Help! Husband's 18year old mortgage debt landed on our doorstep today. I'm terrified.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

That proves that Halifax own it,

just send the letter to SS recorded delivery.

[unclebulgaria67]

That proves that Halifax own it,

just send the letter to SS recorded delivery.

 

What proves that Halifax still own the debt. ?

[dadofholly]

Ring SS and ask them who their clients are - and who owns the agreement. Record the call if you can

[perplexedofdorset]

Ok, here is the letter...just the one to be sent to Shoosmiths 1st class recorded first thing tomorrow.......

 

 

In response to your letter of the 16th September with regards to the above account.

 

The documentary evidence you have provided of alleged payments merely comprises a list of abbreviations and supposed receipts. Their source is in no way explained and there is no evidence that any of these payments were made by me. I require proof from whom these payments came, in what form they were made and in the case of cheque or card transactions full details of the account/s they allegedly came from. I would also ask that you provide me with the addresses connected with these occasions and any covering letters.

The copy of the extremely brief letter you allege I sent in 2004, bears no signature, despite the spacing to indicate otherwise, and could indeed have been drafted by anyone at any time.

In final response to your allegations it is obvious that, even if these correspondences and payments had been from my hand, the most recent is over 7 years old and the Council of Mortgage Lenders, of which the Halifax is a member, states that mortgage debts should not be pursued after six years and as this is the case I shall not be making any payment or offer of payment now or in the future.

I now consider your pursuit of this matter to be harassment. Under the circumstances set out above I suggest you should return this matter to your client.

I await your confirmation that you will not pursue this matter any further.

 

 

Yours Faithfully

 

 

i think i like that ending. you are now harassing me. refer back to your client!

short, sweet and very black and white!

[dadofholly]

If SS own the debt then you should have recieved a Notice of Assignment

[perplexedofdorset]

Shoosmiths have said previously in letters that they will refer the matter to their client....??????

 

i think the Brig means the fact they have written this to me previously proves it ( ? )

[unclebulgaria67]

Yes I think that will do nicely. As there is doubt whether Halifax are still involved with collecting the debt, I would not bother with them at this stage.

[perplexedofdorset]

so if the Halifax, which by the way i believe are now owned by Lloyds and part owned by us, own the debt....

Why are they chasing a 7 year from last communication old debt, which is clearly against the CML guidelines???

 

(oooh, listen to me, like i know what i'm talking about??!!hahahahhha)

[perplexedofdorset]

Thanks UB. any other feelings on the composition and content of the letter??????

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

It's because they are chancers:madgrin:

[dadofholly]

It's because they are chancers:madgrin:

 

Spot on

[perplexedofdorset]

that's not nice!

[perplexedofdorset]

so can i have a final opinion from your good selves...

is the letter good to go??????

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Yes get it posted by RD asap.

 

Brig

[unclebulgaria67]

so if the Halifax, which by the way i believe are now owned by Lloyds and part owned by us, own the debt....

Why are they chasing a 7 year from last communication old debt, which is clearly against the CML guidelines???

 

(oooh, listen to me, like i know what i'm talking about??!!hahahahhha)

 

This is partly why I raised the question about ownership of the debt. You have never mentioned that SS have been back to the Halifax and the Halifax have provided a letter of instruction to SS, as to how they pursue this. They just refer to ...their clients..... from which you would presume it was the Halifax. Surely if the Halifax were involved, the position would be more definate. Halifax know the CML rules about not pursuing debts after 6 years, but a debt collection agency might not or are not bothered, as the CML rules don't apply to them.

 

You could add a sentence to the letter. If your clients are the Halifax, if they still wish to pursue this, will you please provide the name and address of the person dealing with this, so that I can take up a formal complaint, with referral to the FOS if necessary.

[perplexedofdorset]

so they are being deliberately ambiguous. My OH has not received any Notice of Assignment though.

 

UB, how would i phrase and where would i put that sentence in the letter please, my brains getting sore from all this thinking..

i have posted an avatar of how all this is making me feel, do you like it?

[unclebulgaria67]

If they are being deliberately misleading in their letters, I think SS would be in trouble with the SRA.

