Link chasing balance on my Thesis Servicing 98' loan: They Say I owe £2500

[Undercover-Elsa]

If it can be proved that they deliberately stated that a payment has ben made when it hasn't, they fall foul of CPUTR 2008, which can be a criminal offence in some instances. Action is taken by Trading Standards/the OFT. They don't take up individual personal complaints BUT if a practice is brought to their attention they will investigate. I'm keeping an eye open for other threads with similar issues re Link. Seems to me the more people who bring this practice to account the better.

 

Elsa x

[cirian75]

good info, I bet the OP can use that to make Link suddenly feel uneasy.

[cumblechook]

I have actually posted their correspondence to me here.

 

They have categorically stated that my last credit was £4.98.

How can this be? I nervously await the SAR from SLC

[Bazooka Boo]

They have categorically stated that my last credit was £4.98.

How can this be? I nervously await the SAR from SLC

 

How tight are you? Another two pence and you could have rounded it up to a fiver!

I can't wait for this to hit the headlines....how the mighty will fall..

[Undercover-Elsa]

Especially if we can "Link" up other people they've done it to...

[cumblechook]

OK!!!!

 

So The SAR Report from The SLC has arrived Today. It was a big thick wad of stuff. I have been through it quickly.

 

1. There is no Credit from me across both accounts
   
2. I Deffered both loans in 2000 and 2001 and I deferred just the 1998 loan in 2003.
   
3. They have sent lots of letters few of which I recognise, but they have made attempts to contact. I have always been away.
   

Again I have never made a credit to any of the accounts. I will post whatever you want to see, but the account was passed over to Thesis in 2008..... I have never paid them either.

 

Your thoughts please

[cumblechook]

I will Scan and send any documents you require, but I am really non the wiser as to where I stand.

I can only speculate that my 1997 Loan is Status Barred, but the 1998 on may not be.

 

HELP!!!

[cumblechook]

Hi guys....

 

 

I have been looking through the accounts that the SLC sent. There seems to have been quite a few payments of 70p odd in 2009. These have owt to do with me.

 

regards

[postggj]

70 pence in 2009

now thats a surprise

 

i would be demanding from link information of how these payments were paid

 

bank account detail etc

 

they realy are at the bottom of the barrell

[cumblechook]

They look like internal payments.

 

7 or 8 payments ranging from 70p to 93p

 

Remember this is a SAR report from the SLC

[count orlok]

That may be because the inflation rate was so low at that time; the way that the interest is worked out means that rather that what you owe increasing, it actually goes down. Same thing happened to me on my pre 98 loans (first loan taken out pre 98 some of the subsequent loans taken out afterward but all 5 loans/years come under the pre 98 rules) that I defer every year.

[cumblechook]

Thanks count orlok.

 

This sounds about right.

 

Well.. I am trying to see if this loan is Statute Barred

[Undercover-Elsa]

Hi Cumblechook

Sorry, I've got a bit of a crisis going on at home at the moment so not been able to do much on CAG.

A few more questions so we can get to the bottom of it:

Re the 1997 loan

You say you defered this loan in 2001? In which case, what was the new date for repayments to commence?

If you can establish that, you then need to check on the communications log for that account for the period around and after the first payment was due. Look for the issue of a DN (Default Notice). If you deferred for a year presumably we're looking at around April 2002?

Check copies of letters they sent around that time. Can you find the earliest letter demanding the full amount due to your default (failure to pay)?

 

Could you refresh my memory...are Link just chasing you for the 1997 loan, or for the 1998 one as well?

If so you also need to calculate when the 1998 was first due after deferment, and when they first sent demand for full payment, as above.

 

I take it the last you had from Link was where they mentioned the £4.95 payment (LOL, which we now know never happened) and that they would get back to you with a copy of the agreement & statements? Still Waiting?

If that's the case no need to do anything with Link as yet till they get back to you. Let them dig their hole.

 

In the meantime it might be an idea to write to the SLO requesting an explanation of the credits paid to the account as shown in the SAR. Always refer in correspondence as "the above referenced account" etc, not "my account".

 

Elsa x

[cumblechook]

Hi Cumblechook

Sorry, I've got a bit of a crisis going on at home at the moment so not been able to do much on CAG.

A few more questions so we can get to the bottom of it:

Re the 1997 loan

You say you defered this loan in 2001? In which case, what was the new date for repayments to commence?

If you can establish that, you then need to check on the communications log for that account for the period around and after the first payment was due. Look for the issue of a DN (Default Notice). If you deferred for a year presumably we're looking at around April 2002?

