psykix v Red

[psykix]

Another "debt" has appeared from the woodwork...

 

This time, Red Debt Collection Services... From their Statutory Demand Processing Unit, saying papers are being prepared with a view to a petition for my bankruptcy being filed at court, and to ring up and pay them...

 

It seems to be for a Barclays Bank account - I take it I CCA them?

 

Anything else to be aware of?

 

Ta!

[Boro]

Yup get a cca request off to them asap and wait and see what happens, the cca request will put the account in dispute so they shouldnt take any action until they comply (if they do)

[42man]

Is there a chance that the debt may be statute barred at all ?

[psykix]

It's very likely to be statute barred, but can't be totally sure.

 

I even think that I have CCA'd this debt with another DCA, and also SAR'd them possibly, however we had a house fire last year, and lost all paperwork - or lots of it at any rate.

 

Check creditexpert, and nothing at all relating to it on there - I think it's from circa 2001.

[psykix]

So, do I CCA them, or send them the template letter M saying it's statute barred?

[42man]

How about sending them both...Red usually try and get statute barred debts but just in case send BOTH....

[psykix]

Can I send them together?

 

Or best done separately?

[psykix]

One other thing.. this may have been a current account - does CCA request still apply?

 

Thanks for the help so far!

[42man]

Ah, current accounts aren't covered by the CCA....try the stat barred first and see what they say !!

[ODC]

Remember its up to Red to prove a debt is NOT Statute Barred rather than you proving it is.

[psykix]

Stat barred letter sent and has been signed for...

 

Let's await their response...

 

What happens if they still proceed to issue SD after I have told them it is stat barred?

[psykix]

Ok, so they signed for my statute barred letter, and have ignored it and sent me another letter.

 

Gist of it is Warning, this is an important document, then says :-

 

read information below carefully, ....... If a statutory demand is served upon you, the below details in Section I will be incorporated into the statutory demand.

 

Then goes on to give my details, says I was sent letter of assignment dated oct 2004. Blah blah blah..

 

The says Warning Section 2... how to avoid bankruptcy petition being presented against me...

 

So... I haven't had a bank account with the alleged creditor since 2001 - so almost certain if debt is legit it would be statute barred, and would also incorporate illegal bank charges. They have ignored my statute barred letter.

 

What now?

[42man]

Letter reproduced by courtesy of Curlyben...

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY

 

Dear sir/madam,

 

Thank you for your letter of the DATE, the contents of which have been noted.

 

I refer you to my letter of DATE, in which my position was clearly described. To reiterate, you were informed that this alleged debt is Barred under Statute in accordance with Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980. I have included a copy of this original correspondence for your perusal and ease of reference.

 

 

As your letter contests that this is the case, it is now your legal obligation to substantiate your claims and to prove that this alleged debt is indeed enforceable and not barred by statute.

 

You should be aware that I am fully familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance, which states that it is unfair to mislead debtors as to their rights and obligations by falsely stating or implying that the debt is still legally recoverable and continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred.

 

 

You should also be aware that if you are unable to substantiate your claims then your behaviour will be considered harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and may result in my choosing to pursue action against you.

As was stated in my last letter, any attempt to contact me by telephone regarding an alleged debt is an offence under section 127 of the Telecommunications Act 2003.

 

 

In addition, I hereby demand that you now supply me with information regarding your complaints procedure. Failure to comply will result in the complaint being escalated to the Financial Ombudsman Service, who will charge you for investigating my complaint.

 

Finally, I expect no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide clear evidence as to my liability for the debt in question, or your written confirmation that this matter is now closed.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

Yours faithfully,

[Curlyben]

The Library strikes again.

This should shut them up.

 

If, after this letter, they continue to insist the debt is valid without supply documentary proof, then it time for a report to Trading Standards.

 

Cheers 42man

[psykix]

Thanks for that, I already found that in another thread, and it is typed and ready to go.

 

They will just ignore of course, and plough on regardless!

[psykix]

No response from RED... I have, however, received the following letter from Thames Credit in response to the same Statute Barred letter sent to them.... preaching MORALS!!!!

 

Any response required?

 

Re: Agreement No. x x x x x x x

 

We refer to your recent letter in respect of the above account.

 

Your reference to the Statute of Limitations is not relevant. We do of course fully understand Statute but it is often misinterpreted by debtors and their advisors. We have neither threatened nor suggested litigation, hence it is repeated that reference to the Act is not relevant.

 

There is no legislation that precludes a creditor from legitimately requesting payment of a debt which remains outstanding and due. Indeed we could argue that any debtor that recognises that such a debt exists, has a moral obligation to address his responsibility. A credit facility has been provided by a bank or financial house, consequently it is up to that customer to honour his obligations.

 

Blah blah has confirmed that there is an outstanding balance, currently amounting to blah blah. If you believe the account has been fully repaid, would you please provide evidence of such repayment blah blah blah...

 

Then they offer me a 50% discount!

[Curlyben]

While it is true they can request payment, but as this is out of time they cannot take any legal action.

You can freely ignore this and they know it.

[psykix]

I'll just get bombarded still by letters I guess!

 

How long do I give Red? I sent your letter demanding a copy of their complaints procedure, and nothing has been forthcoming?

[Curlyben]

If they send you another letter chasing payment then take this up with Trading Standards, as they are interested in Lowells activities of late.

[psykix]

Letter received from RED today saying writing to inform me that after further examination of my account it has become apparent that it is now subject to Section (5) of the Limitation Act 1980 and as such they have closed it and I will receive no further correspondence. Please accept their apologies

 

Thanks CurlyBen, your letters did the trick. I'll just wait for them to sell it on to another DCA now :-p

 

They seem to be writing a lot of these letters lately, they must be losing money hand over fist due to people knowing their rights these days!

 

Onward and upwards now - have filed a set-aside for the CCJ and charging order that Cabot have against me, and this has just given me added impetus for that fight....

[ODC]

Poor Old Andrew is having to send a lot of these letters out