Link Financial Help

[phildux]

Hi hope somebody might be able to help.

A company called Link Financial Outsourcing made contact with us but very vague in what they wanted. I sent them a first class recorded delivery letter requesting that they send us the original credit agreement. Sent this on 23/11/2010 they received it 24/11/2010 and replied to us on 25/11/2010 saying it would take up to 30 days to provide us with the information I requested.

Not totally understanding all this is it not 12 days +2 if so why are they saying 30days

Kind Regards

Phil

letter to Link.pdf

Letter From Link.pdf

[DonkeyB]

1st April 2005 is when they claim they acquired the account from Woodchester! This would have been a loan account.

 

Have you never heard about this then? Even in 2005? It’s a few months off SB!

[phildux]

no heard nothing, first we new was a couple of weeks ago

[Bazooka Boo]

They know perfectly well the rules surrounding provision of the agreement, 12 working days from receipt of request, link farcical having one last push before it reaches SB..

[phildux]

Hi is there a letter template i can send them to tell them they are out of the time scale to reply to my cca request, and if they continue there harrasment action will be taken (what action not to sure) but there must be something

Regards

Phil

[Bazooka Boo]

Yes it's here.....http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?436-Failure-to-provide-a-copy-of-the-agreement-within-the-prescribed-timescale.

[phildux]

hi used the template provided and have attached it, just want to make sure it looks ok. once i have sent this what happens then

final letter to link.pdf

[UnitedFront]

I wouldn't send it until you're certain the debt would be stat barred. I'd at least wait until I got the reply from cca request and assess the situation at that point.

 

That's just me, though.

 

Cheers

UF

 

EDIT

Sorry I was talking about a statute barred letter.

 

Definitely send the account in dispute letter as you're intending.

[DonkeyB]

This should really have started with a ‘prove it’ letter, not a CCA request, as you say you knew nothing of the account. You have to some extent acknowledged that you know what it’s all about, by assuming there is a credit agreement involved.

 

Do you, in fact, know what the alleged debt is about? It’s all very vague so far. If so, what is the history of the account? Did it fall into arrears? Is so, why? Tell us all you can.

[phildux]

this is where i am totally lost, i thought if you sent them a letter requesting copy of the original credit agreement giving them 12+2 days to do so and they fail as they have then they are in breach and its all over.

on another note Link have bought this debit from GE Woodchester in 2005, if this account went into to default with GE Woodchester in 2004 is it already stat barred or is it from when Link bought the debit

Regards

Phil

[DonkeyB]

It may well be SB – I’m guessing you know what it’s all about as you say it was defaulted in 2004.

[phildux]

we we do now, had a car on fiance with GE Capital / Woodchester, unfortunatly the vehicle was stolen insurance paid the value of the car the GAP insurance paid but there was still a short fall of about £1,600. default notice served by GE Capital / Woodchester in 2004 (i think) Link bought the debit in 2005, trying to find as much info as i can, will need to go into my loft tonight and find the default notice from GE Woodchester

[phildux]

Hi found what i was looking for, the default notice served by GE Capital / Woodchester dated 27th July 2004 as per the attached, also when i got home last night a letter from Link (attached) with the signed credit agreement enclosed. i guess its now looking very dark & grey for us and i have no alternative but to pay them. has the 12+2 days rule and them not replying within that time scale carry no punches now as per previouse letter attached tell me they have upto 30 days. really worried now

 

Regards

Phil

GE Default Notice.pdf

Link Letter.pdf

Edited December 21, 2010 by phildux

[batman1956]

There is a reference number which needs to be removed from these documents. However if the last acknowledgement was 2004 this is statute barred. Have you made any payment or anything since 2004? If not start celebrating.

[phildux]

Hi a small light at the end of the tunnel or is it a train coming, no not made any payment since 2004 after this default notice was served. how do i tell Link that this is now statute barred and to now stop harrassing me

 

Regards

Phil

[batman1956]

Please note before you send this that I have no legal training and all that I know is from reading on this site. Perhaps someone else will give better advice but below is a letter that you could use.

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

 

You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself.

 

I would point out that under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”

 

I would also point out that the OFT say under their Debt collection Guidance on statute barred debt that “it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period”.

