barclaycard debt sold to Lowell - chasing BC debt

[Sidewinder]

Claims would go to the Original Creditor. They will then almost certainly pay any amounts due directly to Lowell, and send you the balance if there is anything left over.

[citizenB]

If the account has been assigned/sold then the original creditor is not permitted to repay any refunds to the new owner - 3rd party agency.

[Hacked_Off]

So we're do refunds go!? :s

[panther12]

So we're do refunds go!? :s

 

As stated above. If the account is sold warts & all to another party then whatever you claim from the OC goes to you (although if you've got other accounts in debit with the same bank I think they can use the refund to go towards thoses other accounts) The OC may try it on and use any refund to set-off the amount owed to the new owners of the debt, but if that happens you have to educate the bank regarding the right of set-off.

[citizenB]

There is something on the FOS website that explains the right of set off and that it cant be done if they have sold/assigned the account to a 3rd party

[Hacked_Off]

There is something on the FOS website that explains the right of set off and that it cant be done if they have sold/assigned the account to a 3rd party

 

So if a refund is obtained what happens to the full amount owing to the 3rd party?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Have a look at what Citizen B suggests above.

[JuryMan77]

So if a refund is obtained what happens to the full amount owing to the 3rd party?

 

That's a good question. The amount "outstanding" would be including the unfair charges and PPI so could be deemed to now be inaccurate (as the figure is made up OF these unfair charges). However, if you were successful in having these charges and PPI payments refunded, then you've already effectively had the "discount" off this amount.

 

DCA claim you owe £2000. £1000 is unfair charges. You get £1000 back from OC. DCA still chase you for £2000, but you've had £1000 of that back.

 

Complex!

[impecunious]

That's a good question. The amount "outstanding" would be including the unfair charges and PPI so could be deemed to now be inaccurate (as the figure is made up OF these unfair charges). However, if you were successful in having these charges and PPI payments refunded, then you've already effectively had the "discount" off this amount.

 

DCA claim you owe £2000. £1000 is unfair charges. You get £1000 back from OC. DCA still chase you for £2000, but you've had £1000 of that back.

 

Complex!

 

 

 

Very complex!! I have similar with LTSB! I have an outstanding loan of just over £5,000. I made a claim for mis-sold PPI/charges on that account. My refund was £5,000+ but DCA are still chasing me for original £5,000.

 

As 100% of the original balance was made up of mis-sold PPI and charges, surely I didn't really owe it in the first place! Stay with me!! And I'm still being chased for the full amount.

 

I gave up months ago trying to understand the full implications, so have just offered to pay the DCA £1/month - sounds realistic and sustainable to me given that it's just a credit debt.

 

BTW, I originally refused LTSB's offer as "derisory" - verbally and in writing - but they still insisted on sending it to me. I accepted it as "part-payment" and now I'm looking for another £2-3K from them.

 

Such is life!

 

 

Impecunious!

[Hacked_Off]

Very complex!! I have similar with LTSB! I have an outstanding loan of just over £5,000. I made a claim for mis-sold PPI/charges on that account. My refund was £5,000+ but DCA are still chasing me for original £5,000.

 

As 100% of the original balance was made up of mis-sold PPI and charges, surely I didn't really owe it in the first place! Stay with me!! And I'm still being chased for the full amount.

 

I gave up months ago trying to understand the full implications, so have just offered to pay the DCA £1/month - sounds realistic and sustainable to me given that it's just a credit debt.

 

BTW, I originally refused LTSB's offer as "derisory" - verbally and in writing - but they still insisted on sending it to me. I accepted it as "part-payment" and now I'm looking for another £2-3K from them.

 

Such is life!

 

 

Impecunious!

 

Mmmmm my balance is 390 of that I reckon about 200 is charged and ppi could be more though. Surely you could argue with the dca once a refund has been obtained x amount had been refunded leaving x amount to pay and make an offer of payment. Given that the dcas are always desperate to get you to pay are they likely to say no?

