SLC have registered a default notice for a statute barred debt

[Stanley 10]

The problem is that although they are not meant to register a default they have. Legally it seems there is nothing to prevent them. The Student Loans Company have repeatedly acknowledged that the debt is statute barred but they say it is still due and owing and they are entitled to demand payment and if I fail to pay that is a default.

 

I thought that the Information Commissioner's Office might come to my rescue but all they say is that they are unable to intervene unless the data is inaccurate. I have argued that it is inaccurate because it says I defaulted in 2008 rather than in 2000. I am feeling rather hopeless about this situation because I can't find any authority which says that a lending institution cannot default a statute barred debt. If they can then in theory SLC can default the loan in 6 years time and keep my credit rating in default in perpetuity.

 

Will now do the DSAR and see what happens. If anyone has useful precedents on this please let me know.

[noomill060]

You would have to go to court to have this removed.

 

 

The grounds for removal would be that the 6 years run from SLC's accrual of Right of Action ie: the last time you acknowleged the debt. ie 2000, not from the time the creditor decided to place it in default.

 

Read up on the Limitations Act 1980.

 

Yes, although they are correct that the debt still exists, they appear to believe that the SB period for the purposes of reporting to CRAs begins again when the account is officially defaulted by the creditor.

 

This of course, is incorrect.

 

The period for reporting and/or recovery action run and end simultaneously.

 

Do you have the stomach for legal action in Small Claims?

 

If so, I will help you.

 

If not, forget about it. Writing letters to them will get you nowhere.

 

The only letter they are scared of, would be your claim form, served on them by the County Court.

Edited December 17, 2009 by noomill060

[Stanley 10]

Thanks for that. I'm just not clear what the claim is - am I just asking the court to make a declaration that the default occured in March 2000 not August 2008 and an order that it be removed from my file or is it a breach of contract claim under the original credit agreement?

[kurvaface]

The problem is that although they are not meant to register a default they have. Legally it seems there is nothing to prevent them. The Student Loans Company have repeatedly acknowledged that the debt is statute barred but they say it is still due and owing and they are entitled to demand payment and if I fail to pay that is a default. Incorrect. They are no longer allowed to demand payment.

 

I thought that the Information Commissioner's Office might come to my rescue but all they say is that they are unable to intervene unless the data is inaccurate. This Is why you do a SAR. All facts established then and they will probably not have an enforcable CCA therefore you can ask them to cease processing data and to change any entries against your name accordingly.

 

I have argued that it is inaccurate because it says I defaulted in 2008 rather than in 2000. I am feeling rather hopeless about this situation because I can't find any authority which says that a lending institution cannot default a statute barred debt. If they can then in theory SLC can default the loan in 6 years time and keep my credit rating in default in perpetuity.

 

Will now do the DSAR and see what happens. If anyone has useful precedents on this please let me know.

[noomill060]

Thanks for that. I'm just not clear what the claim is - am I just asking the court to make a declaration that the default occured in March 2000 not August 2008 and an order that it be removed from my file or is it a breach of contract claim under the original credit agreement?

 

 

The action would be for an order to cease reporting negative data on the grounds that such reporting is unlawful due to the right of action having expired, and a claim for damages.

[Stanley 10]

Well today I had a break through. As I mentioned earlier SLC have always maintained the position that they were entitled to register a default regardless of the fact the debt is statute barred. They refused to amend my credit file stating that the information was correct. Since that date (following advice on this forum) I did the following:

 

1) requested a copy of all CCAs enclosing the correct fee;

2) sent a DSAR for all data relating to these loans; and,

3) made a Freedom of Information Act request regarding the SLC policy and board minutes relating to defaults of loans.

 

I also re-opened the Equifax dispute on the grounds that: a) SLC had acknowledged (in their response to my earlier Equifax online query) that the debt was statute barred at the time of default; and, b) the correct default date appeared to be in 2000 and not 2008 when they sent a demand for repayment in full of the statute barred debt.

 

Finally, I submitted a correction note to Equifax which set out the legal position and requested that Equifax place this on my file.

 

Today I received a response from SLC (via Equifax) which stated that they had taken advice and although the debt was legally due and owing in 2008 they have been advised that the default could not be registered because it was statute barred at that time. They agreed to amend and withdraw the default in their next filing.

 

I telephoned Equifax and insisted that they had an obligation as data controllers to rectify incorrect information straight away and not at the next filing date. The upshot is that they have agreed to remove the default today.

 

Needless to say I have had no direct correspondence from SLC on this even though I wrote to them twice in December and called them 4 or 5 times chasing for a resolution. I even offered on a "without prejudice" basis to pay the loan in full in return for a complete withdrawal of the default which they refused.

 

Thankfully, the mortgage offer was eventually reinstated - although subject to stricter conditions than had previously been offered. The only financial loss I have suffered therefore is legal fees (the mortgage company requested a legal opinion on the validity of the default), postage costs and the cost of obtaining equifax reports. All in around £500. The main issue is the amount of anxiety this caused me when I thought I was about to lose my mortgage offer, the reputational damage and the amount of time I have spent researching this and corresponding with SLC, Equifax, the Financial Ombusman, my local trading standards officer, the information commissioner's office and my mortgage company. I estimate I have spent over 10 hours on this issue. I am contemplating a claim for damages against SLC and, if I do (once I am in a better state of mind to weigh up the risks) I will let you know how this turns out.

 

In the meantime, thanks for your invaluable guidance and for steering me in the right direction. Hopefully, this experience will be of some use to others.

 

Stanley

[gyos]

Excellent news.

[kurvaface]

well done:)

[stawbelly]

very good news - good start to a new year!

[sigsoldboy]

Great thread, I've recently received a letter from CSL followed up by Power2contract saying they are sending somebody over. I told them on the phone that the Debt is Statue Barred. The loans are from 96 & 97 and I last spoke to them in 2002 when I deffered for a year and have not heard from them since.

 

Sending the Statue Barred letter today and will see what happens.

[kurvaface]

Perhaps you should start your own thread on this oldboy. Be prepared for a ride with CSL- phone calls at all hours, threatograms etc. With hindsight I would like to have had a call recorder for my early dealings with CSL because the lies they told me (and SLC) were outrageous and I wish I could be in a position to play them to you now. I now record all calls and I srongly recommend you do the same if they call you.