitoes hates me..!!

I will also explain later what Qs u did not  ask me because u do not know the banks SOPs which can be different from bank to bank after your AKPK DMP was self terminated.

Lunch Break.. !!

(to be continued..)
1 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 10, 2020 at 07:03
by  
edited Sep 10, 2020 at 08:09
by   jeff005
@ Wai Wai

(Part 2)

Your case Facts :

1.  You have 4 Banks namely A,B,C,D.  D has sold your debt new creditor E.

2.  Bank A has initiated N.K. to you before. A composition /voluntary settlement was agreed upon and you have made payments until 6 months ago and unable to continue because of loss of employment due to the Covid-19 Pandemic. Still unemployed currently, any new N.K. would be speedy and effective as it is also an overseas bank.

3.  Since bkcy proceedings have been initiated by A,  B & C will just sit wait and see.

4.  My personal estimation is that the Total Debts (now) to be above half a million ringgit.

5.  You were under AKPK from 2011 - 2014, self terminated because of loss of employment at that point of time.

My Personal Views /opinions /non-legal

1.  LA2018 have no relevance to your case but LA 1953 have the 6 Years Limitation bearing on the new creditor E.

2.  Bearing in mind, that bank D have never initiated a lawsuit on you before and sold to party E on a clean basis  Bank D may have sold the debt based on your last outstanding to D documented and recorded in AKPK. It is a "clean sale"  unless you have been made a Judgement Debtor to/by Bank D before. The LA 1953 of 6 years limitation will be effective, beginning on the date stated of the Vesting Order.

(Caveat : The above comment is written by a Q&A registered User. It represents a personal point of view and is in no way associated with others in this forum nor be regarded as legal advice)

End of Part 2
(to be continued)
2 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 15, 2020 at 10:25
by  
edited Sep 15, 2020 at 10:55
by   Keribang
Hi all, 

Sorry I'm late to the game. Been swamped by personal & family matters & some business issues last couple of months.  My kepala has been out in the ether since then. 😵

Just some questions & needing clarifications to understand what's stated in the amended Limitation Act.
As @Jeff005 puts it in his preface :

Further illustrations have been provided under the Act but it is in no way exhaustive of the application of section 6A. Section 6A is a remarkable addition as it safeguards the rights of plaintiff to bring an action under the ambit of negligence.
I've read the Ammendment in section 6A, with the illustrative provided by the documents as well. Click here to get the actual Act :
http://www.agc.gov.my/agcportal/index.php?r=portal2/lom2&id=1019
The screenshot is as attached. 
Now, here's my question on the 6+3 extension.  Thoughout section 6A, it stated its +3 years after the knowledge of the negligence/default (?). 

So in case of banks or creditors, can they actually claim ignorance/no knowledge that they did not know the debtor stop paying them thus defaulted? They have a proper banking system to detect this, of which even reported to CCRIS reflected in the system even 1 month default. 

So, would it be strange if a bank/creditor claimed that for 6 years they didn't know the account has defaulted, then claim for another 3 years validity of the Limitation Act? 

Also, as @William Chan post above, is this admendment only applies to negligence cases as illustrated in the house buyer example above?

Of course the if the negligence or default happened more than 15 years, then no argument at all in the application of Limitation Act.

Thanks. 

Disclaimer: The above is purely for discussion & understanding purposes. In no shape or form be construe as legal advice or opinion. 
2 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 15, 2020 at 11:26
by  
edited Sep 15, 2020 at 11:40
by   jeff005
@ Keribang

Sir.. Good Morning to you..

You have asked a few very good Qs for public discussions which is why I started this topic content.

However, I could not be in any proper discussion now as you will soon know that I'm under siege  with calls from the Leader (also your Leader) of the esteemed Avengers Malaysia of which you have been identified as an accepted member. There "is" a call to BAN jeff005  from Lawyerment Forum to the Public Readers.

https://www.lawyerment.com/answers/questions/13837/sharing-my-experiences-on-my-tenure-with-avengers-malaysia-the-myths-facts?g=2#tab-top

I will pen my opinions and concerns on your personal concerns once the "ill winds" have been blown away. That would be my answer to Tuan @rara_ too.

I shall leave it to the floor (for the moment).

Pardon my personal concerns, I'm no longer a guest in the AMGC and hence not aware of anything,  are you asking on your personal capacity or you were ordered by the Leader to get me to post something with mistakes so that he can call me names again? There are fiery discussions between ex- and current members of the esteemed Avengers Malaysia now.

@Keribang..  I,m always ready to go into constructive discussions with you.. dear.
2 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 15, 2020 at 14:39
by  
Hi @Jeff005,

No worries Sir. FYI and AFAIK I'm no longer members of AMGC. The questions above are my own, knowledge for my own benefit & also hopefully for some who's in need of it - reading in this public forum.

Thanks. 
1 found this helpful
Helpful

answered on Sep 21, 2020 at 15:26
by  
edited Sep 21, 2020 at 16:18
by   jeff005
@ Keribang

AFAIK



I,m still in the Eye of the Storm.. Patience..
Once the ill-wind and the storm is over.. I can stand  and walk  TALL  again.



Just remember the  me..

Cheers.!!

p/s.. read, research and try to understand the two terms in the LA1953 Act.
1. cause of action
2. cause of action accrued.
1 found this helpful
Helpful


 1   2   3   4   5   6   Next »  Last »

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions by category or search to find answers.