Dumb or what!!!????

[totallylost]

Hi

I have sent off my letter to Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited requesting them for the certificate of whatever, with my one pound postal order for their trouble.

 

They have replied:

 

"We acknowledge receipt of you #1.00 payment. However, iti s essential that we have an agreed future payment and therefore we must ask you to contact this office within the next 48 hrs.

Failure to respond to theis request may leave us with no alternative but to instruct our solicitors to commence legal proceedings against you without further notice.

Payment must be attached to this letter and made payable to Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd.

 

Yours sincerely..."

 

Now, this isn't my debt. Its my DH;s. He is in care at the moment so cannot be contacted by these people. Do I leave it or do I contact them to tell them how daft they are at not reading the letter?

 

Thanks

Totallylost

[Guest Zooman]

Just leave it.

[totallylost]

Thanks Zooman

What will they do now I have left it?

[mechs]

Can you please read my private message to you

[totallylost]

k.

[Seminole]

Thanks Zooman

What will they do now I have left it?

 

Absolutely nothing. They hope you will be intimidated to responding within 48 hours. Don't be.

[Rich44]

Just keep hold of that letter and a copy of what you sent them and sit tight.

[simonjohn]

If the alleged debt is in dispute and you have sent your £1 postal order for a true copy of the credit agreement or a true copy of the deed of assignment, then I would send another letter to moorcroft by recorded delivery outlining that the £1payment was for this information and not payment towards the alleged debt.

 

The danger of Ignoring any further letters from moorcroft is that they may construe your £1 as payment and therfore acknowledgement of the alleged debt, which may start the 6 year period again.

 

In conclusion my advice would be, if anyone is sending a payment by cheque or postal order for information under the consumer credit act or for a deed of assignment, then, on the back of the cheque or postal order, write, "request for information" Then at least if the creditor or debt collection agency tries to imply that its a payment towards the account, then you at least have evidence to the contrary.

[Guest Zooman]

If the alleged debt is in dispute and you have sent your £1 postal order for a true copy of the credit agreement or a true copy of the deed of assignment, then I would send another letter to moorcroft by recorded delivery outlining that the £1payment was for this information and not payment towards the alleged debt.

 

The danger of Ignoring any further letters from moorcroft is that they may construe your £1 as payment and therfore acknowledgement of the alleged debt, which may start the 6 year period again.

 

In conclusion my advice would be, if anyone is sending a payment by cheque or postal order for information under the consumer credit act or for a deed of assignment, then, on the back of the cheque or postal order, write, "request for information" Then at least if the creditor or debt collection agency tries to imply that its a payment towards the account, then you at least have evidence to the contrary.

I also thought this but if they fail to send it the debt becomes unenforceable. If you used our letter template the allocation of the pound is very clear.

[simonjohn]

I also thought this but if they fail to send it the debt becomes unenforceable. If you used our letter template the allocation of the pound is very clear.

 

Yes, agreed.

 

But debt collection agencies have an uncanny knack of losing letters posted from alleged debtors, or claims of not receiving them. However at the same time claiming that their records are 100% accurate !!!

 

Its just my idea, but if you mark your cheque/postal order with "request for information" and , if you have the facility, to make a photocopy of it, then should it come to court then you have 100% proven your proberty.

 

I would not trust anything to chance.

[barracad]

Good idea - but I would write the additional information on the front of the cheque, not the reverse. It is possible to write on the cheque what it is for, as well as the payee name.

 

The new edition of the banking code, which was published last month, gives clearer advice to customers about how to reduce the risk of fraud when making out cheques payable to banks and building societies. It might be worth reading to the House what the new edition says at paragraph 12.6:

• "When you write a cheque, it will help to prevent fraud if you clearly write the name of the person you are paying the cheque to and put extra information about them on the cheque especially if you are not personally paying a cheque in (for example, because you are sending a cheque by post)."

A little later it says:

• "If you are making a cheque payable to a bank or building society, do not make the cheque payable simply to that organisation. Add further details in the payee line (for example XYZ Bank, re J Jones, account number xxxxxx). You should draw a line through unused space on the cheque so unauthorised people cannot add extra numbers or names."

House of Commons Hansard Debates for 4 Apr 2005 (pt 39)

[Stopthethieves]

Been asking the same question many times without any luck

 

DOES ANYONE KNOW WHICH LAW(S) GOVERN THE TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP?

Regards

[Guest Zooman]

Tort

[Guest Zooman]

It is simple contract law, common practice available to all of us. Someone may owe you £2k and you can sell me the debt for £1.5k and I can then go after the £2k plus interest.