Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Speaking of the reformatory boys, here they are with all of their supporters, some of whom traveled with them from miles away, all carefully crammed together and photographed to look like there were more than about 80 .. rather like Farages last rally with even fewer people crammed around what looked like an ice cream van or mobile tea bar ... Although a number in the crowd apparently thought they were at a vintage car rally as they appeared to be chanting 'crank-her'. A vintage Bentley must be out of view.   Is this all there is? Its less than the Tory candidate. - shut up and smile while they get a camera angle that looks better
    • in order for us to help you we require the following information:- Which Court have you received the claim from ? Canterbury If possible please scan redact and upload a full page copy of page 1 of the claim form. ( Name of the Claimant ? Moneybarn No 1   How many defendant's  joint or self ? One Date of issue – top right hand corner of the claim form – this in order to establish the time line you need to adhere to. 29/05/24 Acknowledged by 14/06/24  Defence by 29/06/24  Particulars of Claim PARTICULARS OF CLAIM   1.  By a Conditional Sale Agreement in writing made on 25th August 2022. Between the Claimant and Defendant, the Claimant let to the Defendant on Conditional Sale. A Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi (200 P S) 4x4 Wildtrack  Double Cab Pickup 3200cc (Sep.2015) Registration No, ******* Chassis number ***************** (“The Vehicle”).  A copy of the agreement is attached   2.  The price of the goods was £15,995.00.  The Initial Rental was £8500.00.  The total charge for credit was £3575.;17 And the balance of £11,070.17 was payable by 59 equal consecutive monthly instalments of £187 63. payable on the 25th of each month.   3.  The following were expressed conditions of the set agreement,   Clause 8: Our Right to End this Agreement  8.1   Subject to sending you the notice as required by law, any of the following events will entitle us to end this Agreement: 8.1.2  You fail to pay the advance payment (if any) or any of the payments as specified on the front page of this agreement or any other sum payable under this Agreement. 8.1.3 If any of the information you have given us before entering into this Agreement or during the term of this Agreement was false 8.1.4 We consider, acting reasonably, that the goods may be in jeopardy or that our rights in the goods may otherwise be prejudiced. 8.1.5 If you die 8.1.6 If a bankruptcy petition is presented against you; if you petition for your own bankruptcy, or make a live arrangement with your creditors or call a meeting of them. 8. 1.7 If in Scotland, you become insolvent or sequestration or a receiver, judicial factor or trustee to be appointed over any of your estate, or effects or suffer an arrestment, charge attachment or other diligence to be issued or levied on any of your estate or effects or suffer any exercise, or threatened exercise of landlords hype hypothec 8.1.8 If you are a partnership, you are dissolved 8.1.9 If the goods are destroyed, lost, stolen and/or treated by the insurer as a total loss in response to an insurance claim. 8.1.10 If we reasonably believe any payment made to us in respect of this Agreement is a proceed of crime. 8.1.11 If steps are taken by us to terminate any other agreement which you have entered into with us.   Clause 9.  Effect of Us Terminating Agreement   9.1 If this Agreement terminates under clause 8 the following will apply 9.1.1 Subject to the rights given to you by law, you will no longer be entitled to possession of the goods and must return them to us to an address as we may reasonably specify, (removing or commencing the removal of any cherished plates) together with a V5 registration certificate, both sets of keys and a service record book. If you are unable or unwilling to return the goods to us then we shall collect the goods and we'll charge you in accordance with clause 10.3 9.1.2 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you for all payments and all other sums do under this agreement at the date of termination 9.1.3 We will sell the goods or public sale at the earliest opportunity once the goods are in a reasonable condition which includes a return of the items listed in clause 7.1.4 9.1.4 We will be entitled to immediate payment from you of the rest of the Total Amount Payable under this agreement less: ( a) A rebate for early settlement ias required by law which will be calculated and notified to you at the time of payment (b) The proceeds of sale of the goods (if any) after deduction of all costs associated with finding you and/or the goods, recovery, refurbishment and repair. Insurance, storage, sale, agents fees, cherished plate removal, replacement keys, costs associated with obtaining service history for the goods and in relation to obtaining a duplicate V5 registration certificate   4, The following are particulars required by Civil Procedure Rules. Rule 7.9 as set out in 7.1 and 7.2 of the associated Practice Direction entitled Hire Purchase Claims:-   a)     The agreement is dated 25 August 2022. And is between Moneybarn No1 Limited  and xxxxxxxxx under agreement number 756050. b)    The claimant was one of the original parties to the agreement. c)    The agreement is regulated under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. d)    The goods claimed Ford Ranger 3.2 TDCi ( 200 PS) 4x4 Wildtrack Double Cab Pickup 3200 cc (Sep2015} Registration No ^^^^^^^ Chassis number ***************** e)     Thw total price of the goods £19570 f)     The paid up sum £1206 5 g)    The unpaid balance of the total price £7505 (to include charges) h)    A default notice was sent to the defendant on 20th February 2024 by Firrst class post i)      The date when the right to demand delivery of the goods accrued 14 March 2024 j)      The amount if any claimed as an alternative to delivery of the goods 7505 22 include charges ]= 5.  