Check copies of letters they sent around that time. Can you find the earliest letter demanding the full amount due to your default (failure to pay)?

 

Could you refresh my memory...are Link just chasing you for the 1997 loan, or for the 1998 one as well?

If so you also need to calculate when the 1998 was first due after deferment, and when they first sent demand for full payment, as above.

 

I take it the last you had from Link was where they mentioned the £4.95 payment (LOL, which we now know never happened) and that they would get back to you with a copy of the agreement & statements? Still Waiting?

If that's the case no need to do anything with Link as yet till they get back to you. Let them dig their hole.

 

In the meantime it might be an idea to write to the SLO requesting an explanation of the credits paid to the account as shown in the SAR. Always refer in correspondence as "the above referenced account" etc, not "my account".

 

Elsa x

 

Elsa,

 

 

AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRFGGHHHHHHH!!!!!

Can you believe It... I have just spent the last 30 mins composing a detailed response to you and my laptop Stiffs me!!!

 

I am gonna try again. The plot thickens

[Undercover-Elsa]

No probs...I'll check back in the morning

[cumblechook]

Hi Cumblechook

Sorry, I've got a bit of a crisis going on at home at the moment so not been able to do much on CAG.

A few more questions so we can get to the bottom of it:

Re the 1997 loan

You say you defered this loan in 2001? In which case, what was the new date for repayments to commence?

If you can establish that, you then need to check on the communications log for that account for the period around and after the first payment was due. Look for the issue of a DN (Default Notice). If you deferred for a year presumably we're looking at around April 2002?

Check copies of letters they sent around that time. Can you find the earliest letter demanding the full amount due to your default (failure to pay)?

 

Could you refresh my memory...are Link just chasing you for the 1997 loan, or for the 1998 one as well?

If so you also need to calculate when the 1998 was first due after deferment, and when they first sent demand for full payment, as above.

 

I take it the last you had from Link was where they mentioned the £4.95 payment (LOL, which we now know never happened) and that they would get back to you with a copy of the agreement & statements? Still Waiting?

If that's the case no need to do anything with Link as yet till they get back to you. Let them dig their hole.

 

In the meantime it might be an idea to write to the SLO requesting an explanation of the credits paid to the account as shown in the SAR. Always refer in correspondence as "the above referenced account" etc, not "my account".

 

Elsa x

 

Elsa.

 

Thank you for being in touch again. I hope all is well.

 

Link are only pursuing me for one loan (1997) however the have threatened that they know of another with the SLC. I posted all their letters to me on an earlier post on this thread. I have not heard anything from them since.

 

The Letter accompanying the SLC SAR report is headed with the reference number for 1998 loan. It mentions that The 1997 loan was passed to Thesis in 2008.

 

The report contains, Screenshots of my records on their (SLC) computers, notes on their records recording Thesis' request for my statements and my request for SAR, Balances, letters to me at my home and term addresses ( letters addressed to my term address as recent as 2008, more on that in a bit), my credit agreements, my applications for deferments (Which are accompanied by payslips as proof of my income at the time)

 

I deferred the loans (Both together in 2000 and 2001) and just the 97' loan in 2003. The have sent me copies of those applications and my payslips. I cannot say for sure when payment was supposed to commence, but in the "customer Activity Inquiry" sections of the report. It shows both loans as being deferred from 2000 through till 2004. The last "Deferment End" date for both was in March 2004.

 

The earliest letter stating that I am in breach of consumer credit act on both Loans is July 2001.

There are then letters sent out about arrears regarding the 1997 loan in Sep 2001, Jan 2002 and in May 2007. (All for just 1997 loan.)

At a totally different address the communications kick off with a notice of default for 1998 loan in Oct 2008, a "pending issue of county court claim" letter in nov 08, another in March 09and one in sep 09.

 

This all looks very worrying. But I have never paid anything to these loans and not a penny has been deducted from me.

 

Someone has posted a possible reason for the credit entries on my loan accounts and it makes sense. I have seen that on other SLC related threads. These small 70p credit entries are interest payments. The interest rates fell sharply in 2009, 2010 and have remained low since. These are interest repayments, not from me, but from the SLC in to the loans in accordance with the Loan financing. I am fairly happy with this assumption, but I will write to the SLC to Clarify.

 

From what i can see.... SLC, Link (Thesis) have a problem with data integrity. There must have been some kind of data migration at some point. Again I have never paid anything or spoken to them since at least 2003.

