In 2005 I paid (what I thought was) the final payment towards a mortgage shortfall arising from repossession and sale of a property.

The mortgage was in joint names with my now ex wife.

I argued with the DCA at the time that my wife was jointly liable despite her claim she could not afford to pay,

and eventually agreed to pay 50% of the Lenders' shortfall amount.

The DCA claimed to be acting on behalf of the Lender.

They wrote and stated that the Lender was prepared to accept my 50% offer in full and final settlement of my liability to them.

I paid the agreed amount in full and received a further written confirmation from the DCA

that this was accepted by the Lender as full and final settlement of my liability.

They stated that the Lender reserved their right to pursue "any party not named above" for the remaining balance.

They stated that the Lender would make arrangements to show that my liability has been satisfied

on the register maintained by the Council of Mortgage Lenders.

However,

I have now had a letter forwarded from a previous address claiming that it is from the Lender

with a letter 'enclosed' from a 'solicitor' with whom the debt has now been assigned to from another DCA I have never heard of!

The letter claiming to be from the Lender appears to have an old logo which I am unsure as to whether they would actually use

and it is enclosed with the letter from the solicitor which strangely bears the exact date the solicitors letter bears.

They are claiming that I owe them the other 50%.

They state the following:

"We understand that payments have been made towards this account in the past

and from this we have determined that this account is not in dispute,

there is no valid legal reason for it to remain unpaid

and these payments are an admission of liability.

If you believ this not to be the case you must contact us immediately to advise us of the details."!

Where do I stand on this. Could this be the 'solicitor' faking the Lenders letter?

Any advice appreciated. Thanks.

Do you still have a copy of the letter confirming you have paid your 50%?

If so, send a copy to whoever is chasing you and tell them to Foxtrot Oscar.

Hi havinastella (wish I was!),

Thanks for your reply.

Yes I did indeed (thankfully) keep the letters.

Should I wait until they find me at my present address or not?

Oh and I have also just noted that the letter claiming to be from the lender with a solicitor's letter enclosed just happens to have the exact same envelope, postmark, return address as the initial 'fishing' letter which preceeded it and was directly from said 'solicitor'!!

I guess what I am worried about is that the original DCA was not acting on behalf of the Lender

and that I somehow still owe the Lender?

Surely the Lender would be aware that they had accepted my settlement

and as such would not be instructing this DCA/solicitor to resume collection activities?

How has this come about.

The alleged 'Lenders' letter states that the decision to instruct them (solicitor/DCA) specifically relates to a process change within the bank.

What does this mean?

Thanks.

If you could either scan or type up the letters [minus identifying information] it would help ppl

or at the very least name names.

Ppl on the forum will most likely have experience of them, their behaviour and their anatomy and can then advise accordingly .

My suspicion is that there has been a communications breakdown somewhere.

I would think it highly unlikely that any lender of repute would have the audacity to demand the other 50%

after having accepted and received payment of a f + f , otherwise they are in breach of numerous guidelines.

The mention of third parties in the letter means that they can chase your ex. Unless you are particularly vengeful you should not have agreed but unfortunately you did. Maybe what you have received now was meant for her and not you but they got themselves in a tangle.

Little wonder they accepted your offer since it gave them free rein to pursue the remaining 50%.

And do you really mean DCA acting on behalf of the creditor or do you mean debt purchaser to whom the debt has been assigned ?

This is another reason why we really do need names.

It is common practice for both DCAs and debt purchasers to send out letters purporting to come from solicitors

but in fact to have been written in-house.

And yes sometimes with obsolete letter head:

I've seen that on several occasions.

Thanks.

Back then when I agreed to pay "my half" my now ex wife was not being very helpful or co-operative.

She cashed in both of the endowment policies (worth in excess of £4000

despite a Consent Order made between us at the time that she was to asign the smallest of the 2 policies to me.

She had also ran up several other debts which I had to pay.

She then proceeded to CSA etc and has screwed me into the ground at every opportunity since.

I even found out I overpaid the CSA by around £2000 which the CSA refuse to repay me.

TBH I couldnt have cared less that they would still pursue her as she was the reason the house got repossessed in the first place,

as once she had cashed the endowments, the lender would not let me take over the house/mortgage.

the original company dealing with it claimed to be acting on behalf of the lender.