A the date of service of the notice the instalments were £562.89 in arrears. 6. By reason of the Termination of the Agreement by the notice, defendant became liable to pay the sum of £7502 7. The date of maturity the agreement is 24th August 2027. 8. Further or  alternative by reasons of  the Defendant breaches of the agreement by failing to pay the said instalments, the Defendant evinced an intention no longer to be bound by the Agreement and repudiated it by the said Notice the claimant accepted that repudiation 9. By reason of such repudiation the claimant has suffered loss and damage.   Total amount payable £19570 Less sum paid or in arrears by the date of repudiation £12064 97 Balance £7505 (to include charges.) ( The claimant will give credit if necessary for the value of the vehicle if recovered.)  The claimant therefore claims 1.    An order for delivery up of the vehicle 2.    The MoneyClaim to be adjourned generally with liberty to restore,  Upon restoration of the MoneyClaim following return or loss of the vehicle. the Claimant will ensure the pre action protocol for debt claims is followed. 3.    Pursuant to s 90 (1)  of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. An order that the Claimant and/or its agents may enter any premises in which the vehicle is situated in order to recover the vehicle should it not be returned by the Defendant 4.    further or alternatively damages 5.    costs.   Statement of truth The Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. The Claimant understands that the proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes or causes to be made a false statement in the document for verified by statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. I am duly Authorised by the Claimant to sign these Particulars of Claim signed Dated 17th of April 2024   What is the total value of the claim? 7502   Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No   Never heard of this   Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No   Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? n/a Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? No   When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After  Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? In a garage  Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes  Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Original Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? n/a   Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? They said sent but nor received   Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? None seen   Why did you cease payments? Still Paying,   What was the date of your last payment? Yesterday  31st May 2024   Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No   Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes on 12 Feb 2024   What you need to do now.   Can't scan, will do via another means as you cant have jpg
    • Now that is an interesting article which adds afew perspective that I hadn't thought significant - but on reflection of the perspectives offered ... Now Starmer is no Blair, however 'blairite he may be perceived, but the Tories aren't tories and aren't even remotely liberal   The fast 'unannounced and unexpected election call from sunack may well be explained by the opinion linked that he hoped reform would be unprepared and effectively call a chunk of Farages largely empty bluster - making him look even more of a prat, leave scope for attacks on shabby reform candidates and mimimise core vote losses to reform - while throwing the 'middle ground' (relative) tories TO THE DOGS - and with the added bonus of likely pacifying his missu' desire to jogg off to sunny cal tout suite somewhat   thumb in the air - I expect about 140ish tory seats, but can hope for under a hundred Reform - got to admit the outside possibility of 1, maybe 2 seats with about 8% of the vote - but unlikely. I think projections of over 10% of the vote for reform is nudged and paid for speculation - but possible with the expected massive drives from Russian, Chinese and far right social media bot and troll prods targeting the gullible.
    • Commentary June 2024 WWW.ELECTORALCALCULUS.CO.UK Interesting article about just how bad it could be for the Tories.  Also Tories could be hoping on Reform not having candidates in many seats, as they were not ready.  
    • Even a Piers Morgan is an improvement and a gutless Farage Piers Morgan calls for second Brexit referendum WWW.THELONDONECONOMIC.COM Piers Morgan and Nigel Farage have faced off over Brexit and a second referendum in a heated reunion on BBC Question Time.   “Why don’t we have another referendum about Brexit?” he questioned. “I seem to remember when 2016 came around we were told there was going to be control of our borders and it was going to be economically beneficial to this country. And eight years later we have lost complete control of our borders… and economically it seems to have been a wilful act of self-harm.”   ... Piers missed off : after all somebody said a 48/52 decision would be "unfinished business" by a long way - was that person just bul lying (again)  
  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Egg mrs p card - now Marlin


