Possible Statute Barred

[Marky2]

I have been sent a collection letter from a DCA for a debt accrued around 2001 for a bank account with overdraft - totalling around £2,000.

 

At the time, my partner set up a direct debit to pay towards this debt on my behalf the sum of £35 per month. In 2005 we cancelled the direct debit from my partners account, and recently a DCA has cought up with me after a couple of changes of address.

 

A huge percentage of the initial £2,000+ debt (now reduced to £900) was due to charges.

 

I have written to them with the statute barred letter, advising that as the debt is over 6 years old I require proof - they sent me copies of the actual account the debt was for - but the last entry before the account was closed was 2002. They wrote in their letter that they had received payments of £35 per month for a period of time and the last one was in 2005 - but they have provided no proof of the payments.

 

2 questions - 1: The payments would have been made by somebody other than myself, would this still count as my acknowledgement of the debt? And 2: How do I go about trying to claim the charges back on the account without acknowledging the account/debt? Can I do this, or is the bank charges debt stature barred?

 

Your help would be appreciated.

[havinastella]

This is only Stat barred if you have NOT made a payment for more than six years.

 

You need to start to reclaim the charges to offset against the amount owned.

 

Jogs

[Marky2]

This is only Stat barred if you have NOT made a payment for more than six years.

 

You need to start to reclaim the charges to offset against the amount owned.

 

Jogs

 

I understand that, but they cannot provide proof (so far, anyway) and it wasn't me who made the payments towards the debt. It was somebody else, from their bank account in their name - does it need to be me personaly make a payment?

 

Surely (exagerate to make a point) but in a case that is SB then a anybody could make a payment "on behalf of" who owes the debt without them knowing this nulling the stature barred? I know this is not the case, but its a possible scenario - so does the payment need to be proven and does it need to be me?

[IdaInFife]

if you want to try the senario that someelse made the payment then you must also realise that this MAY cause serious problens for your partner

You want to say your partner opened your mail and discussed the account with the dca all without your permission and then you partner will need to explain this and also explain why they felt the need to pay for someone elses' debt.

 

Ida x

[Belaflat]

I cannot imagine for 1 minute the Police getting involved in someone paying in money...the other way around certainly.

 

That being said, if someone else paying towards a debt invalidates statute barring, then whats to stop DCAs paying a small amount on our behalfs to start the clock again...it happens although I do believe they try to make out it is 'we' who have made the payment.

 

In that scenario, I would class that as fraud committed by the DCA to obtain moneys for which Mr Plod could certainly take an interest.

 

I am just trying to provoke a discussion here, my own personal view is that if payments were made on someones behalf with thier knowledge, then that would count towards the debt.

 

I dont know what the legality would be if the payments were made without the debtors knowledge, a scenario not impossible as I was asked many years ago to make payments for my wifes debt after we parted. Had I done so it would have been without consulting her so what would have been the situation if she didnt pay and then some years down the road believed it to be statute barred yet in reality a payment had been made, say for arguments sake, 5 years ago without her knowledge.

[pmhcfc]

I understand that, but they cannot provide proof (so far, anyway) and it wasn't me who made the payments towards the debt. It was somebody else, from their bank account in their name - does it need to be me personaly make a payment?

 

Surely (exagerate to make a point) but in a case that is SB then a anybody could make a payment "on behalf of" who owes the debt without them knowing this nulling the stature barred? I know this is not the case, but its a possible scenario - so does the payment need to be proven and does it need to be me?

 

Without trying to sound rude, but ignorance is no defence. If monies have been paid toward the debt (and more so on a regular basis) then that counts as payment/s. Hence the debt will not be statute barred until 2011. Having said that, if there are unlawful charges on this, then you can claim those back, or at least attempt to. If the banks keep the claim thing tied up in red taope until 2011, it will become state barred by then anyway

[Marky2]

Without trying to sound rude, but ignorance is no defence. If monies have been paid toward the debt (and more so on a regular basis) then that counts as payment/s. Hence the debt will not be statute barred until 2011. Having said that, if there are unlawful charges on this, then you can claim those back, or at least attempt to. If the banks keep the claim thing tied up in red taope until 2011, it will become state barred by then anyway

 

But at the moment the DCA have yet to provide 'proof' of any payments to them, do they have an obligation to provide this proof before being legally entitled to recover this debt? Does something written on their own letterhead count as proof?

[Marky2]

Bump - any input about what constitutes 'proof' please?

[pmhcfc]

But at the moment the DCA have yet to provide 'proof' of any payments to them, do they have an obligation to provide this proof before being legally entitled to recover this debt? Does something written on their own letterhead count as proof?

 

Well, an SAR would be the way to go then

[diddydicky]

Bump - any input about what constitutes 'proof' please?

 

imo you are clutching at straws

 

a judge will see right through your protestations in 10 seconds flat

 

you need to find another way to challenge it and forget about SB