I understand, but given there is a potential time limit I was eager to prevent a backdoor CCJ. I had moved recently and forgotten to update them. I have ensured everyone else has the right address. How should I proceed with TM Legal? The LoC they have apparently posted has still not arrived.

Interesting one. I contacted them as I had not received LoC. They had sent it to previous address. I updated address when I contacted them approx. one week ago ( v hard to get through on phone and they ignored emails) and they confirmed they would be re-sending it to correct address. However, there's been some dodgy behaviour from then as: 1. They initially said over phone that by calling them I was in fact "responding to LoC". I asserted that I was not and could respond to something I hadn't read. They eventually relented and said it wasn't considered a "response" and that 30 day period would be reset as I hadn't received letter. 2. One week later letter still hasn't arrived. Nothing would take this long to come. I have called every day and they can only confirm they "actioned" the request to re-send it and reiterated that 30 day period was reset. 3. Even on call in last 24 hours the guy was saying "why don't you just respond to LoC now over phone". I pointed again, that I can't respond to something I haven't read and this seemed to annoy him. I am worried they're trying to run down the 30 days (there is approx .one week left until initial 30 day period would expire), but then I have recorded these phone conversations where they reluctantly confirm the 30 days has been reset. Is there anything else I can do to protect myself? As soon as I get LoC I will respond as per your suggestions.

No problem, Be as blunt as you like. I thought my complaint would be upheld so when it wasn't in February I didn't do anything else or prepare for an LoC. Bad decision. Post 2 is to send the reply form you've included, correct? As a further bit of info, I work in Finance and am concerned about something like this appearing on an internal credit check. Whilst I believe my complaint should have been upheld, and UB behaved badly, would it not be a wise move to simply pay the £150 balance as it seems to have been discounted heavily? Thanks for your help.

What have I lost by speaking to them though? The only contact was to ask for more info and that I didn't recognise the debt. Thanks, I'll let it lie for now, then. I take it their statement that it's closed and there'll be no more " communication from our organisation in this regard" doesn't actually mean I'll never be chased for it again?

A strange turn of events with this one. I advised Link that I did not recognise the debt. They interpreted this as a complaint and have now replied (last few days) with the following: "...As you are stating that you are not our customer, I am very limited to the amount of information which I am able to divulge to you in accordance with General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018. Having taken all aspects of your dispute into consideration, I have taken the relevant action to prevent you from receiving any further communication from our organisation in this regard; therefore, you can consider this matter as closed. I trust this letter satisfies your dispute. However, if I am able to assist you further, please do not hesitate to contact me. OVERALL RESPONSE: Based on the above, I wish to clarify that your dispute has been upheld. As such, we believe a reasonable explanation has now been provided and your dispute has now been closed." However, they also sent an email back in May that said the following: "Thank you for your email we can confirm this is regarding your Co-operative Bank account. This account was opened on [redacted] and defaulted on [redacted date in last few years]. This account was assigned to ourselves Link Financial Outsourcing Limited on the [redacted date in last few years] . Your balance as of today’s date is [approx £1500] . We can confirm the last payment made towards this account was on [ redacted date in last few years] for the sum of [£small] We would like to discuss your income and expenditure information in order to agree a repayment arrangement in line with your affordability. The easiest way to complete an affordability assessment is to register your account online at https://link.ldmsportal.com/. Here you can view your transactions, complete an income and expenditure form, set-up a direct debit and send us a message. Once an affordability assessment is completed, we will review and be in touch via email." Am I correct to believe the supposed overdraft debt of approx £1500 is now null and void? Thanks in advance.

Thanks for your help. If I understand correctly then, you are advising that I complete a reply to the letter of claim and (the completed form) and also send a CCA request. Is that right? Do I have to indicate if I will defend or not when completing the form (it hasn't arrived yet)? I can see the debt never appeared on my credit file, with any of the agencies, when it was UB, but it was sold to Perch and they have marked it as defaulted. Have Perch done this correctly then, or do I have a defence? Finally, I should point out the "original balance" was around £550 but is now approx. £150, despite me making no payments. I've never been notified of any discounts so Perch seem to have proactively applied one.

