my MBNA debt been through every DCA in the book - now link chasing

[sequenci 3,735]

Hello there. What constitutes as acknwoledgement is abased around the facts of the particular situation, there isn't a hard or fast rule. I would probably argue that the above would count as acknowledgement. What's important is that the other party would need to raise it as a bar to your limitations argument - are they aware of the letter?

 

best wishes,

 

Seq.

[Desperate Daniella 2,131]

Hi ncm-000,

 

I think it probably does unfortunately unless you made a statement somewhere in your letter along the lines that you didn't acknowledge the debt and were in effect only offering a repayment plan for a quiet life!

 

However, if you were led to believe that the agreement was enforceable when it wasn't you might be able to come up with some kind of argument.

 

Who was the card with?

 

Are you suddenly being chased by the DCA or a new DCA when it's been quiet for some time?

[ncm-000 101]

The Credit card was issued by MBNA and the DCA I have been sparring with since 2008 are known to read this forum so I will not name them.

 

I have never received anything from the DCA to demonstrate enforceability just around 20 threatogrammes

[Desperate Daniella 2,131]

Have you ever asked for a copy of the alleged agreement? Or checked the likelihood of its enforceability by comparing it to those from around the same date on other MBNA threads?

 

If the threats are just using words like 'may' or 'could' it doesn't sound as though they are pushing too hard. Do you know if the DCA is a debt-chaser or a debt buyer? If it's the former they won't take action on their own although they could pass it on.

[ncm-000 101]

Hello there. What constitutes as acknwoledgement is abased around the facts of the particular situation, there isn't a hard or fast rule. I would probably argue that the above would count as acknowledgement. What's important is that the other party would need to raise it as a bar to your limitations argument - are they aware of the letter?

 

best wishes,

 

Seq.

 

They reminded me of the contents of the letter after I wrote in a number of interchanges earlier this year

As I have said before many times, I do not, and never have, acknowledged any alleged debt to you or MBNA.

This is after receiving an unsolicited offer to write off the debt on health grounds, which I replied to with all relevant info.

They acknowledged my medical condition but instead of writing the debt off they asked for a nominal £1 per month

[Desperate Daniella 2,131]

I wonder why you have so many guests?

 

Hi guests!

[Desperate Daniella 2,131]

The £1 a month was to keep the debt alive in case your circumstances change and they can get more money.

 

If they were prepared to consider a write-off on medical grounds and your circumstances haven't changed, then I think they may just stick at threats as they'll know they have no realistic chance of getting huge sums from you.

[ncm-000 101]

Have you ever asked for a copy of the alleged agreement? Or checked the likelihood of its enforceability by comparing it to those from around the same date on other MBNA threads?

 

If the threats are just using words like 'may' or 'could' it doesn't sound as though they are pushing too hard. Do you know if the DCA is a debt-chaser or a debt buyer? If it's the former they won't take action on their own although they could pass it on.

 

I have never asked for any proof just stated I do not acknowledge the debt. Left it up to them to send any proof to refute the statement.

I do not believe the paperwork to be valid as it goes way back to 1995/6 time, as a similar situation has gone quiet with a different DCA after they sent some paperwork which I picked a number of holes in, also for a MBNA account of the same vintage

[ncm-000 101]

I wonder why you have so many guests?

 

Hi guests!

 

Like I said the DCA is known to LURK here.

[ncm-000 101]

The £1 a month was to keep the debt alive in case your circumstances change and they can get more money.

 

If they were prepared to consider a write-off on medical grounds and your circumstances haven't changed, then I think they may just stick at threats as they'll know they have no realistic chance of getting huge sums from you.

 

My Medical circumstances are not going to change for the better and my financial ones should improve in 4/5 years time long after SB.

I also think they will not push the matter but I would like to have the threat lifted and only replied to them regarding the medical condition after they made the offer.

[dx100uk 9,455]

8 threads on same debt merged for history of advise

 

dx

[Desperate Daniella 2,131]

Like I said the DCA is known to LURK here.

 

A lot of DCAs lurk here, but usually they flood to threads where they are mentioned in the thread title so I was curious as to why they were all on this particular thread. You seem to have an audience of 24. Mind you, it is their lunchtime .......

[Desperate Daniella 2,131]

My Medical circumstances are not going to change for the better and my financial ones should improve in 4/5 years time long after SB.

I also think they will not push the matter but I would like to have the threat lifted and only replied to them regarding the medical condition after they made the offer.

 

Unfortunately you may just have to live with the threats because they refused the complete write-off. I've scrolled up a bit and see that Fred's were involved about six months ago. Presumably you still haven't heard from them?

[dx100uk 9,455]

i'd be checking you CRA file & getting am sar off to MBNA

 

that's will tell you all the info you need

esp on the SB fronts on both cards.

 

dx

[ncm-000 101]

8 threads on same debt merged for history of advise

 

dx

 

I am a wee bit surprised that you have concatenated these threads as they refer to at least 3 different debts and 2 generic questions.

 

Have I done something to offend you DX?

