Statutory Demand: Seeking Advice on Options

[oleg]

I received a statutory demand from one of the well known debt purchasing scoundrels, let's call them DPS. I am ignoring it because they did not attempt personal delivery, as required, only post. However, that is unlikely to be the end of the matter, especially as the balance in question is a five-figure sum. I have not communicated with DPS at all during the months that they have been sending me letters, partly due to enduring ill health but also because I have been hoping to ride out six years until the debt becomes statute barred, but there is a long time yet to run. It is two years since I last acknowledged the debt, but to the previous owner (a bank), not DPS. The bank did not warn me that they may sell the balance, nor inform me afterwards that they had done so.

DPS have applied interest on an ad-hoc basis without informing me in advance or telling me what rate it is supposed to be (it isn't consistent at all).

My only income is pension credit and I get disability living allowance. There is no prospect of my obtaining income from any other source. DPS told me they know that I have no CCJ. They would have seen from a credit reference check that various creditors, including two other debt purchasing outfits, are claiming a six-figure total from me and the only payment I am making is £1/month to one credit card company.

I am not sure which tactics to adopt.

1 Continue to ignore the SD because I awas hoping to maintain my policy of no contact (which seems to be working with the other two purchasers). If DPS were subsequently to petition for my bankruptcy, how may a court react to my assertion not to have received the SD?

2 Inform DPS that I am on benefits and I am disabled. I understand that being disabled prevents them from harassing me, but does their merely sending letters constitute harassment? Surely they wouldn't just let the matter 'go away'?

3 Apply for the SD to be set aside on the grounds that the bank did not inform me of the assignment, the supposed purchasers have not informed me of the interest rate (thus making it impossible for me to know the correct balance) and that the date of the original credit agreement is missing from the SD. Even if the SD was set aside, wouldn't DPS simply serve a new one; is there anything to be gained from set aside other than delay? More than a week has elapsed since the SD was issued so I am running out of time for the set aside option. Illness prevented me from doing anything until now and it is probable that I will not be well enough in the remaining days to grasp this particular nettle.

4 Other? I am not keen on the bankruptcy alternative for various reasons. Apart from everything else, my health would not be up to the court proceedings.

Advice from those of you more knowledgeable in these matters than I would be most welcome. Thanks.

[teaboy2]

Hi Oleg

 

Sorry to say but stating that it was not received would not wash with a judge, especially if DPS have proof it was posted. I mean how often do letters not get delievered, so the chances are slim that a judge would accept that it was not served.

 

You really need to apply for a set aside, no doubt others that have experince in getting SD set aside will come in and post advice on how to do so.

[nicklea]

I would disagree with teaboy on this point. Have aread of this thread for arguments for and against ignoring a SD:-

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?162131-Statutory-Demands-and-Service-By-Post

[oleg]

Yes, nick, I did read your link and you state what I thought. Even if the judge were to disbelieve my not having received the letter, the fact remains that DPS are legally obliged first to serve a statutory demand in person. They did not. And in any case, I very much doubt that they hold a certificate of posting. I am still inclined to believe that in fact they are just trying it on to 'encourage' me to make contact.

[Tingy]

totally agree you. the way they have done it so far makes it effectively invalid anyway. I would cover your back by getting and filling in the set aside forms just in case, but I think they're threatening you in a very naughty way!

[oleg]

Thanks for reply Tingy and apologies for belated acknowledgment, I had some problems and could not access internet as a result. Unfortunately, nobody has yet provided an opinion on my basic question as to which of the options available they consider I should take. This is my first experience of posting on CAG and I had hoped for more feedback. Having the threat of a bankruptcy petition dangling over one's head is pretty daunting when you're alone and no access to impartial advice so, if anyone can offer some, I'd be very glad of it. Many thanks.

[oleg]

Thanks for reply Tingy and apologies for belated acknowledgment, I had some problems and could not access internet as a result. Unfortunately, nobody has yet provided an opinion on my basic question as to which of the options available they consider I should take. This is my first experience of posting on CAG and I had hoped for more feedback. Having the threat of a bankruptcy petition dangling over one's head is pretty daunting when you're alone and no access to impartial advice so, if anyone can offer some, I'd be very glad of it. Many thanks.

[oleg]

I am coming to the end of the period allowed for responding to a statutory demand for a very substantial sum and am not completely sure what strategy to adopt. Unfortuately, I have not received much advice from CAG-ers. If anyone is able to offer some informed opinion, I would be most grateful. Many thanks.

[nicklea]

To be honest, I would continue with your present policy. Also, if you do not contact them, then if they do try to get a CCJ against you in the future then you can plausibly deny that you have received any notice of assignment from them and that is a very strong defence.

 

I really would suggest that the fact it was just sent by ordinary post is their means of getting you to contact them and they have no real desire to present a bankruptcy petition.

 

You will notice that there are other threads here where people have actaully had a SD served on them personally.

 

In my case, the SD was sent by recorded delivery so I knew they were serious.

[oleg]

Thanks, Nick. I am not particularly alarmed so far, like you I feel they are not serious but, with my total debts amounting to a six-figure sum, I need to tread carefully. The debt purchasing company did inform me of the alleged assignment, the bank which supposedly sold it on did not. I also take comfort from the fact that on the SD, the name of the Original Credit is not accurate: it is stated as that of another part of the same bank. In addition, the date of the original credit agreement is missing. But these matters are not material at the present stage of the game.

I am disappointed that I can't find discussion on these forums of the fact that creditors and their running dogs are not allowed to harass disabled people. I am especially interested to know if it has been established what constitutes harassment in such cases.

[harrassed senior]

Harrassment is 'in the eye of the beholder'. It is a personal matter as to what constitutes harrassment. For instance, I hate the telephone, so repeated calls throughout the day would cause me distress, however, letters do not bother me and answering them gives me something to do.

 

I do not like unannounced visitors, so even one instance of this would cause me problems.

 

Hope that makes harrassment clearer, there are and have been many threads on this subject but at the end of the day, you are the only one who can decide what distresses you and what does not.

 

There are guidelines issued by the OFT for dealing with debt and the disabled person, and again, each persons' disability is different from that of the next. For instance, if you are deaf, you cannot communicate on the telephone or in person very well, but a blind person may be able to do the reverse, the scope is so very wide. It will also depend on how much about your personal circumstances/disabilities you wish to disclose.

 

I will put up a couple of links that you may find interesting;

 

http://www.malg.org.uk/documents/Men...2Final2009.pdf

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

 

The OFT are at present discussing ways to assist people with disabilities

 

OFT LAUNCHES MENTAL CAPACITY

GUIDANCE

CONSULTATION

 

 

Please do not be too dissapointed with the responses you have received, each of us have differing 'knowledge' and it may happen that those who might enter into your 'discussions' may not be logged on for a few days. No-one is ever intentionally ignored.

 

 

 

[Tingy]

I don't think the definition of harassment is legally any different for disabled people, though you will obviously count as a vulnerable person and so will be governed by the rules protecting that group of people. In terms of actual bankruptcy I am sure you know that to send out a Statutory Demand costs nothing, but to pursue starts to cost serious money, so lots of DCA's use it as a very effective threat. In terms of disability and bankruptcy you may find this link useful: http://bankruptcy.org.uk/archives/item/7629-does-being-disabled-protect-us-in-bankruptcy

[babydoll0141917]

subbing

[babybear39]

The CSA website has industry rules for dealing with disabled and vulnerable people. Check to see if your DCA and situation may come under this at:

 

http://www.csa-uk.com/

[oleg]

Thanks for these helpful replies and sorry for [again] lateness in acknowledging due to health situation. I will read with interest the links given.