Hi, Odd Situation. I had multiple Uncle Buck loans between 2016 and late 2018. It's been with TM Legal/ ACI for a since early 2019. One was never paid off. I've just received a letter of claim from TM giving the usual 30 days to resolve. I've complained about irresponsible lending but UB/their administrators send a curt email in February of this year, stating: "Unfortunately, having assessed your complaint based on the Redress Methodology, I regret to inform you that you do not qualify for any Redress. For the avoidance of doubt, this represents our final response in respect of your complaint and there is no further recourse beyond this decision" Could I take the complaint to any other party to forestall the LoC and actual court action? Secondly the LoC is for approx £150. Not only a very small amount but actually significantly less than the approx £550 I owe. In fact it is £400 less, down to the penny. Whether this is a mistake or a discount they've applied without telling me, I feel I should take advantage of this and get a payment plan sorted. I did/do only have one outstanding loan with them, so there's no chance of the rest of the balance showing up as a separate action. Am I correct to reach an agreement on this now, assuming the oddly reduced balance stands, or should I dispute further, if that's even possible? Thanks,

Ah, sorry. So there's nothing I can do to remove said default? Obviously, I do deserve one but thought, just like the DCAs, that I'd push my luck.

I defaulted on a MyJar loan in December 2018. As the company went into Administration in Feb 2019, they never added a default to my credit file. In August 2019 the debt was sold to Lantern who reported a default on my file from then until APril 2019 (presumably stopping due to COVID related staffing issues). However in March 2020 MyJar applied a new default to my credit file. They emailed me saying: "In August 2019, your outstanding loan with MYJAR was sold to Lantern Debt Recovery Serviced Limited and we reported this on your credit file from September 2019. Unfortunately in March of this year, we began reporting again that the loan was still active and in default with MYJAR. We have now rectified this and your credit file will again show that the loan was sold, from September 2019. It may take the credit reference agencies a bit of time to process the update that we have sent them, but rest assured this will be completed. You don’t need to take any action. If you need to contact us, you can do so by emailing us at [email protected] If you need to discuss your outstanding balance, please contact Lantern by emailing [email protected] or by calling 0113 887 6876." However, the default is still on my file 13 months later. Can I get them to take it off? If not, can I complain to anyone else? The very knowledgable Dx, who will probably reply, has stated in another thread that late reported defaults should simply be removed and complaining to the ICO should achieve this (I hope I'm not misinterpreting). Can anyone confirm if this is correct? The credit report in question is Transunion, which I think is the only one that shows all PDL activity.

Excellent. Thanks again.

Lived with a girl until January 2020. Our tenancy agreement (AST) said we are both equally liable for all bills but also that her mother was Guarantor for the agreement as a whole, including said bills. It was verbally agreed that as I paid Council Tax, and some other bills, she was responsible for Scottish Power and some others. She reneged on this and, perhaps importantly, had my name added to the Scottish Power (henceforth SP) account without my agreement or knowledge. I never signed anything with them (although I had of course signed AST). SP said that the any dispute over liability comes down to what was agreed in the AST. Am I correct to think that 1. Her adding my name is allowed but 2. Due to the AST her mother is ultimately liable? Finally, which if any scenarios going forward, besides me clearing the balance, would damage my credit score? I'm currently paying a payment plan to slowly pay it off to avoid any damage but have also advised, verbally and in writing, that I don't believe I'm liable. The girl late twenties woman has no intention of paying anything, and is financially very hard up but I am very reluctant to be saddled with this, and SP have cheekily told me I should quadruple my monthly payment to clear the balance faster.

Thanks. Will do. How does that impact Link's ability to pursue a CCJ? Once I've updated my contact details with Link am I right to think I should ignore them unless I receive a letter of claim?

Thankyou for the response. I've just checked my credit file and it was sold to Link Financial back in 2018 with no defaults registered on the Coop debt but defaults were registered on the 'new' debt. I've emailed them, playing dumb that I don't recognise the debt so that I can update my contact details and avoid a backdoor CCJ. It seems bizarre they haven't even attempted court action given the amount and age of the debt.

Hi All, I have an overdraft debtor of approx. £1,500.0 with the Coop. The Overdraft itself was taken out with a pre 2014 Student account and the account/overdraft have not been used since sometime in 2015 since when I reached the limit and stopped paying anything into the account (I use a different bank as my main account). I was provided the overdraft when I had no actual income (as a student) and disclosed to their Collections Department that I had dropped out of university due to mental health issues (which is true). I believe I may have had some contact with the Coop bank in 2016 where I talked about my (in)ability to pay it back. Does this mean I would have to wait until 2022 for it to be statute barred? I haven't had any contact from any DCA so I don't believe the debt has been sold on and the bank still sends me generic marketing and update emails. To be blunt, am I going to get away with not paying this back?

Perch Capital owns both TM Legal and ACI (another company I've had some communication from about an unrelated debt). Oddly they adopt the third person in regards to Perch instructing them when they are one and the same company. I want to fight this. At which point is the final threshold when I have to pay or be blemished by a CCj: when they state their intent to go to court, when it reaches court or when the judgement is given? If it goes to Court, am I able to just pay up at any time before the ruling to avoid the actual CCJ?