Surely in the first line you mean "You clearly are as simple as you sound" (i.e., cut out "not").
There's also a typo where you repeat "to a to a".
Personally in the last line I'd stop at the "Arkell v Pressdram case" so they won't have a clue what it is until they look it up (if they do)!
forget the PP debt, if PP credit is not involved, there is nothing anyone can do to you.
as for the others..
this not only applies to PDL's but any credit if you file was shot with defaults etc at time of lending
For me I don’t know how paypal can sanction that much money in one day without being held accountable in anyway as they’re not registered as a bank. I was in a Right state depositing more money I didn’t have Nor did I need as they just kept sanctioning it as I was trying to win it back.
Is that something I can find on here ? Thanks
If you are talking about it being on your file, then it is the CRA first. Then when they get back to you, the creditor.
Sort of, " my debt is over 6 years old and has been on my record all that time, this is contrary to Data Protection rules".
If you suspect that an agreement is SB, you should always make a claim to the creditor saying so. "just a little detail , not to much. "I have had no contact, and the debt was closed over six years ago."
When the creditor threatens an action to recover money, the burden of proof falls on the debtor to show that he is not SB.
However once you replay and state you are SB, if becomes incumbent on the creditor to show the debt is not SB.