Statute of Limitations/ Tuition Fees

omnishambles

What might happen in this situation. This is imaginary.

Tom was a medical student between 2004 and 2006. In September 2007 term he had to repeat some classes, but a few months in, he left his degree and set up his own business.

In 2013, Tom is returning to college. A problems arises.

The college want Tom to pay the balance of his fees from 2007. This is €1,000.

Tom thinks this is unfair, because the college had agreed in 2007 that he did not owe the fee. In fact, they did not think he owed it last week. It has come as a complete surprise. The college have written it on their system as "bad debt write off" and never wrote to Tom asking it to be paid (they agreed he didn't owe it).

Does Tom have any case? Do statute of limitations apply? The fee was to be paid by September 30 2007.

omnishambles

in case it's relevant, this is a public university

Bepolite

Jim is a third year law student that likes to answer questions on Boards.ie. Jim is also a bit of a gobsh... and his answers should not be relied upon to any great extent.

Rule is Foakes v Beer, also see Pinnel's case.

SoL might apply as of the 30/9/2013, so long as the debt hasn't been acknowledged.

Outstanding name, from an outstanding TV Show. It's a shame the actor now won't be in the new series

omnishambles

Thanks for your reply. Great show:pac:

Does Foakes vs Beer apply? My post might have been badly worded... there was no part payment 'per se'.

Tom paid his 2007 registration fee in full. What I called "the balance" is actually a different bill, which is a €1,000 examination charge (the cost of correcting Tom's exams). This was to be paid by September 30 2007, and was billed seperately.


You say SI might apply so long as the debt hasn't been acknowledged. Would you mind explaining this? Does it mean that Tom shouldn't discuss it with the university until the end of September? The college has not once sought this supposed debt in 5 years and 11 months.

Tom Young

The 30th of September 2013 is within the SL clock. 6 years simple contract debt.

omnishambles

Thanks.

is the debt then fully extinguished?

After the debt is statute barred, can a public institution maintain a block on his registration?

Tom Young

If the debt has been acknowledged, which it appears to have been, then the clock restarts .... S. 56 and then S.65 http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/1957/en/act/pub/0006/index.html

We don't give legal advice. The practical advice, pay the bill.

Cody Pomeray

The OP has to ask two questions.

1. When did breach of contract occur?

The cause of  action  accrues as soon as a breach of contract occurs whether or not damage has been suffered at that time. This may or may not be the date he thinks it is. It is possibly much, much later.

2. Did acknowledgement occur?
Acknowledgement is not the same as simply having received a letter. Acknowledgement must be clear, preferably written, and must identify and quantify a debt clearly and explicitly. It is not sufficient to say "since you owe us money, you can't enrol". Sounds obvious but you'd be surprised. Good v Parry [1963]

LutherBlissett

Has the OP tried contacting the college to clarify the situation? It might be that some confusion has occurred in the fee office/ the department. You would be surprised at how effective openly discussing this with the university might be. If OP has any documentation verifying the college's decision to write off the debt at the first instance, then it might be helpful to use that as supporting material. (Without appearing to threaten the college obviously.)

The contract theory outlined above is all very well in the abstract, but OP has to consider a few things:

1. If the OP did decide to stall paying and things did get as far as a "case", OP's legal fees could easily amount to enough to negate any benefits of not paying the 1000 euro in the first place.

2. If legal action was taken against the OP and the OP tries to plead SoL, the amount of time it would take for something like that to arise in court would probably prevent OP from registering for any course this year (as presumably OP will not be allowed to register with an outstanding debt of 1000 euro).

In short, the OP owes a debt to the college. The most practical way to resolve the situation is just to pay off the debt (if things can't be resolved with the college in any other way). 1000 euro is a lot of money, but it is due to the college, and trying to play the SoL as a trump card does not lead down any profitable avenues in my opinion.

Pat Mustard

The Statute of Limitations sets out limitation periods for actions. It presents a defence to actions that are not brought within the relevant statutory period. However, just because a debt may not be legally enforceable anymore does not mean that it cannot be pointed to at all. Debts do not become extinguished by passage of time, as such.

In this case, the debt has already been written off as a bad debt by the university and no action seems to contemplated. Certainly, there are solicitors who believe that a debt of only €1,000 may not be worth pursuing. From what the OP has written, an action for recovery of debt may be very unlikely. Therefore, it doesn't seem relevant whether Tom may or may not have a defence to such an unlikely action.

By all means, shoot me down in flames if the following is incorrect and if there is some university regulation which contradicts this, but I don't see why the university couldn't ask for the amount owed to be discharged by Tom at this stage, before agreeing to contract with him again.

Certainly, in private business, it is common that creditors would ask debtors to discharge previous bad debts before agreeing to do business with them again.

However, in the OP, it states that the university had previously agreed that Tom did not owe this fee of €1,000. Although I am not sure why this would be the case, if Tom could evidence this assertion by producing the relevant receipts and paperwork to the university, then he should consider looking into this.

omnishambles

The person has not written to the college to clarify the situation because he does not acknowledge that a debt exists. The college have not written demanding payment. The person has found out there is a 'hold' on his account stopping him from registering (fully), was informally shown by someone who works at the college that it relates to "a charge from his previous attendance" and has been written down as "bad debt, write off". The exams fee is the only thing it could be.

The Mustard wrote: »

However, in the OP, it states that the university had previously agreed that Tom did not owe this fee of €1,000. Although I am not sure why this would be the case

Because Tom paid the registration fee, and every other charge to repeat the year. He didn't sit the exams and doesnt think he should have had to pay the fee specifically for correcting the exams. The college agreed in 2007, but in 2013 they put a hold on his account.

