Seeking advice on old debts when i have a clear credit report.

[BlurredFX]

CPR31.16 is quite a new approach i think, and not to be taken lightly. I think there is a risk it can blow up in your face. Search the internet, this site, and what not.

 

I understand your desire to put this to bed once and for all, but it isn't that simple, sadly

 

I meant it!! dx had the same idea.

 

Research CPR31.16 if you are considering that approach. It's above me, as yet! Though I have an interest in how it's application evolves.... I would be interested in what you found.

 

Send them the letter you have seen previously, about them not visiting and that. That could well be enough to send them fishing elsewhere.

 

Now go find that paragraph, post it up, and let's have a look at it.

[BlurredFX]

Incidentally, if they start Court proceedings, then CPR 31.15/4 are equally effective - the difference is that they apply once proceedings have started - by you or them.

[BlurredFX]

Dear Sir/madam

 

In regards to your letter dated 22 march 2010, requesting payments be made on an outstanding debt of £29,406.85.

 

As my credit records are completely clear of any outstanding debts, please provide the original credit agreements signed by myself and including the full payment histories also including dates of last payments made, to prove that a debt exists.

 

Please be advised that I will only communicate with you in writing.

 

Furthermore, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make such an appointment with you.

 

There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v Sheppard & Short Ltd [1959] 2 QB 384

. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and, if you do so, you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance.

 

Sprry, forgot about this post. Double check the references are correct.

 

As my credit records are completely clear of any outstanding debts

 

DO NOT TELL THEM THIS!!!!!!!

 

The fact that there are no defaults on your credit file is a good defence in itself to any Court action!!! I would think... That is all about "pre-action protocol", and other things.

 

Frankly, I have never (in my very limited experience) come across someone with an IVA, who has not paid it. And to seemingly walk away with a good credit rating....

 

On that basis, my honest advice is to leave it. Send them a letter advising that you won't be having none of their doorstep visits, and see what they do.

 

DON'T PLAY YOUR HAND NOW. Personally, I think you have had a bit of a touch, so it is a case of "gently, gently, catchy monkeeeeee....."

 

My honest opinion, for what it is worth.

 

If you want to go a bit more heavy with them, send them a letter asking for a SAR, CCA, and don't visit in one go. Just look round the forums.

[BlurredFX]

I will be glad to proof read your letter. But I am not exactly an expert.

[BlurredFX]

I think also, and this could be very significant, that if this got to Court, it could well be allocated to the "multi-track".

 

From what I have read, this applies to debts over £25k (single debts that is) - not the whole lot lumped together.

 

That distinction could be important. Is the £29k one debt, the the whole lot lumped together?

 

Multi-track means unlimited costs....

[BlurredFX]

http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/590-letter-used-when-a-dca-threatens-a-doorstep-visit-

[dx100uk]

eve fx

 

i know people have has success with the no doorstepping letter, but my thoughts rather more lie with it just being a threat that was never going to happen rather than the letter stopped it happening.

 

i too am rather puzzled 'what' this debt consists of, one debt that was XXXX and it now £29k or IS this the total of multiple debts,

something just isn't right here.

no dca would ever send out a letter like that, they know it would never ever get to court.

 

dx

Edited March 28, 2010 by dx100uk

[BlurredFX]

eve fx

 

i know people have has success with the no doorstepping letter, but my thoughts rather more lie with it just being a threat that was never going to happen rather than the letter stopped it happening.

 

i too am rather puzzled 'what' this debt consists of, one debt that was XXXX and it now £29k or IS this the total of multiple debts,

something just isn't right here.

no DCA would ever send out a letter like that, they know it would never ever get to court.

 

dx

 

I agree. Would be ideal if the OP could put up a proposed letter to them, so we can have a look.

 

It looks like a proper fishing trip, of one sort or the other...

 

FX;)

[the_blue_cat]

The largest debt was a bank loan for around £11k an the next highest was a credit card for around £9k. Here's a copy of the letter i received:

 

Edited March 29, 2010 by the_blue_cat

[the_blue_cat]

I was thinking of sending this:

 

Dear Sir/madam

In regards to your letter dated 22 march 2010, requesting payments be made on an outstanding debt of £29,406.85.

I dispute this without any admission of liability, I require true copy’s of all the original signed Credit Consumer Agreements in they’re original form as would be presented to a court of law, this is not a request made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I also require a true and original copy’s of all Notice of Assignments and Document’s of Assignment from all of the original creditors to prove that a debt exists.