 

The last payment of this alleged debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that “continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to harassment contrary to CPUTR2008

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed and that no further contact will be made concerning the above account after that last letter.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

 

[DonkeyB]

Forget the date of default – it’s only a guide (albeit a good one). It’s the last time you ACKNOWLEDGED the debt in writing or with a payment. Could you have paid anything AFTER the default date? Have you, at any time, admitted in writing to Woodchester or Link AFTER November 2004 that you owe this money? From what you have said, you weren’t even aware it has been sold to Link.

 

Have you had any statement of account from Link in the intervening period, as would now be required by law?

 

Have you moved home from where you lived when the agreement was taken out, or the debt sold to Link?

 

If you can be absolutely sure of that the answer to these questions is NO, then the SB letter should be sent.

 

And that should be the end of it.

[phildux]

hi no never paid anything after the GE Capital / Woodchester default notice. no never written to them. never had a statment, YES moved house in 2006

Regards

Phil

[DonkeyB]

But you moved house AFTER you believed the matter to be settled by insurance.

 

If Link bought the account in 2005, and you moved a year later, it’s their own fault for not advising you of the assignment. You can’t tell someone you have moved who has had no communication with you prior to that move.

 

Obviously they have now found your new address. This explains why they were vague initially – they have almost certainly been trying to trace you, as the letters to your old address may have been returned, and were not sure of your identity (which is why a ‘prove it’ letter is the best first step). As you have not been hiding, they would have to explain why they waiting four or five years to try and contact you. I am also concerned that they appear not to have established your true identity before sending out CCA documents.

 

Personally I would now send the SB letter, based on the information you have provided here.

[Jasper1965]

Dear Sir/Madam

 

 

You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself.

 

I would point out that under the limitation act 1980 Section 5 “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”

 

I would also point out that the OFT say under their debt collection Guidance on statute barred debt that “it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period”.

 

The last payment of this alleged debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that “continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to harassment contrary to CPUTR2008.

 

For the avoidance of doubt I hereby state that I shall not be making any further payments upon this account.

 

I copy below the relevant extract from the OFT guidance on debt collection and state as follows:

 

Link Financial failed to contact me during the relevant limitation period.

 

Any attempt by Link Financial to claim an "attempted payment" was made to this account will be reported as a deliberate attempt to mislead.

 

Any claim by Link Financial that a payment was made during the relevant period must be supported by documentary evidence and the making of such a claim in the absence of such documentation will be reported as a deliberate attempt to mislead.

 

 

Any alleged debt became statute barred in July 2010 when the account was defaulted and subsequently terminated, any manipulation of default dates or inaccurate reporting of this account to the credit reference agencies will be reported to the neccesary authorities and legal action will be raised against Link Financial if neccesary

 

 

2.14 In the past we have dealt with a number of statute barred debt cases governed by the Limitation Act 1980, which applies to England and Wales. Based on that experience our position with regard to England and Wales remains:

a. we accept legally the debt exists

b. it is the methods by which the debt is collected that can be unfair as follows:

• it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period

• if a creditor has been in regular contact with a debtor before the debt is statute barred, then we do not consider it unfair to continue to attempt to recover the debt

• it is unfair to mislead debtors as to their rights and obligations, for example, falsely stating or implying that the debt is still legally recoverable and relying on consumers not knowing the relevant legal provisions, and

• continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970.

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed and that no further contact will be made concerning the above account after that last letter.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

 

 

Nothing wrong with the original letter but Link have a habit of extending the letter ping pong etc. for months with these ficticious "attempted payments". Nip it in the bud and get rid!!

 

 

 

[phildux]

Hi will give the above ago will send it 1st class recorded today

Regards

Phil

[Pathway]

Did you know that Link Financial Ltd and Link Financial Ousourcing Ltd are two totally seperate companies - and have different company registration numbers.

 

Was your debt assigned to Link Financial Ltd? or Asset (whatever their name was) Have Asset then assigned to Link ? Have you had assignment correspondence?

 

So - if Link Financial Outsourcing Ltd are writing to you - this a totally new arrival on the scene. It might suit

Link to write to you on Link Financial Outsourcing Ltd letter head - BUT you do NOT have any business relationship

with Link Financial Ousourcing Ltd - or you have not been advised of any change.

 

Hope this makes sense.

[Bazooka Boo]

Regardless, they are with this alleged debt. It is dead and buried, SB trumps everything. Happy new year phil!!

[phildux]

no i was not made aware of the changes, i have fired off the sb letter at dinner time to Link Financial Outsourcing, has this left me in the crap now

 

Regards

Phil

[DonkeyB]

Not at all – it’s irrelevant.