LutherBlissett

For the reasons outlined above, it would probably still be most use to just contact the college about it to clarify/ remedy the situation.

The college probably won't pursue you for the debt, so trying to beat the SoL is a bit of a waste of time. All the college needs to do if you don't pay up is not accept your registration, which they're perfectly entitled to - the college isn't obliged to have you on its books as a student.

Pat Mustard

omnishambles wrote: »

The college want Tom to pay the balance of his fees from 2007. This is €1,000.

Tom thinks this is unfair, because the college had agreed in 2007 that he did not owe the fee. In fact, they did not think he owed it last week. It has come as a complete surprise. The college have written it on their system as "bad debt write off" and never wrote to Tom asking it to be paid (they agreed he didn't owe it).

omnishambles wrote: »

The person has found out there is a 'hold' on his account stopping him from registering (fully), was informally shown by someone who works at the college that it relates to "a charge from his previous attendance" and has been written down as "bad debt, write off". The exams fee is the only thing it could be.

Because Tom paid the registration fee, and every other charge to repeat the year. He didn't sit the exams and doesnt think he should have had to pay the fee specifically for correcting the exams. The college agreed in 2007, but in 2013 they put a hold on his account.

Writing something off as a bad debt is not the same as debt forgiveness. I think that Tom was mistaken when he thought that the college agreed that he did not owe the fee, as mentioned in the OP.

omnishambles

LutherBlissett wrote: »

For the reasons outlined above, it would probably still be most use to just contact the college about it to clarify/ remedy the situation.

The college probably won't pursue you for the debt

The Mustard wrote: »

I think that Tom was mistaken when he thought that the college agreed that he did not owe the fee, as mentioned in the OP.

Why? It was clear. This was 2007

Tom: I'm leaving the course
student desk: well there's still 1000 outstanding on your account for exams
Tom: Yeah I wont be sitting xmas exams
student desk: that's fine, have you spoken to your tutor etc?
tom: yes
student desk: ok sign here please and i'll take back your student card


now skip forward 6 years (almost) and i get my registration login. no holds on my account all is fine. so tom pays the required part of the registration fee. then one day, out of the blue, when tom goes to login, an account hold appears that says Tom owes the college something.

Is this clearer? how many of you would be rushing to pay this 1000 quid on top of everything else?

I'm not sure how you think there is a mistake

Tom Young

Part payment of a debt also re-starts the limitation clock. Pity.

Pat Mustard

omnishambles wrote: »

Why? It was clear. This was 2007

Tom: I'm leaving the course
student desk: well there's still 1000 outstanding on your account for exams
Tom: Yeah I wont be sitting xmas exams
student desk: that's fine, have you spoken to your tutor etc?
tom: yes
student desk: ok sign here please and i'll take back your student card


now skip forward 6 years (almost) and i get my registration login. no holds on my account all is fine. so tom pays the required part of the registration fee. then one day, out of the blue, when tom goes to login, an account hold appears that says Tom owes the college something.

Is this clearer? how many of you would be rushing to pay this 1000 quid on top of everything else?

I'm not sure how you think there is a mistake

Your statement of the facts seems clear enough, but I don't see why you think that this accounting treatment amounts to an agreement (legally binding or otherwise) between the university and Tom, regarding discharge of the debt or regarding the fees not being owed.

Let's look at this from an evidential point of view, for the sake of argument.

If Tom was in court, defending a theoretical debt collection action, Statute of Limitations issues aside, what evidence could he produce to the District Judge to show that the university agreed that the fees were not owing or that the debt had otherwise been discharged? Is there paperwork from the university to show this?

(Bear in mind that the university choosing to treat the amount owed as a bad debt for accounting purposes is not the same as agreeing that amount is not owed or otherwise discharged).

UCD fee policy

Students carrying more than €600 of debt will not be allowed to complete online registration for 2013/2014 until they have paid off or reduced their previous year's debt to below €600.

EDIT: Is there anything in the university fees procedures about cancellation of exam fees in upon cancellation of exam re-sits?

Cody Pomeray

Tom Young wrote: »

Part payment of a debt also re-starts the limitation clock. Pity.

well op says the debt is not the usual college charges.

if it's a different debt to what he's paid the clock doesn't re-start.

however if op has paid money for a new course, consideration enters the scene.

OP the institution is likely to be pragmatic on this. Especially if you have already paid your other fees.

omnishambles

The Mustard wrote: »

Your statement of the facts seems clear enough, but I don't see why you think that this accounting treatment amounts to an agreement (legally binding or otherwise) between the university and Tom

I'm not basing it on what the college have written on their syste but on what was said between Tom and the college in 2007.

If Tom was in court, defending a theoretical debt collection action, Statute of Limitations issues aside, what evidence could he produce to the District Judge to show that the university agreed that the fees were not owing or that the debt had otherwise been discharged?

Nothing that's why I'm asking about statute of limitations. Why would I leave statute of limitations aside if that's what my post was about?

Pat Mustard

The statute of limitations was already discussed and is a bit of a red herring in my view. I see you have gone back to that rather than answer the question about the purported 'agreement'.

Good luck with that.

mitosis

In any case, the college is under no obligation to take the student back. As has previously been observed, in any business, if you want to have a new relationship you will be required to clear any historic debt. Fool me once.....and all of that.

Cody Pomeray

mitosis wrote: »

In any case, the college is under no obligation to take the student back.

Actually I'm going to change my opinion in light of OPs last few posts.

If there is consideration (reg/ similar fee) from the student, then ceteris paribus there is a new contract.