[ncm-000 101]

Unfortunately you may just have to live with the threats because they refused the complete write-off. I've scrolled up a bit and see that Fred's were involved about six months ago. Presumably you still haven't heard from them?

 

Freds =different debt, they have gone dark for many months after calling their bluff and suggesting Put up or Shut up.

 

Thinking of sending a similar letter to this DCA

[ncm-000 101]

i'd be checking you CRA file & getting am sar off to MBNA

 

that's will tell you all the info you need

esp on the SB fronts on both cards.

 

dx

 

I can think of plenty of good reasons why NOT to do this and all of them have come as suggestions from this forum

[Desperate Daniella 2,131]

Freds =different debt, they have gone dark for many months after calling their bluff and suggesting Put up or Shut up.

 

Thinking of sending a similar letter to this DCA

 

Sorry, I was confused.

 

You could certainly send a similar letter to this DCA.

[ncm-000 101]

Sorry, I was confused.

 

You could certainly send a similar letter to this DCA.

 

 

I can understand your confusion. I await a reply from DX regarding the concatenation of these threads

 

As to the letter I am contemplating which type of letter to send.

 

Short pithy anglo saxon equivalent of go away with vigour.

A bit longer pointing out their foolishness in pursuing this matter

Extremely insulting and sarcastic regarding the IQ and linage of the companies owners and to some extent the employees.

A long an detailed letter explaining in excruciating detail why they will be on a hiding to nothing as win or lose they will get nothing but a big bill.

And last but not least a simple 'Put up or Shut up' - go away or see you in court.

 

I have used all of the above with varying degrees of success.

[BRIGADIER2JCS 3,029]

Hello there. What constitutes as acknwoledgement is abased around the facts of the particular situation, there isn't a hard or fast rule. I would probably argue that the above would count as acknowledgement. What's important is that the other party would need to raise it as a bar to your limitations argument - are they aware of the letter?

 

best wishes,

 

Seq.

 

Definition of Acknowledgment of a debt (appendix B) Section B7.: OFT Guidance on Debt Collection 2003/2006 updated Nov. 2012. The updates should be read in conjunction with the 2003/2006 document.

 

A relevant acknowledgment will normally be made by performance of the debtor (or his representative. For example, by making pay7ments or by making an unequivocal written admission clearly acknowledging that the obligation still subsists.

 

As to what constitutes 'contact' with a debtor, General Debt Collection Letters are not considered relevant contact with a debtor. Contact that is relevant is contained in B6.

 

A relevant claim, will normally take the form of the creditor raising an action for payment in court, simply sending a default notice or a letter demanding payment will not constitute a relevant claim. (claim can be taken as also mean relevant contact with a debtor).

[dx100uk 9,455]

I can think of plenty of good reasons why NOT to do this and all of them have come as suggestions from this forum

 

you'll be whistling in the wind forever till you get facts not supposition on all three of the cards.

 

and know you certainly done offend me

 

just a wee bit diff to untangle what debt you are going on about sometimes dear boy.

 

bout time you stopped all letter tennis on all 3

that'll sort the lot.

 

dx

[ncm-000 101]

Definition of Acknowledgment of a debt (appendix B) Section B7.: OFT Guidance on Debt Collection 2003/2006 updated Nov. 2012. The updates should be read in conjunction with the 2003/2006 document.

 

A relevant acknowledgment will normally be made by performance of the debtor (or his representative. For example, by making pay7ments or by making an unequivocal written admission clearly acknowledging that the obligation still subsists.

 

As to what constitutes 'contact' with a debtor, General Debt Collection Letters are not considered relevant contact with a debtor. Contact that is relevant is contained in B6.

 

A relevant claim, will normally take the form of the creditor raising an action for payment in court, simply sending a default notice or a letter demanding payment will not constitute a relevant claim. (claim can be taken as also mean relevant contact with a debtor).

 

Not being a Lawyer nor having legal training please can you confirm that the above means that as we (myself and the DCA) who have only played letter tennis and the only words written by me that could possibly be construed to be such an admission are as detailed in an earlier reply to this thread, this does not fall within the meaning of the above.

 

Hence no acknowledgement.

[ncm-000 101]

you'll be whistling in the wind forever till you get facts not supposition on all three of the cards.

 

and know you certainly done offend me

 

just a wee bit diff to untangle what debt you are going on about sometimes dear boy.

 

bout time you stopped all letter tennis on all 3

that'll sort the lot.

 

dx

 

I am trying to play these DCAs out to SB as although, from previous advice (both to me and others) I have concluded they do not have sufficient to go to court.

 

However, to be on the safe side I have not simply ignored them, but tried to keep up a dialogue.

 

I am aware that one cannot predict the outcome of court action so although I am reasonably certain of the outcome, I would rather not test it in court unless I absolutely need to.

[dx100uk 9,455]

sounds reasonable

 

though AK are the only ones that try on mbna usually

 

dx

[ncm-000 101]

sounds reasonable

 

though AK are the only ones that try on mbna usually

 

dx

 

I exchanged a couple of letters with them - they disappeared over 18 months ago, perhaps they did not like something I said.

e.g. "I am at a loss to decide if you are stupid, incompetent or just illiterate! "