 

What are your thoughts? What should I do. I think Link will start calling my house again. My earlier post show a letter from them disputing the Statute Barr on the 1997 loan. I am sure at least one loan are statute barred and definitely one of these loans remains on the SLC books from what I can see.

 

I hope the SLC does not play games with SAR and I am not talking to anyone if they call. Actually ..... what should I say when the calling starts????

Edited March 27, 2011 by cumblechook
Adding new info

[Undercover-Elsa]

Morning

I wouldn't be unduly worried. It is confusing, as they seem to have been very random and slapdash at chasing these up.

Cutting through all that, if deferment for both loans ended in March 2004, then your liability to start payment begins then. Cause of action would probably start after about 3 months of missed payments. I would think the SB clock would therefore have started before March 2005 which is the 6 years prior to now. It's up to Link to prove it didn't.

What's good is that you can now prove you've made no payments on either loan.

 

Sit back and wait for Link to get back to you...see what they say and if appropriate we'll do you a nice letter bringing in CPUTR 2008 etc re their false statement...

Ideally they will realise their error and drop the case.

 

Elsa x

[cumblechook]

Morning

I wouldn't be unduly worried. It is confusing, as they seem to have been very random and slapdash at chasing these up.

Cutting through all that, if deferment for both loans ended in March 2004, then your liability to start payment begins then. Cause of action would probably start after about 3 months of missed payments. I would think the SB clock would therefore have started before March 2005 which is the 6 years prior to now. It's up to Link to prove it didn't.

What's good is that you can now prove you've made no payments on either loan.

 

Sit back and wait for Link to get back to you...see what they say and if appropriate we'll do you a nice letter bringing in CPUTR 2008 etc re their false statement...

Ideally they will realise their error and drop the case.

 

Elsa x

 

 

Morning Elsa,

 

I was going through the statements on the SLC SAR (their internal screenshot statements)

 

 

I found a £5.02 payment on the records pertaining the 1998 loan. It says "Repayment - Agency Cheque - repayment" in the transactions description.... I never had an account to write cheques over the decade. I never paid this. And it comes up on their (SLC) internal stuff? Link are going to see this and start with the BS.

 

SLC and Link/Thesis are really going to be on the case now.

 

I am going to now have to write that letter to the SLC. I want to know what this entry is.

 

Having gone through the whole thing again. Those small entries are interest payments according to the SLC internal screenshot statements

Edited March 27, 2011 by cumblechook
add

[cumblechook]

This is BS..... I never made a payment. Defered the loan till 2004 then made a 5.02 payment and then ran off?

 

Bull.. I am not having it~!

[cerberusalert]

Was this £5.02 agency cheque paid on the a/c after the debt collection agency became involved?

[Undercover-Elsa]

I bet you're goggle eyed now...aren't they a pain to go through?

 

Yep, while you're waiting for Link, query anything you need to. Send a photocopy of the page/s containing whatever you query, with the entry highlighted, to speed things up.

[cumblechook]

Was this £5.02 agency cheque paid on the a/c after the debt collection agency became involved?

 

Sorrry for getting back to you so late. I was checking to see if the other credits on my loans before 2004 matched any of the few bank statements I retain from then.

 

 

To my knowledge, there has never been a Debt agency until now. Even when they say this was passed to Thesis in 2008 ( I didnt even know that when it happened).

 

I see your thinking .....perhaps a debt agency may have got me to pay or I paid a debt agency.

 

Again I dont ever remember paying anybody ....

[cumblechook]

Again... I have actually got a Requested Bank statement form 1 Jan 2005 showing no activity on my account relating to these payments...

[Undercover-Elsa]

Again, it's a nonsense figure...you wouldn't have paid that silly amount. Maybe some sort of inter department accounting, or at worst an attempt by a DCA to reset the clock. Only payments by you count.

Ask them to clarify the nature of the payment, exactly where/whom it came from and for what purpose.

[cumblechook]

Again, it's a nonsense figure...you wouldn't have paid that silly amount. Maybe some sort of inter department accounting, or at worst an attempt by a DCA to reset the clock. Only payments by you count.

Ask them to clarify the nature of the payment, exactly where/whom it came from and for what purpose.

 

Thankyou Elsa,

 

I will get this letter draghted now and send.

 

Ya... My bank statement from the 1st Feb states no records of any payment made. I didnt have a cheque book anyway.

 

I think someone at the SLC is altering the records. This information is from the SLC SAR