 

I would add it as the last sentence.

 

Dear Madam

 

Your Ref:

 

In response to your letter of the 16th September with regards to the above account.

 

The documentary evidence you have provided of alleged payments merely comprises a list of abbreviations and supposed receipts. Their source is in no way explained and there is no evidence that any of these payments were made by me. I require proof from whom these payments came, in what form they were made and in the case of cheque or card transactions full details of the account/s they allegedly came from. I would also ask that you provide me with the addresses connected with these occasions and any covering letters.

 

The copy of the extremely brief letter you allege I sent in 2004, bears no signature, despite the spacing to indicate otherwise, and could indeed have been drafted by anyone at any time.

 

In final response to your allegations it is obvious that, even if these correspondences and payments had been from my hand, the most recent is over 7 years old and the Council of Mortgage Lenders, of which the Halifax is a member, states that mortgage debts should not be pursued after six years and as this is the case I shall not be making any payment or offer of payment now or in the future.

I now consider your pursuit of this matter to be harassment and will not hesitate in making a complaint with Trading Standards, the SRA and the OFT. ( I am sending a copy of this letter to the Halifax to make them aware of my position and that that they are infringing the CML code of conduct. ) (delete this, if you are not sending to the Halifax)

 

I await your confirmation that you will not pursue this matter any further.

 

However, if your clients are the Halifax, if they still wish to pursue this, will you please provide the name and address of the person dealing with this, so that I can take up a formal complaint, with referral to the fos if necessary.

Yours Faithfully

[perplexedofdorset]

mmmn, seems a bit clunky?

 

something about if your clients are... doesn't sound right? professional?

 

what about..... However, if your client, the Halifax, still wishes to pursue this, will you please provide their contacts name and address , so that I can take up a formal complaint, with referral to the fos if necessary.

 

how does that sound????

[perplexedofdorset]

actually i shall scrap , the Halifax, bit, just leave it as....... if your client wishes to take this further, gimme their name and where they live....hahahaah

[perplexedofdorset]

or does that allow them to continue the ambiguity?????

Nah, cos if they give me their client's contac'ts name, address etc i will be able to see who they are, shouldn't I ?

[unclebulgaria67]

The reason for saying, "If your clients are the Halifax", is that I have a feeling that they might not be. If SS were representing Halifax, why is this not made explicity clear ? From what you have said the letters SS are issuing appear deliberately vague. Also some of the transactions would appear to indicate that Halifax had sold the debt. Why would Halifax buy the debt back, if they had sold it ?

 

I would therefore include Halifax in the last sentence, as SS inferred this is the case. So add the sentence you suggest...... However, if your client, the Halifax, still wishes to pursue this, will you please provide their contacts name and address , so that I can take up a formal complaint, with referral to the fos if necessary.

 

I think if you just said client, they might just write back, saying that their client intends to pursue this further, as they believe that neither the CML code of conduct or the limitation act are relevant to the debt. If you said Halifax, if this is a wrong assumption, as solicitors they have a duty in my opinion to correct this. I doubt the SRA would be happy if the correspondence from SS was not clear.

[perplexedofdorset]

thank you my dear UB, that will be it... letter is printed and will be posted , first class recorded, tomorrow!

 

acually what about just saying, if the Halifax...dropping the your client bit???

 

no, you're right UB, leave it at...if your client, the Halifax, still wish to pursue this...

 

thank you so much!

[unclebulgaria67]

thank you my dear UB, that will be it... letter is printed and will be posted , first class recorded, tomorrow!

 

acually what about just saying, if the Halifax...dropping the your client bit???

 

no, you're right UB, leave it at...if your client, the Halifax, still wish to pursue this...

 

thank you so much!

 

No, you believe that SS have led you to believe that their client is the Halifax. You need to state this, so that they have a chance to correct you, if this is not the case.

 

Stop overthinking this, as that would be dangerous (brain ache !!) and get the letter sent off.

[perplexedofdorset]

yes both over thinking and under drinking are bad for you.....the end sentence will be

 

However, if your client, the Halifax, still wishes to pursue this,

 

yes?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Yes