phatram
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3517 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Mrs P was one of the 160000 that were lucky enough to have their Egg account wrongly closed many moons ago. Can anyone remember when this happened?

 

This was then taken over by Barclaycard and now is with Marlin. Seen a few threads with differing opinions of what to do, can someone please give firm correct advice as to what to do. I'm sure a lot of people would appreciate this.

 

Many thanks

 

Mr P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Phatam.

 

My only advice is not to poke and also be very very aware Marlin are not your run of the mill DCA. Underestimate them at your peril. They are up there at the top of the dangerous league.

 

Make them jump through hoops, make them comply with lawful requests, challenge and make yourself a right royal pain in the neck for sure but I would be reacting not proacting.

 

They are on a cycle with this lot. You all getting the same letters. The first threats went out this week after your i/e request 2 weeks ago. Before that was the phising letters. If you in dispute already let em know, if you aint asked for your CCA ask for it now. Anything to get you removed from the cycle you on. The wont pays and unengaged are on a route to a courtroom. This is what this DCA does.

 

What was the conclusion for these wrongly terminated accounts back then? Did they become UE because of the termination? If so how sure were people that this was correct. Any court success? If so heres your dispute.

 

Many seem to think there will be no CCA's on these. Sadly some are in for a rude shock as Canada Square are finding some and yes they are fully enforceable.

 

I know as just got one 3 weeks back.

Edited by ken100464
Link to post
Share on other sites

The account was terminated by Egg so is it then "in dispute" or not? Mrs has never had a Barclays account so is it then "in dispute" or not? and if it wasn't should it be now disputed for the above reasons. I think ! :???:

 

Confused as to what to do for the best.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Found a few things now, will post them if it helps.

 

Thank you for your letter dated 24/08/2009.

I would be grateful if, as Egg’s appointed agent, you would indicate to me the relevant section of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which provides Egg with legal entitlement to terminate my Egg credit agreement with effect from 6th March 2008 merely by providing me with written notification of Egg's decision to terminate the contractual agreement between Egg and myself.

 

In the event that the dispute between Moorcroft Debt Recovery,Midaslegalservices, Egg Banking and myself is put before a court for adjudication, I will draw the court’s attention to the following points.

 

Both you and your clients, Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited and Egg Banking, although fully aware that the debt is disputed, have continued collection activity in breach of paragraph 2.8k. of the OFT Debt Collection Guidance.

 

I consider that you have communicated with me in a manner which presents information in such a way that it creates a false or misleading impression and exploits my lack of knowledge, for example my lack of knowledge of the law in relation to your own. Specifically, I am referring to your statement that failure to contact Moorcroft Debt Recovery Ltd by a specific date may result in the issue of legal proceedings without further notice. I consider that amounts to unfair business practice, psychological harassment and misrepresentation of the correct legal position within the terms of paragraphs 2.2b, 2.3, 2.6f, 2.10a and 2.10b of the OFT Debt collection Guidance.

 

I consider that the manner in which you and your client have exercised their rights under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 amount to an unfair relationship within the terms of S140 of the Act, and I will request the court to make an appropriate Order under S140.

 

I will also draw the court’s attention to the manner in which Midaslegalservices has acted in connection with the dispute between Moorcroft Debt recovery Limited, Midaslegalservices, Egg Banking solicitors and myself, particularly in relation to,

 

The Consumer Credit Act 1974,

 

The Data Protection Act 1998,

 

The Office of Fair Trading Guidance on Debt Collection and Unfair Business Practices (Updated December 2006),

 

The Solicitors’ Code of Conduct 2007,

 

The pre-action protocols which have been approved by the Head of Civil Justice,

 

The Credit Services Association Code Of Practice.

 

I am confident that Midaslegalservices will, as I will, provide to the court full records of the matters to which I have referred, including copies of all correspondence relating to this dispute.

 

 

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I say if you have a unresolved dispute I would dust it off see if its still fit for purpose and if so notify Marlin that it is unresolved.

 

What I certainly wouldnt be doing is thinking it was won 3/4 years ago, that the dispute is still fit for purpose if things have changed or ignoring Marlin.

 

Think I would be revisiting the reasons why this termination got Egg into trouble?. What made the money written off? If indeed it did. Or was it internet chatter and lack of moral fibre from the bank. Get the threads read. Was it a court defeat? Be critical was it internet warriors who have defeated a demoralised bank that was closing down? Whats the case law. How did they do it. But be critical as this isnt Egg you are fighting. Its a DCA that prides itself on using litigation.

