Hi all

I have had a letter from a swiss credit agency (Creditreform) about issuing me with a Betreibung if I do not pay up. But this is relating to some (disputed, but that's another story) debt in the UK that was referred to them.

Is this allowed? Or is it just an idle threat? I would have thought Betreibungs could only be used for Swiss debt

thanks for any info!

If it is disputed just refuse it when it is served on you with the comment "Rechtsvorschlag". The person suing you or Creditreform will then have to prove that you owe them the money before taking matters further. For smaller amounts this could happen before a "Judge of the Peace" (Friedensrichter), for larger amounts in a court.

You might want to counterclaim, or file a claim with Money Claims Online http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/o...mcol/index.htm

In any event you ought to contest the competence of the agency. Have a look at the Lugano Convention on jurisdiction and enforcement of judgments. http://curia.europa.eu/common/recdoc...lug-textes.htm You might find something useful there; and in any case the threat of very costly litigation far exceeding the value of the claim, and the need for expert advice -- in addition to the issues others have raised -- may well put off the most aggressive claimant and enforcement agency.

It is entirely possible to use a Betreibung to enforce a foreign debt but this must be done through a third party based in CH. In this case the company has used Creditreform and is handling itself entirely correctly. Note however, that the creditreform company is unlikely to actually take this "all the way". Usually this is just a threat as there is a requirement to do two things:
1. Show jurisdiction
2. Prove the debt
Jurisdiction only applies where the service or product has been delivered in Switzerland or where there is a court judgement in the country demonstrating 2.

So if you have been to court and lost then you can expect they can and will come knocking. If not then you can argue the debt and the jurisdiction in Switzerland if they take it that far which they most likely will not.

In the case of a court judgment from another EU/EEA/Swiss country enforcement is easy: the judgment can be registered locally under the Lugano Convention (parallel to the old EU Brussels Conventions on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments, now the "Brussels Regulation"). There is no right to defend except under extremely limited circumstances (such as you happen to share the same name with the debtor and furthermore were never served with the writ). http://curia.europa.eu/common/recdoc...es/lug-idx.htm

The problem in many of these cases is that credit card and other debts are sold off by financial institutions to speculators and collection agencies for pennies, and then the buyer proceeds aggressively. I've seen this happen even when the debtor had been discharged in bankruptcy, although normally that's a perfect defence. Claim of payment is also a defence, unless that was raised, or could have been raised, in the foreign proceeding.

There is a principle called "lis pendens", included in the Convention, that encourages a race to the courthouse in the most favourable jurisdiction because once an action (such as libel or divorce, although family law cases aren't covered by the Convention) has been started in one signatory state an action in another, except for enforcement or attachment, is precluded. That's why the English small claims courts can be useful. https://www.moneyclaim.gov.uk/ (Indeed the French small claims system (Tribunal d'Instance) is also helpful when they have jurisdiction, and there's is the additional advantage that they are free and gratis, unlike the English ones.)

Often the cheapest way to address unfair pursuit for debt is through the English administrative bodies responsible for unfair trading. For example, some claims are for fees charged by for-profit vocational schools that immediately sell off the instalment agreement and then either go into receivership or fail to teach anything useful, their sales pitches having been totally fraudulent. In some places (New York City comes to mind) it is possible to pursue the claimant in criminal court for a misdemeanor if the facts support such a private prosecution. That works well against unscrupulous landlords. (There is also a landlord & tenant court (Housing Court) in NYC but a tenant can be whipsawed there by lawyers acting for the landlord.)