They were called "Counselling Intermediary Services" and based in Bournemouth, Dorset.

I will try and upload the letters at some point minus the personal details and account numbers etc.

UPDATE:

I have just used a search engine to research the company chasing the debt.

I found a thread on another forum which describes exactly what they have done to me here!

They have sent a letter which claims to be from the bank which clearly is not

and has a very poor letterhead/logo stating that they have assigned this debt to the so called solicitors.

Both envelopes in this case also have the exact same return address (which is the same as mine).

There are comments on the thread that this is in fact deception and is illegal as they are claiming to be who they are not.

The 'solicitors' in question are called Drydensfairfax.

Drydens are well known here. That's why I asked you to name names. We still need the full picture, starting from original creditor.

When creditors assign [sell] a debt, it is very common practice for the assignee to send not only a letter from themselves but also one purporting to be from the original creditor. They do so with permission of the assignor. Deceptive yes, but happens thousands of times every day.

Don't waste your energies on that, you'll most likely get nowhere: rather, concentrate on your task in hand.

Copy or type-up of the letters would help fill in some of the holes in your narrative.

When was the last payment on the shortfall made?

Thanks to all for taking the time to reply. I will post up the letters at my earliest convenience. The original creditor was The Halifax. The last payment made was March 2005.

Hello all. Having just read this thread to refresh my memory, I realise that I never followed up on the above with regard to posting the letters.

I have, unbelievably, received a letter from another DCA which I suspect is a fishing letter for the above.

Surely, having paid nothing since the "full and final settlement" letter in March 2005, they cannot legally claim that I am liable?

Difficult to say given that you have not updated your thread for 4 years.

I doubt the lender saw any of that 50% you paid anyway..

Straight in drydens pocket

Which is why they are seeing if they can mug you for the rest

Hi dx100uk long time no "speak" . I hope you are well.

As per first post above, the original company dealing with it claimed to be acting on behalf of the lender.

Drydens got bored when I ignored their threatograms.

The original DCA were called "Counselling Intermediary Services" and based in Bournemouth, Dorset.

I still have the letter advising that my liability was settled.

Counselling Intermediary Services

are a bunch of sc@mmers

if you were to enquire to Halifax you'll find they never saw a penny of the money you paid Counselling Intermediary Services

Thanks for your reply dx.

where does that leave me if I have letters showing monies paid and advising that my liability has been met etc?

in fact where does that leave anyone who has paid a debt collector claiming to be collecting on behalf of the OC?

If CIS were purporting to be acting on behalf of Halifax as an agent and they haven't paid them do I have any redress?

Just ignore all contacts, as you have confirmation you settled your liability years ago. It would be up to the OC to take any further court action, if they were able to, whiich seems to be very doubtful.

Think what happens is the OC does not think they will obtain any further settlement. They therefore allow the debt to be chased by a DCA for a fee. If the DCA collects, they keep the amount agreed and the rest goes to some old sundry collection account at the OC. I doubt the original mortgage account is ever noted about any debt collection years later. The mortgage is closed off with the debt owed and debt collection activity is a separate issue.

You have no redress. The debt was owed. You decided to pay something to a DCA that bought rights to collect and what happens to the money is subject to commercial agreement between the DCA and OC.

go ask haliprats if they got your F&F

I bet not!

Just ignore all contacts, as you have confirmation you settled your liability years ago. It would be up to the OC to take any further court action, if they were able to, whiich seems to be very doubtful.

 

Think what happens is the OC does not think they will obtain any further settlement. They therefore allow the debt to be chased by a DCA for a fee. If the DCA collects, they keep the amount agreed and the rest goes to some old sundry collection account at the OC. I doubt the original mortgage account is ever noted about any debt collection years later. The mortgage is closed off with the debt owed and debt collection activity is a separate issue.

 

You have no redress. The debt was owed. You decided to pay something to a DCA that bought rights to collect and what happens to the money is subject to commercial agreement between the DCA and OC.

Thanks UB If the DCA (in this case CIS) was acting on behalf of the Halifax rather than buying the debt would that make any difference?

go ask haliprats if they got your F&F

I bet not!

I'd rather not contact them or the DCA if I can avoid it as I'd be confirming my whereabouts.

you should never run away from debt!

backdoor CCJ's