 

The Barclaycard not being the account is nothing more than a delaying tactic sorry to say. Seen someone try that and have now got a reply from BC via Marlin saying Egg card xxxxxxxxxxx when sold to BC on XXXXXXXXXXX under assignment xxxxxxx was given BC account number xxxxxxxxxx. This account was then sold to Marlin under assigment on the xxxxxxxxx.

 

And by sending the prove it letter they are one letter further forward than the ones who ignored the phising letter. Why because Marlin have the active contact. This isnt random its a well thought out strategy.

 

Think in court you would be hard pressed to argue this isnt one and the same account. Sounds good to us this side the fence but to a judge will be laughable defence. A delay maybe but not much more. The pumps to the Titanic if you will. It will buy you time not much else.

 

They are actively after the wont pays and unengaged debtors

Link to post
Share on other sites

Heres another one,

Dear Bryan Carter Solicitors

 

 

Thank you for your letter dated 18/03/2010.

As the solicitors acting for Fredrickson International Ltd you will be aware that the credit card agreement between Egg and myself is governed by the Consumer Credit Act 1974, therefore I would be grateful if you would indicate to me the relevant section of the Act which provides Egg with legal entitlement to terminate my Egg agreement with effect from 6th March 2008.

1a.

In the course of preparing a county court claim on behalf of your client, Fredrickson International Ltd , you will have become aware that the debt claimed by your client is disputed by me.

2.

My reasons for disputing the debt, as both you and your client will be aware, are set out in my previous letters to Egg and Fredrickson International Ltd. As you know, paragraph 2.8 k. of the Office of Fair Trading debt collection Guidance of July 2003, updated in December 2006, makes it clear that collection activity must cease whilst investigating a disputed debt. I look forward to the results of your investigation.

3.

In the event that the dispute between Egg Banking plc, Fredrickson International Ltd, Bryan Carter Solictors and myself is put before a court for adjudication, I will draw the court’s attention to the following points.

3a

Both you and your client, Fredrickson International Ltd, although fully aware that the debt is disputed, have continued collection activity in breach of Section 2.8k. of the OFT Debt Collection Guidance.

3b.

Both you and your client, Fredrickson International Ltd , although fully aware that the debt is disputed, have accepted assignment of the disputed account. You will be aware that this is in breach of Sections 2.6c and 2.8f of the OFT Debt Collection Guidance, and also in breach of the Data Protection Act 1998.

4.

I also consider your client’s actions amount to psychological harassment within the terms of section 2.6h. of the OFT Guidelines, in that your client has ignored and disregarded the fact that I have reasonably queried and disputed the debt.

5.

I will also draw the attention of the court to the manner in which both you and your client, Fredrickson International Ltd have acted in respect of the dispute between Egg Banking and myself, particularly in relation to,

The Consumer Credit Act 1974,

The Data Protection Act 1998,

The Protection from Harrassment Act

The Office of Fair Trading Guidance on Debt Collection and Unfair Business Practices (Updated December 2006),

The Solicitors’ Code of Conduct 2007,

The Credit Services Association Code Of Practice.

I consider that your conduct in the dispute between Egg Banking and myself amounts to an unfair relationship in terms of section 140 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 as amended by the Consumer Credit Act 2006, and I will request the court to make an appropriate Order under S140 of the Act.

6.

I am confident that Egg Banking , Fredrickson International Ltd and Bryan Carter Solicitors will, as I will, provide to the court full records of the matters to which I have referred, including copies of my letters.

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

I acknowledge no debt to your company.

Dear Sir,

Thank you for your letter dated 04/06/09.

May I remind you that I have no account with Egg or yourselves. The account was unlawfully terminated by Egg over a year ago.

The CCA 1974 clearly states the following,

87.--(1) Service of a notice on the debtor or hirer in accordance with section 88 (a default notice) is necessary before the creditor or owner can become entitled, by reason of any breach by the debtor or hirer of a regulated agreement,--

(a) to terminate the agreement, or

(b) to demand earlier payment of any sum...

 

88.--(1) The default notice must be in the prescribed form and specify--

(a) the nature of the alleged breach;

As the account was not in default, Egg acted unlawfully and are aware of this, and should not have processed my data with a third party. I have of course reported this to the I.C.O, and the F.O.S who are now investigating my complaint.

