Jump to content


Rockwell Debt Collection Agency


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5152 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

Apologies if this has been asked before but I had a good look around and couldn't find a thread that addressed my specific issue.

 

My son has an old debt relating to a current account with HSBC. The original debt was for just over £4,000.00, it was definatley his and he does not dispute it.

 

To cut a long story short he was contacted by various different solicitors/debt collectors and finally ended up being contacted by Rockwell. As he did not dispute the debt he has been paying them £20 per month and the balance of the debt is now around £3,380.00.

 

I have recently been helping him to sort his finances out and we sent Rockwell a 'prove it' letter. Unfortunatley I missed the bit about not signing the letter, but hopefully that won't be an issue.

 

They have written back today stating:-

We can confirm that the account assigned to our above named client relates specifically to a current account and as such is not regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. Due to the nature of this account there is no written agreement to provide, we return the £1.00 fee enclosed with your letter. (Your £1.00 postal order has been enclosed)

 

The enclosed statement of payments is your acceptance and acknowledgement of liability.

 

Your repayment has been reset at the current rate of £20.00 per month for the next 6 months, payment details will follow in the post.

 

Are they correct in that his payments are acknowledgement of liability and therefore he should carry on making the payments or does he have any other options?

 

As I said, he does not dispute the original debt and is not trying to wriggle out of his responsibilities, but on the other hand I don't believe he should have to keep paying these leeches if the original debt has been written off by HSBC and Rockwell are blatantly profiteering from him.

 

Thanks in advance for any advice,

 

Regards,

 

Martin/Cheffy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes payment is admission of liability, so he will have to continue repayment. Unless the debt was statute barred at the point he made his first payment. I presume not statute barred as you have not mentioned that 6 years passed by without payment, acknowledgement or CCJ.

 

I am presuming there has been a lot of correspondence from the various companies involved, which must have included a default notice and reassignment of debt letter from HSBC at some point.

 

At £20 per month this is going to be ongoing for a long time and your son will be under pressure to increase the payments. Then there is the issue of his credit record/rating.

 

When did he default with HSBC ? Has your son requested full information from them ? A subject access request for copies of statements and copies of default notice, with other related correspondence may be useful to have.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

payment is not an admission of liability, and neither is just supplying a statement...you need the letter of assignment if they are saying they have purchased the debt..

 

So you are saying that if this matter was presented in court, with copies if all the letters issued and record of payment, this would not be seen as admission of liability?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

making payments is not an admission it could be argued that these were given incorrectly or as a gift...if you gave me a statement and told me i owed you money just because you had a statement would you expect me just to pay you? i think not..also default notices are not issued on a current account a notice of termination should have been

Link to post
Share on other sites

Point taken re termination notice and not default.

 

I have read other opinions that payments, taken into consideration with other documentation, can be considered by a court as admission of liability.

 

Is there any specific case law covering this?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

if you have i have never seen it on here...nearly all advice given on here is making a payment is not an admission of liability...however if it is then i stand corrected...will have a dig around on specific case law for you and see if i can find anything..in meantime if anyone else would care to jump in and let us know i am sure unclebulgaria and myself would appreciate it

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think things are getting confused with admission of a debt somehow debarring or not debarring a Statute Barred Debt.

 

If a period of six years (five in Scotland) has passed where no written acknowledgement or payment towards a debt has been made then a debt becomes Statute Barred. Any payment or admission after that period does not unbar a debt, it remains legally unenforceable regardless.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was that payment could be seen as admission of liability in some circumstances, if the debt is not statute barred.

 

We don't know whether statute barred applies or not. The OP will have to look into this.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afternoon all,

 

First of all thanks for your input and advice everyone.

 

No, I'm 99% certain the debt is not Statute Barred. I will double check though.

 

Unfortunatley my son is not very good at keeping correspondence so I don't have all the relevant paperwork.

 

I will draft a letter for him to sign for HSBC requesting all the relevant information as unclebulgaria suggests.

 

Thanks again,

 

Martin/Cheffy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...