Arrow Global Guernsey/Drydens Claim Form received for a statute Barred Debt

[Dot1]

My wife had a Natwest Credit Card Account from around 2001- 2005. It was closed with a balance of about £3000 then sold to Arrow Global.

 

Last payment to original lender was around 2007/8. No acknowledgement or payment made to DCA at all. They wrote many letters in 2012 demanding for payment because we had made a claim for default charges.

 

We asked them to prove but they went quiet but at the same time the claim for the default charges was partly successful but Natwest decided to make that payment to Arrow Global despite my wife's protest.

 

I wrote and informed them that the dedt was statute barred but they never responded.

 

We did not hear anything and no CCA was provided when requested at the time but upon receipt of the claim form early this month, I wrote to Arrow reminding them that they were still in default of the CCA request. They wrote bck claiming that they did comply in 2012 and enclosed a copy of the application for with "T&C" which can not be read.

 

I acknowledged the Claim and also sent CPR request to Drydens for which they responded that they have passed it to their client.

 

They claim that the last payment was made in 2012. The only payment I can think of is the one from Natwest.

 

Does this reset the clock?

 

Can I use statute barred as a defense?

 

Thanks

 

Dot

[Conniff]

No it doesn't count. It is not you who acknowledged the debt by making a payment. DCAs add £1 to a lot of accounts nearing SB in the hope it will reset the clock, but it doesn't.

[Dot1]

No it doesn't count. It is not you who acknowledged the debt by making a payment. DCAs add £1 to a lot of accounts nearing SB in the hope it will reset the clock, but it doesn't.

 

Thanks Conniff,

 

In that case then I will use SB defense and will not waste time to wait for their CPR reply.

 

Thank you

 

Dot

[Dot1]

Sorry,

 

One thing I forgot to ask is if the penalty charges Claim I made to the original lender can be deemed as an acknowledgement of the debt therefore restarting the clock.

 

Any idea please?

 

Thanks

[dx100uk]

They say it was payment so if they change their story

The judge will laugh them out the door

 

If the SB defence

 

DX

[Dot1]

They say it was payment so if they change their story

The judge will laugh them out the door

 

If the SB defence

 

DX

 

Thanks dx,

 

Will file the SB defense and wait and see what they will come with next.

 

Dot

[Dot1]

Hi everyone,

 

I submitted a SB defense but when I was going through the statements last night, I discovered that there were a few payments of the same amount made between mid 2007 to late 2007. I also noticed that in 2011, the statement shows that Agency Payment was made which was deducted from the outstanding balance at the time.

 

Beginning of 2012, there were 3 entries too, 2 on the same date then another one a week later. These were entered as purchase yet at the time the Card was already suspended/cancelled. Looking at the entries in 2012, it looks to me that the charges refund which was made up of the actual Charges and interest. These two were entered on the same date as separate transactions then then after a week, the total was entered as another transaction all showing as purchases.

 

I am quite sure that the above relates to the refund made and was paid directly to the DCA.

 

As for the one in 2011 indicated as Agency Payment, I haven't got a clue. To the best of our recollections, last payment was made in late 2007. No other payment was made there after as far as we are aware.

 

In view of the above, I am not only confused but concerned. Not sure if the SB was the best defense. Any suggestions as to how to deal with this?

 

Dryden has not responded to my defense yet but I would like to be ahead just in case. Your thoughts are valued and appreciated.

 

Dot

[dx100uk]

well unless the account holder themselves made those payments

they can be discounted for the purpose of determining the SB date.

 

 

automatic or refunded stuff etc are inhouse 'bank' transactions not made by the account holder

 

 

dx

[Dot1]

well unless the account holder themselves made those payments

they can be discounted for the purpose of determining the SB date.

 

 

automatic or refunded stuff etc are inhouse 'bank' transactions not made by the account holder

 

 

dx

 

Hi Dx,

 

Thank you for that but just in case it happens that the account holder paid it then what options are there please?

It will not be SB but what will be the way forward as far as the claim is concerned.

 

Thanks

[AndyOrch]

Then you don't plead statute barred unless you are 1000% certain...as for the above....if you have not made the payments...makes no odds whats been credited to the account.Only the debtor can reset the statute of limitations.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Dot1]

Then you don't plead statute barred unless you are 1000% certain...as for the above....if you have not made the payments...makes no odds whats been credited to the account.Only the debtor can reset the statute of limitations.

 

Regards

 

Andy

 

Hi Andy,

 

Thanks for the information. So I take it that if one of the payment was made by the account holder then we have lost the case.

Or is there alternative?

 

Thanks

[AndyOrch]

Not lost the case but unable to submit a statute barred defence....a payment would be an acknowledgment...thus resetting the limitations.

[Dot1]

Not lost the case but unable to submit a statute barred defence....a payment would be an acknowledgment...thus resetting the limitations.

 

Thanks Andy,

 

I will wait for their reply. Otherwise, the defense is already submitted as SB.

Well, there is no recollection of paying any money within the last 6 years. I am not sure what yet of what to expect.

 

Thanks

 

Dot

[AndyOrch]

Well if you have not made payment ....then its statute barred.

[Dot1]

Andy,

 

What I am trying to find out is "IF" it turns out that the payment was made buy the a/c holder then does it mean that with the SB defense submitted, they will win?

 

With the SB, other issues like CCA and other issues will not be considered. Will it just be restricted to that defense only.

 

Sorry to bother you.

 

Dot

[AndyOrch]

If your defence consisted only of the statute barred standard wording then that is what your defence relies on...nothing more and will be judged on that alone.Which is only right and correct....because you cant mix a statute barred defence with a holding defence...this weakens the SB defence...and a court wont allow you to edge your bets just in case.

 

Hence I always state....before you submit a Statute Barred you must be 1000% certain that it is...because you only get one shot.

 

And your not bothering me Dot..always time for you.

 

Regards

 

Andy

[Dot1]

Thanks for clarifying that Andy. I will wait for their reply then update.

 

Dot