Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm still pondering/ trying to find docs re the above issue. Moving on - same saga; different issue I'm trying to understand what I can do: The lender/ mortgagee-in-possession has a claim v me for alleged debt. But the debt has only been incurred due to them failing to sell property in >5y. I'm fighting them on this.   I've been trying to get an order for sale for 2y.  I got it legally added into my counterclaim - but that will only be dealt with at trial.  This is really frustrating. The otherside's lawyers made an application to adjourn trial for a few more months - allegedly wanting to try sort some kind of settlement with me and to use the stay to sell.  At the hearing I asked Judge to expedite the order for sale. I pointed out they need a court-imposed deadline or this adjournment is just another time wasting tactic (with interest still accruing) as they have no buyer.  But the judge said he could legally only deal with the order at trial. The otherside don't want to be forced to sell the property.. Disclosure has presented so many emails which prove they want to keep it. I raised some points with the judge including misconduct of the receiver. The judge suggested I may have a separate claim against the receiver?   On this point - earlier paid-for lawyers said my counterclaim should be directed at the lender for interference with the receiver and the lender should be held responsible for the receiver's actions/ inactions.   I don't clearly understand that, but their legal advice was something to do with the role a receiver has acting as an agent for a borrower which makes it hard for a borrower to make a claim against a receiver ???.  However the judge's comment has got me thinking.  He made it clear the current claim is lender v me - it's not receiver v me.  Yet it is the receiver who is appointed to sell the property. (The receiver is mentioned/ involved in my counterclaim only from the lender collusion/ interference perspective).  So would I be able to make a separate application for an order for sale against the receiver?  Disclosure shows receiver has constantly rejected offers. He gave a contract to one buyer 4y ago. But colluded with the lender's lawyer to withdraw the contract after 2w to instead give it to the ceo of the lender (his own ltd co) (using same lawyer).  Emails show it was their joint strategy for lender/ ceo to keep the property.  The receiver didn't put the ceo under any pressure to exchange quickly.  After 1 month they all colluded again to follow a very destructive path - to gut the property.  My account was apparently switched into a "different fund" to "enable them to do works" (probably something to do with the ceo as he switched his ltd co accountant to in-house).   Interestingly the receiver told lender not to incur significant works costs and to hold interest.  The costs were huge (added to my account) and interest was not held.   The receiver rejected a good offer put forward by me 1.5y ago.  And he rejected a high offer 1y ago - to the dismay of the agent.  Would reasons like this be good enough to make a separate application to the court against the receiver for an order for sale ??  Or due to the main proceedings and/or the weird relationship a borrower has with a receiver I cannot ?
    • so a new powerless B2B debt DCA set up less than a month ago with a 99% success rate... operating on a NWNF basis , but charging £30 to set up your use of them. that's gonna last 5mins.... = SPAMMERS AND SCAMMERS. a DCA is NOT a BAILIFF and have  ZERO legal powers on ANY debt - no matter WHAT its type. dx      
    • Migrants are caught in China's manufacturing battles with the West, as Beijing tries to save its economy.View the full article
    • You could send an SAR to DCbl on the pretext that you are going for a breach of your GDPR . They should then send the purported letter of discontinuance which may show why it ended up in Gloucester and see if you can get your  costs back on the day. It obviously won't be much but  at least perhaps a small recompense for your wasted day. Not exactly wasted since you had a great win  albeit much sweeter if you had beat them in Court. But a win is a win so well done. We will miss you as it has been almost two years since you first started out on this mission. { I would n't be surprised if the wrong Court was down to DCBL}. I see you said "till the next time" but I am guessing you will be avoiding private patrolled car parks for a while.🙂
    • It is extremely disappointing that you haven't told us anything about the result of the hearing. You came here at the very last minute and the regulars - all unpaid volunteers - sweated blood trying to get an acceptable Witness Statement prepared in an extremely short time. The least you could have done is tell us how the hearing went, information invaluable for future users. Evidently not.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Time limit on debt collection???


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3643 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I have just received a letter from Clarity Credit Management Solutions re: a very old loan I had with Egg dating back to 2001. I did not fully repay the loan, but I have NEVER been contacted by Egg with regard to the arrears. They have had my email address and my credit history has been updated with my addresses over this period of time.

 

Does anyone know if there are any time limits for how long a company can pursue an old debt (for example, if Egg has placed a CCJ on my credit history in 2001 it would have fallen off by now), and if they have a duty to show that they made reasonable efforts to contact you about the account before enlisting the services of the bully boys.

