Long story short:

I got into debt 5yrs ago and have slowly been sorting through things and made arrangements with creditors etc.

I recently received a letter from Wescot chasing me for payment on an old Mint CC (I probably received these before and ignored them).

They are saying if I don't do something to pay the 7.5k debt in the next 10 days, they will take things further.

A few things to note:

1. In 18 months time I will have all my defaults removed so do not want a CCJ on my file now

2. The above debt is on my credit file and due to be removed in May 2014 when the account defaulted

3. The last payment made on the account was in September 2007

4. There is an AP on my file for it in March 2008

5. I may have written a CCA request years ago but cannot remember if I did and if I got a reply (my head was pretty messed up a few years ago)

Should I write for a CCA again?

Is it now statute barred because I haven't paid for 6 years or does the AP in March 2008 affect it being SB?

It defaulted in May 2008 so an AP clearly didn't happen!

Any advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks

as long as its defaulted it will vanish regardless of AP marker

if your last payment was sept 07 then its SB'd

send the SB letter.

dx

Even if there was an AP in March 2008?

Although I clearly didn't make a payment because that was month 5,

April was month 6

and then it defaulted.

I'm assuming AP means payment arrangement?

Thanks for replying

Let's be clear please exactly when was the last payment, also entering into an AP is an acknowledgment of the debt the statute barred clock restarted at that point, an AP is an unequivocal acknowledgement of the debt if the AP was set up and agreed in writing.

Yes, I thought that was the case but would they not also have to provide proof that an AP was agreed?

To add to that, the last physical payment was made in September 2007, no payments have been made since then.

Thanks

Then the question is did you sign an agreement? If you are certain you did not ask them for a copy of it. dont sign any letters you write or you might find it to your disadvantage.

Even charities are not above reproach in this sort of thing.

Yes, I thought that was the case but would they not also have to provide proof that an AP was agreed?

I would expect them to have it on file if not annotations that an AP was agreed and how it was setup.

So, armed with all this information. Shall I go for a CCA? Incidentally, even if I ever have requested the information, I wouldn't have signed. I took heed from this site years ago and even used postal orders instead of cheques.

Does anyone know if Wescott are brutal in terms of collection or are they scaremongers? Are they also attached to RBS because it's RBS showing on my credit file, not Wescott.

I really don't think there is any need for not signing letters, simply would you respond to an unsigned letter asking for information on a financial matter, never seen proof of signature lifting!

Bear in mind a 'reconstituted agreement' could be produced which does not need signatures.

.

I really don't think there is any need for not signing letters, simply would you respond to an unsigned letter asking for information on a financial matter, never seen proof of signature lifting!

 

Bear in mind a 'reconstituted agreement' could be produced which does not need signatures.

.

Am I misreading something here? I thought it was advisable to not provide a copy of your signature for fear of them using that to produce relevant documentation. Your message reads that I'm being silly for even suggesting such a thing?

This 'theory' has been proposed for many years and it's my opinion that it not necessary to with hold a signature.

After many years dealing with these matters I have never seen proof of signature lifting, a few allegations don't make it fact.

 

After many years dealing with these matters I have never seen proof of signature lifting,

What would you consider proof? After all, it would just come down to one person saying someone signed and the other saying they didn't.

a few allegations don't make it fact.

No but they should make any sensible person think twice before doing it.

Would you advise a young girl to go out with an alleged rapist just because it hadn't been proved he was one?

I for one would hate to be the victim of signature lifting just because you have never seen proof of it happening.

You read on here time and time again about the things DCAs are willing to do to get money out of people, whether that person owes it or not, then you think they draw the line at lifting a signature!

A couple of points to be mentioned

The last payment was Sept 2007, was this a due payment under the agreement.

If that is the case the cause of action will be the due date for the Oct payment and thus 6 years from that date.

I would get a CCA request off straight away,

I wouldn't sign it because I know that RBS will want a signature,

this should slow things down until at least the end of OCT as they are very slow at responding.

To be honest even if you do sign it it is unlikely that they would comply by the end of Oct.

With regard to them wanting a signature,

if Mint have been corresponding with you at your current address they can not then turn around and say we need a signature for data protection can they.

Westcot were all bluff but they got in the habit with me of replying very quickly

Thanks fletch, I appreciate the reply. Do you also think that it wouldn't be SB until March 2014 because of the AP on my credit file or should I take the risk and assume SB after the end of Oct.

The payment was due in Sept 07 so it will start from Oct. Thanks for pointing that out. Perhaps that's why they've suddenly come to life?

Get the CCA request off to wescot ASAP by royal mail signed for. It might be worth sending a SAR off to RBS as well to get statements etc so you can challenge any rogue payments

can we stop faffin' around please guys

send the SB letter as in post 2.

its for wetcloths to PROVE its not SB'ed

not for the OP to prove its IS.

dx

What would you consider proof? After all, it would just come down to one person saying someone signed and the other saying they didn't.

 

 

 

 

No but they should make any sensible person think twice before doing it.

 

Would you advise a young girl to go out with an alleged rapist just because it hadn't been proved he was one?

 

I for one would hate to be the victim of signature lifting just because you have never seen proof of it happening.

 

You read on here time and time again about the things DCAs are willing to do to get money out of people, whether that person owes it or not, then you think they draw the line at lifting a signature!

I must say this is a very naïve post and is best ignored.

can we stop faffin' around please guys

 

send the SB letter as in post 2.

 

its for wetcloths to PROVE its not SB'ed

 

not for the OP to prove its IS.

 

dx

Have just found evidence that I made a reduced payment in April 2008 but that was the last time. On this basis, am I clutching at straws by sending the SB letter? wouldn't the CCA be better at this stage and hope they can't be bothered with the hassle of even getting the info in time?

I'm afraid that any payment made in the 6 year period restarted the clock.

I would be pretty sure that any such payment will be documented and will crop up if the SB letter is sent now.

I think you are playing a very dangerous game sending a SB letter when it's not, even if its only a couple of weeks.

As you have made a reduced payment in Apr 2008 you need to get that CCA request off ASAP, it will put a hold on the account at least for a while

Yes, I'm inclined to agree now I've found the evidence myself....I was going from my credit file which showed the last payment as Sept 2007.

Update:

I sent off the CCA request to Wescott and received a letter back from them today (along with my postal order)

telling me to write to their client requesting the same and make the cheque/postal order payable to them.

I had assumed that Wescott had bought the debt but this sounds like they are acting on behalf of RBS doesn't it?

Should I write to them and start the process again or is it up to Wescott to produce the information asked for?

I've never seen this situation before.

Thanks in advance

You could argue that they should deal with it but I think in this case send it to RBS.

They will write back wanting a signature but by the time they do your SB date may well be up.

I sent mine 9th March 2012 and got the letter asking for the signature 2nd April.

You could argue that they should deal with it but I think in this case send it to RBS. They will write back wanting a signature but by the time they do your SB date may well be up. I sent mine 9th March 2012 and got the letter asking for the signature 2nd April.

Why would they write to you and ask for a signature?