Please be advised that I will only communicate with you in writing.

 

Furthermore, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make such an appointment with you.

 

There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v Sheppard & Short Ltd [1959] 2 QB 384. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and, if you do so, you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance.

I would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods. Furthermore, ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment. I would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above accounts unless you can provide evidence as to our liability for the debt in question.

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise we will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

[BlurredFX]

Interestingly, if you google fairfax solicitors, the CAG is the second link, with a load of cases that are worth looking at. The feeling within the forum is generally the same: fishing trip. Take half an hour to scan through these.

 

fairfax solicitors - Google Search

 

Read through them, I have skimmed briefly.

 

In terms of your letter, it is along the rigth lines. I would copy and paste the relevant section of the link below over your bit referring to CCA requests - the CAG one has all the correct references in it.

 

http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/581-cca-request-letter

 

For what it is worth, I wouldn't be surprised if the original IVA co, and the people chasing you now, are one and the same bunch of people, or linked in some way. Just a feeling, no evidence to back it up, but you have to wonder where they have got this data from.

 

I hope this helps, and if it does, tip the scales!!

 

Post the latest draft of the letter up for us to have a squint at, I think that will be enough to fire them off fishing elsewhere.

 

Blurred;)

[BlurredFX]

Don't forget, they have to default you before they can enforce the Judgement in the Court.

 

Your Credit Records show no default, have you ever received a Default Notice? If not, then at this stage, you have nowt to worry about anyway! Unless, of course, they can prove you have been sent one...

 

Chill ya bean mucker!

 

Blurred:)

[BlurredFX]

For what it is worth, I wouldn't be surprised if the original IVA co, and the people chasing you now, are one and the same bunch of people, or linked in some way. Just a feeling, no evidence to back it up, but you have to wonder where they have got this data from.

 

DOH!! It says on the letter they have been appointed by Max Recovery haha. Sorry.

 

Once they have gone 12+2 on the CCA, they cannot enforce the debt until they produce some for of a CCA.

 

Then let them issue proceedings, and we can leg them up quite simply due to their anticipated lack of any Default Notices. Besides the fact that this lot is 5 years old.

 

I got to a point where i entered into an IVA 5 years ago with Debit Free Direct

 

When does this tick over into six years, and statute barred territory? As long as you don't acknowledge the debt before 6 years, I assume it becomes statute barred, though I am unfamiliar with IVAs.

[the_blue_cat]

It would be another year by my reckoning before it would be due for statute barred. However if they don't produce the relevent documentation in the specified time (looking at previous posts in regards to this company, they don't) then they will recieve the second letter from me (from the list on the forum). From previous threads in regards to this company and this situation there's been no further posting on them after the second letter is issued. SO I'm hoping that it's promising. Besides that if they don eventually decide to take me to court then there is no NOA's anyway.

 

Right here's my revised letter:

 

Dear Sir/madam

 

You have contacted me regarding debts, which you claim is owed by myself.

 

I would point out that I have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to you and please be advised that I will only communicate with you in writing.

 

This letter is a formal request pursuant to s.77(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I require you to provide me with a true copy of the credit agreement relating to the above account, together with any other documentation the Act requires you to provide.

 

I expect you to comply fully and properly with this request, within the statutory time limit. You are reminded that should you fail to comply with my request, the provisions of s.77(6) will apply.

 

Your attention is drawn to ss.5(2), 3(b),6 and 7 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR).

 

I enclose a postal order in the sum of £1.00, which is the statutory fee. Note that these funds are not to be used for any other purpose.

 

I am are familiar with the CPUTR 2008 and the Office of Fair Trading's Guidance on debt collection, which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

I would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. AND in not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

 

In addition, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make such an appointment with you.

 

There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v Sheppard & Short Ltd [1959] 2 QB 384. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and, if you do so, you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance.

 

I would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my liability for the debt in question.

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to Trading Standards and also inform the Office Of Fair Trading of your actions.

Edited March 29, 2010 by the_blue_cat

[BlurredFX]

Section 77 looks right for a fixed sum.

 

ss.5(2), 3(b),6 and 7 looks right - i assume c&p!

 

From previous threads in regards to this company and this situation there's been no further posting on them after the second letter is issued.

 

I think that will be enough to fire them off fishing elsewhere.

 

Well done on your research into other threads, I hope it will provide you with some reassurance, and you have added to my knowledge as well. Thanks.

