Red Debt Collection / Lowells

[nooneshotjr]

Hi.

 

I was wondering if anyone could give me advice on an old debt (1998 ). I left the country at that time and returned in 2005.

1. 0n 18th September 2006 Lowells sent me a letter saying that the debt had been sold to them. I sent them a letter offering to repay £5 per month (I'm a full time student), but they did not acknowledge this letter.
   
2. 25/9/06 & 2/10/06: Two letters letter demanding repayment. I wrote again, immediately, telling them I require a full breakdown of the debt before any repayment options can be finalised.
   
3. 10/10/06: Another letter demanding immediate repayment, to which I stroppily responded saying I was trying to resolve the issue but that I wanted details on the debt.
   
4. 20/10/06: Another letter threatening visits to which I told them they were not legally entitled to do since the debt is considered non-priority and again offered £5 per month. They finally acknowledged this letter.
   
5. Nov 06: I returned an income-expenditure form and asked for this statement/breakdown of the debt again.

Anyway, I never received the statement and now Red Debt Collections (seems to be the same company?) are on my case. What I am wondering is, by writing to them and offering £5 and asking for statements about the debt - is this a formal acknowledgement? Have I started that 6 year statute thing all over again? Or can I just tell them Statute-Barred and be done with them?

 

Many thanks.

[tiglet]

Hi there

 

Once a debt is statute barred, it cannot be "un" statute barred.

 

Send the statute barred letter from the templates section. it is up to the company to prove it isn't statute barred rather thn for you to prove that it is, if you see what i mean.

 

if they continue to persue you, post again because that is against OFT guidelines on debt collection.

 

Prior to september 2006, when did you lst make a payment towards the debt?

[nooneshotjr]

thanks for your super quick reply and advice. i will send the template letter today.

 

i would have last made a repayment (it was a credit card) in november (or perhaps october) 1998.

[tiglet]

Then it's definitely statute barred (unless this is a mortgage) and making payments towards this any time after the six years has elapsed does not restart the process.

 

Make sure you send that letter special or recorded delivery!

[nooneshotjr]

tiglet, i love you! i'm off to the templates section now. weeeee!

[nooneshotjr]

okay - i am a little confused with this templates section. all i can see are templates pertaining to bank charges. am i looking in the wrong place? link, anyone?

[tiglet]

Just give me a sec ...

[tiglet]

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/20758-creditors-dcas-letter-templates.html - it's letter M

[nooneshotjr]

tiglet, really, really, really, thank you, thank you, thank you. i'm in my last year at uni and really don't have the energy to give to debt collectors. you've lifted a large weight off my mind. THANKS!

[tiglet]

You're welcome - any time you need any advice, you know where we are.

[nooneshotjr]

Hi,

 

So I sent off the Statued Barred letter which they received on 23rd Nov. Today I received the following letter, dated 26th Nov, of which I quote:

 

We are disappointed that the monies you have previously had the benefit of are still outstanding and you have not taken responsibility to clear the outstanding debt.

 

Your account is now to be passed to our specialist recoveries unit which will ultimately decide the best form of action that is to be taken to recover the outstanding amount.

 

To avoid this going any further you must call us and arrange repayment... blah blah blah.

 

What would you suggest doing? Ignoring it? Reminding them of that clause which states that, "continuing to press for payment could be amount to harrassment"?

 

Any advice would be appreciated!

 

Many thanks.

[tiglet]

I would immediately report them to their local TS - once a person has stated that a debt is statute barred and will not pay because of this, although the debt still exists, it can be viewed as harrassment if they are still pursued for payment, as stipulated in OFT guidelines.

[nooneshotjr]

okay, i'm all for harrassing those that harrass. heh!

 

how do i find out who their local TS are? or rather, can you confirm that i've found the right one? essentially i went to the TS website and put in RDCS postcode (LS11 1AT) and came up with:

 

West Yorkshire Trading Standards Service

Trading Standards Complex

PO Box 5

Nepshaw Lane South

Morley

Leeds

LS27 OQP

 

would that be right?

 

also, any tips on what to say exactly? anything i should specifically appeal to?

 

thanks again tiglet!

[tiglet]

No probs (again)

 

It looks like the right one to me - if it isn't in their jurisdiction, they will able to advise you to call or to call consumer direct.

 

I would simply tell them red are pursuing your for a statute barred debt, you have advised them that it is statute barred and you will be making no payment towards it and yet they are still pursuing you for payment, which you view as harrassment.