 

I wonder why I've been contacted now about it?? Strikes me as being a little odd??

 

Any help or enlightenment on this one greatly appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I am no longer welcome on CAG

i will be off site for the next month or so. if you have any problems, feel free to report the post so a moderator can help you.

 

I am not a qualified or practicing lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks both for your responses. I will definitely not be acknowledging this debt in any way and will be sending off the standard letter to Clarity asap.

 

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Does this apply to all debts? I had a Barclaycard in the 90's, and have recently had letters referring to it having been sold to a recovery agency, despite not having banked or been contacted by Barclaycard since 1994.

 

One letter is quite threatening, saying 'This will not go away'. I think it's just scare tactics. I have had letters from 2 companies about the same thing. I intend to ignore them, is this right?

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this apply to all debts? I had a Barclaycard in the 90's, and have recently had letters referring to it having been sold to a recovery agency, despite not having banked or been contacted by Barclaycard since 1994.

 

One letter is quite threatening, saying 'This will not go away'. I think it's just scare tactics. I have had letters from 2 companies about the same thing. I intend to ignore them, is this right?

 

Cheers

Could this by any chance be Lowells aka Red Debt aka Hamptons Legal.

 

They have recently bought a shed load of UNENFORCABLE Barclaycard debts that they are trying to fool people into thinking they have a legal obligation to pay. Truth is THERE IS NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO PAY A STATUTE BARRED DEBT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this apply to all debts? I had a Barclaycard in the 90's, and have recently had letters referring to it having been sold to a recovery agency, despite not having banked or been contacted by Barclaycard since 1994.

 

One letter is quite threatening, saying 'This will not go away'. I think it's just scare tactics. I have had letters from 2 companies about the same thing. I intend to ignore them, is this right?

 

Cheers

 

Assuming you paid nothing for at least years, the above letter will suffice. You will probably then get a letter referring to a "moral" obligation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, just thought it would be worth adding that I followed the advice given in this thread at the time of my original post, and managed to beat Clarity into submission. It took 3 letters (they just continued to send their standard letters out to me, even heading up the letters that they were 'disappointed I had not contacted them'), which I sent recorded delivery, using the same language that they use (lots of capitals, bold text and threats of police intervention if they sent a 'representative' to call at my house). Eventually I received a letter from their customer services director apologising for their failings and promising that I would never hear from them again. They said they had returned the debt to the originator, but so far I have not heard anything from them either.

 

The help available in this forum is amazing. Its helped me with the above, and it also helped me to claim over £3k of charges back from my bank.

 

Thanks a million.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems to be the same with most bullying DCAs. They threaten all sorts and continue sending threatomatic letters. However like most bullies thay are easily beaten when confronted with the law. Thet are so stupid that they do not realise that if they adopted a genuine attitude with folks instead of being ignorant and nasty on the phone or sending threatening letters they may well have more success. Now people feel so intimidated by them that they immediatly type their names into GOOGLE and end up here where they discover what and what not a DCA can actually do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Right now, I am ignoring them, will see what happens.

 

I'm in the mood for a fight, so I'm secretly hoping they might try something................

 

Cheers, Midori

Other than bluff and send empty threats there is nothing they can do on a Statute Barred debt.:o

Link to post
Share on other sites

As at today's date, red have got to the stage of offering me a 50% deal--I should cocoa!:p

 

Interested to see their next move. They don't have a phone number, and I'm not going to be daft and give 'em one!:rolleyes:

 

I'm fascinated by this whole subject, and seeing how far they will go with it....;)

 

Cheers, midori

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are sure that you have not acknowledged this debt for 14 years then ignore it, there is a letter in the templates - I'll get you the link.

 

EDIT

 

Letter M here

 

hi, is it possible for you to give me the link for this letter template as this has just happened to me, only i cant remember having the card it was dated 16 years ago according to barclaycard and got quite nasty with me for phoning them about it and told me to discuss it with lowell. i have not admitted anything in fact i denied having it to lowell. they asked for a copy of my signiture, what should i do?? i have changed my name by marriage twice since then. any help and advice would be great. please.

thanks wendy

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Surprise surprise folks. I received a letter from Red Debt that 'after further examination it has now become apparent' that the account is 'subject to Section (5) of the Limitation Act 1980' and they have closed the account and they wont be sending further correspondence. A duplicate letter arrived in the same mail! Just for the record, I didnt contact them at all and ignored any letters. Many thanks to everyone for the information that let me do this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...