 

The letter looks go-to-go as far as I am concerned, but obviously, I would like a other people's opinion - let's hope one is forthcoming. I'll PM dx.

 

I know the dead line is tomorrow, otherwise a convoy of blacked out limousines will turn up, possibly armed, probably with air-borne support, and snipers in the surrounding fields - but chill. Just call the MIB/CAG8). A couple of days won't make any odds, just to be confident it is right.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/159445-getting-them-reveal-their.html

 

The above link is interesting reading, should you wish to do a bit of background reading should this matter look like even getting close to Court. 31.16 is similar, but is "pre-action", and something I know little about, if you fancy your luck.

[dx100uk]

dx

[blueboy987]

Have you done any research on Max Recovery, ie searched them on Google? If not then I'd suggest doing so before doing anything as you'll find plenty of interesting and useful information on them.

 

I checked quickly and it looks like their business is going round buying up debts for peanuts that have been written off by the original creditor - real lost causes and not the kind of debts most of the companies you read about on these forums deal with. So there is a good chance they have bought the debts they are claiming to have bought.

 

But it also looks like they don't try very hard to get payment, I couldn't find anything saying they'd actually taken court action - just the threatening letters from Fairfax (and previously Eversheds).

 

If it was me I'd ignore them. By replying, especially with the legal stuff, you run the risk of them thinking they've got your attention which could lead to an escalation and possible court action. Ignore it and they might simply give up and move on to the next one.

 

If you really must send a letter I'd keep it simple and tone it down. Just state the basic stuff - you deny any debt, you refuse permission for doorstep calls and that unless they come up with some proof of the debt any further contact will be viewed as harassment and treated appropriately.

[BlurredFX]

Blueboy,

 

Your sentiments are pretty similar to dx and my own. However, the OP wants to approach it differently, and has done some reading around - at our suggestion!

 

I can see where he is coming from in why he wants to send the letter, which is why I have tried my best to help.

 

What I would say, is taht if you are going to write the letter, do it properly, like the re-drafted letter the OP has drawn up, not the first one.

 

But, hey, we all have a different take on things, and we all bring a different bottle to the party, that's what is great about the forum - a variety of opinions - and the OP seems happy with his course of action! As am I!!

 

Hope you are well.

 

FX

[the_blue_cat]

UPdate

 

Just receieved a letter from said solicitors completely ignoring my CCA request, saying that i have 7 more days to pay or they may take legal action.

 

THis is laughable and i was expecting it,as they have done this to all the other people on this forum in similar cirumstances. In sending this letter they have failed to comply with my request in proving that such a debt exists.

 

Now quick question to everyone, is it 14 calendar days or working days from a CCA request before i send in the failure to comply with cca request letter?

[dx100uk]

working days

 

dx

[the_blue_cat]

so another week then before i get to send my letter saying they have failed to comply. They're even persisting on attempting to recover debt even though the whole thing is in dispute, which nicely goes against them. Lets face it, they have nothing and its just a computer generated letter.

[the_blue_cat]

I've now received the next letter from them. THey have still failed to provide the requested information and apparently they are now either going to send someone round or attempt court action. So not only have they failed to provided the info requested to prove that such a debt exists, they have also now on two occassion pursued said 'debt' ignoring the OFT's guidance on not ceasing activity on a disputed claim.

 

The letter also chucking an account number and original creditor for the full wack of being MBNA Eurpoe Bank limited, now this is interesting as no one company is the original creditor, so they are now even providing misleading information in an attempt to bully. LOL

 

Now their time has elaspsed so they get the second letter from me (the one on the forum for failing to comply with the CCA request.

[dx100uk]

yep.

oh and i'd go back and revisit this statute barring issue.

 

i think you will find atleast one of the debt WILL be SB'ed.

 

i'd SAR MBNA now.

lets findout when the last payment was they got off you.

 

and poss the same to the other 'debts'

 

bypass the fleecers lets get at the truth on these debts.

 

dx

[the_blue_cat]

THing is I can't even remember having anything with MBNA. Although if i Subject Access request them they may get interested, and since the debt has been sold on to Max Recovery they can do the donkey work:) However claiming that the whole wack belongs to this one is a bit naughty, they grasping at straws. I never got any Default notices anyway from anyone prior to entering the IVA. Good luck in court fellows.

[dx100uk]

well i think its about time you took up the advice in post 2.

 

ignore everyone

 

they've had their 15mins of fleecing fame.

 

dx