[nooneshotjr]

okay, thanks. i think i'll also send RDCS a letter informing them that i am doing so.

[tiglet]

TS may just phone them straight away - that's what they did for me with Muck Hall and that shut them up straight away.

[nooneshotjr]

hehehe. let's hope they do the same for me. i'll update if anything else happens.

[make them aktiv runners]

 

I was wondering if anyone could give me advice on an old debt (1998 ). I left the country at that time and returned in 2005.

 

Your above statement (I have made into bold) is the type of confession that a DCA is looking for. Yes debts are usually statute barred after 6 years, however section 32 can extend that limit where information has been with-held from the creditor.

 

If you informed the creditor your new address then statute barred does apply, however, if you did not then they can use section 32 to ask a judge to reset the clock to a later date (possibly 2005 when you returned to UK, and then payment offers by yourself have restarted the clock again as it would be within 6 years). Movement within the UK is normally easily traceable so section 32 does not really impact that much for a judges opinion, but disapperaing off all UK records probably would.

 

Any decision under section 32 can only be made by a judge.

[Boro]

Your above statement (I have made into bold) is the type of confession that a DCA is looking for. Yes debts are usually statute barred after 6 years, however section 32 can extend that limit where information has been with-held from the creditor.

 

If you informed the creditor your new address then statute barred does apply, however, if you did not then they can use section 32 to ask a judge to reset the clock to a later date (possibly 2005 when you returned to UK, and then payment offers by yourself have restarted the clock again as it would be within 6 years). Movement within the UK is normally easily traceable so section 32 does not really impact that much for a judges opinion, but disapperaing off all UK records probably would.

 

Any decision under section 32 can only be made by a judge.

 

Thats as maybe but if the person hasnt told red that they have been out of the country and they are unaware i would leave it at that and wouldnt advise them of the fact, he has made reasonable efforts by the sounds of it making offers or repayment which have fallen on deaf ears, if they dont comply with his request for information (cca request) that is not his fault, not having a go btw as i realise you are just trying to be helpful

[make them aktiv runners]

All I have done is state what is actually in the Limitations Act (as the OP got it wrong), no-where did I suggest that he gave additional information to Red (I simply stated that the sentence I put into bold is the type of confession a DCA is looking for, ie if they were to find out that OP was previously outside UK then they could build a case against OP).

 

There are a few reports from the industry that have been copied onto threads, basically we are being accused of giving misleading information. We do need to be vigilent, read everything posted by OP, ask questions and put forward all the facts, that way the OP can make an informed decision and be aware of potential pitfalls.

[tiglet]

A lot of DCA's try to use section 32 when you are in the country - MH tried to threaten me with it although they strangely managed to contact me through my mother, who has lived in the same house for 32 years and was my original address, so that didn't wash. They also informed me it was a criminal offence!

 

At this point in time, the OP has not even been given proper details on the debt, but I agree that the OP should be careful.

[nooneshotjr]

thanks for that aktiv, i appreciate all the information i can get. at this point my only concern is not to be harrassed whilst i am in my last of uni and therefore stressed and on an exceedingly low income! once i start working the situation will be reconsidered.

[tiglet]

Sweetie, deal with eac debt individually and take them in your stride. Deal with your statute barred on appropriately and then deal with any others when (and if) you feel you need this forum's support.

 

We'll still be here!

 

Lots of love

 

Tigs xxx

[nooneshotjr]

thanks a lot tiglet.

[rory32]

As has been previously posted, this debt may not be statute barred. In fact if the DCA find out that you left the country and did not inform your creditors then the debt is likely to be not statute barred by virtue of section 32.

32.--

• (1) .... where in the case of any action for which a period of limitation is prescribed by this Act, either-
  • (a) the action is based upon the fraud of the defendant; or
    
  • (b) any fact relevant to the plaintiff's right of action has been deliberately concealed from him by the defendant; or
    
  • © the action is for relief from the consequences of a mistake;

  [*]the period of limitation shall not begin to run until the plaintiff has discovered the fraud, concealment or mistake (as the case may be) or could with reasonable diligence have discovered it. ....

  [*](2) For the purposes of subsection (1) above, deliberate commission of a breach of duty in circumstances in which it is unlikely to be discovered for some time amounts to deliberate concealment of the facts involved in that breach of duty.

While you might argue that they could have attempted to get a CCJ against you for the debt, they may also argue that you deliberately concealed your location and they would have not been able to readily identify this conceallment as you had left the country to avoid this debt.