As Egg has unlawfully terminated my account they are in breach of contract and I intend to claim damages for this and for damage to my creditworthiness by Egg's action. I refer to the authority of Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society - [1996] 4 All ER 119

I will not be contacting you by telephone to discuss this. Until some correspondence regarding resolution is forthcoming from Egg the situation remains unchanged and they are constrained as to what enforcement and collection activities they may pursue, and I am not obliged to offer payments to the alleged account.

Yours faithfully,

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have just trawled through that great big thread which seemingly this is relying on.

 

My problem with it is that many because they were in debt wanted to believe it was all done unlawfully.

 

But the reality is no one is sure and because Egg didnt take anyone on this has become an internet myth. Its become fact. But like I said above that was then this is now and suspect you got an adversary who will if its possible take someone to test the water.The thread was locked as it was going round in circles.

 

I cant predict how Marlin will react but would suspect they know some of the horrors in the portfolio. They are obviously segmentating. Your defense might be the clincher but like approved limits and the like things that seemingly give you a get out of jail card a few years back dont now.

 

Its the argument is your dispute fit for purpose. Do you twist or stick. Perhaps they are looking via segmentation for a debtor who wont pay but can who has one of these accounts. Get a sympathetic hang em high judge and there is the case law fecking everyone up.

 

For me no one knew back then if this was clear cut. The only difference is another 2 years has passed with no activity on the account.

 

And this is what I mean by caution. If they are looking for a wont but can pay terminated disputed account by admiting your dispute you give them exactly what they want. But by not advising them of the dispute you are doing your position harm too.

 

For me I really would be hanging back not showing yourself up to the gunsights and allow another herd member all the glory until you are in position that you really have to twist or stick. And only you know that point.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I sent Marlins a 'Prove it' letter a few weeks back after receiving their initial letter claiming my 'Barclaycard' (Egg) account had been assigned to them. This (attached) is their reply I have received today...

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]42633[/ATTACH]

 

The second last paragraph is very interesting seeing as I have never had / signed an application with Barclaycard. I am assuming they mean the Egg online agreement. If so this will tell me just how much original egg documentation is still available.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think you will find they are confusing an online application from the date of the law change to one from before the law changed.

 

Yours is quite clearly from before and therefore there should be an original hard copy that was supposed to be sent out to you signed and returned?????

 

If I was a betting man your going to get a recon here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Phatram,

 

In regard to the Egg Terminations / Endings ( when not in default ) etc, as many have stated, there is no case law yet.

 

If it was unlawfull, I would expect a Judge , to rule that the Termination could not have taken place as CCA '74 would not

allow for it and the agreement was therefore still valid !!! ( as otherwise it would be an UNLAWFULL termination outside of CCA 74 ie the DN ruling ).

The said agreement should therefore logically return to the beginning of the dispute, BUT -

 

this would place the injured party where ? Harrassed unlawfully for years, threats for the recovery of sums not due, trashed credit rating, stress etc etc. That might be some

counter claim !!!

 

If the courts said it was lawfull, then even better imho.

 

Also, beware of Greeks bearing gifts.

 

trout

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 9 months later...

They are required to send a current statement of the account at least once a year.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a bit thick here, but if I haven't acknowledged anything since 2006, is this not statute barred now and if so why have they sent a statement for the first time since 2006 but not asking for payment, am I supposed to write to them and say why are you sending me this statement, don't know anything about this account ??? Help please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a bit thick here, but if I haven't acknowledged anything since 2006, is this not statute barred now and if so why have they sent a statement for the first time since 2006 but not asking for payment, am I supposed to write to them and say why are you sending me this statement, don't know anything about this account ??? Help please.

 

Hi statements should be sent at least once a year it is a requirement.

 

 

For clarification please does this appear on your credit reference files?

 

 

Statute Barred on Credit cards and unsecured loans = 6 clear years with no payment and/or unequivocal written acknowledgment of the debt.

 

 

For Some secured loans/ overdrafts/ and HP accounts the limitation period MAY start from the date the account is defaulted. ( this is definite on HP accounts due to a judgement BMW Finance - v Hart, but it's a grey area on the overdrafts).

 

 

If you are sure that this SB send a letter stating that you do not acknowledge any liability for the debt.

 

 

State it is statute barred and you will not make any payment now or in the future.

 

 

This does not reset the limitation period!

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...