 

I'll get that sar off tomorrow

[rdm2006]

Lets say you have a loan of £400, 200 in your hand and 200 to pay off charges. You dont pay on this so it is sold on to a dca. you then find that the charges were unlawful and claim them back the bank pay you £200.00 - you have now had the full £400 in your hand so the balance owing is the full £400.

 

You cant have the refund and have it deducted from the loan it is one or the other.

 

Would you have had a £400 loan in the first place since you only needed £200???? that is a whole different issue

 

just my opinion

[LostAtSea]

But surely, after the alleged debt has been sold/assigned, whatever transpires between the OC and your self, regarding PPI/charges etc, is confidential and subject to data protection?

[panther12]

The new owners of the debt will have purchased it from the OC for probably pennies in the £. Obviously they will want you to pay the full whack of the original balance but hold out and they will be offering huge discounts and still make a profit. It’s an interesting one as if the debt was made up entirely of charges which you have claimed back from the OC, it seems wrong for a 3rd party dca to make a profit on the back of the debt as if it wasn’t for the charges there wouldn’t have been any debt to sell on.

[rdm2006]

My opinion was based purely on an accounting point of view.

 

would you have had that much debt if it wasnt for charges? - NO

 

Should you pay the **** bags the full amount? --- only you can decide....

[Hacked_Off]

But surely the OC is at fault selling on a debt knowing full well it's riddled with charges and mis sold ppi!! That would be an issue between OC and third party surely they've sold a debt on under false pretences. Mmmmm interesting.

 

Sar sent to OC anyway I'll be interested to see what both come back with.

[Hacked_Off]

But surely the OC is at fault selling on a debt knowing full well it's riddled with charges and mis sold ppi!! That would be an issue between OC and third party surely they've sold a debt on under false pretences. Mmmmm interesting.

 

Sar sent to OC anyway I'll be interested to see what both come back with.

[Hacked_Off]

But surely the OC is at fault selling on a debt knowing full well it's riddled with charges and mis sold ppi!! That would be an issue between OC and third party surely they've sold a debt on under false pretences. Mmmmm interesting.

 

Sar sent to OC anyway I'll be interested to see what both come back with.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

A debt can be sold at any time defaulted or not charges and PPI

included.

The ICO guidance says if a debt consists of charges without which

the debt would not have been defaulted no defaulted be recorded,

challenging in this way may get a default removed.

[Hacked_Off]

Can't find my thread do posting here

 

Had a letter from scotcall re the barclaysharks/lowlife alleged debt

 

Doorstep collection notice

 

Basically pay now or were coming to you house.

 

Am I right in thinking they should not be collecting when waiting a sar reply?

[rdm2006]

No.

 

They should not be collecting whilst the account is in dispute.

 

They can not send a collector without your prior agreement (OFT REGS)

 

Doorstep Collectors Letter

[Hacked_Off]

Ah so I should report to the oft?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

There is nothing to stop them attempting to collect when

the debtor is waiting for a SAR even when waiting for a CCA

request they can attempt to collect but cannot enforce in court.

The subtle difference is between collction activity. attempting

to collect is NOT enforcement.

[Bang!]

The inability of a DCA to receive payment of PPI/charges from a bank for debts/alleged debts they bought, makes for an interesting situation, especially in Scotland.

 

Once a debt/alleged debt becomes time barred five years after the last payment. Then the debtor/alleged debtor could then seek return of charges/PPI, and no one would own an enforceable debt to attempt to chase for the repayment.

 

It obviously applies elsewhere too - but to claim there are only six years of records in a five year jurisdiction, makes one year very difficult to deny/set off.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

5 years only in Scotland when the debt is not only SB but completely

extinguished 6 year in England an Wales and the debt still exists.

[Bang!]

Yes - I could have made the "Scotland" bit in the first paragraph clearer.

 

But can you see what I mean - effectively when the banks are claiming they only have six years of records, but can only pursue for 5 years.

 

So it looks like this could mean repayment for Scottish PPI/charges five years after the last date of payment (etc) could result in a repayment that could not be set off against a debt as it was extinguished.

 

Does anyone agree/disagree?