Thames Credit

[Tezcatlipoca]

Hi All,

 

I've recently been contacted - quite of the blue - by this company, who are claiming I owe them approx. £560.

 

I gave them call to find out more, and was told that this apparantly relates to a bank account that was closed in 1994, and that the last activity on that account was in that year.

 

Now in the dark recesses of my memory, I do recall having an account with this particular bank around that time, but I moved abroad in the mid-90s and stopped using the UK banking system altogether. I moved back to the UK in early 2001, did the usual opening of bank accounts, and have been lviing and working - debt free I might add - in this country since then. I've never taken out credit or had any loans.

 

So now this letter has arrived, demanding I pay up. What I honestly don't recall is if any money really was owing. I might have had an overdraft, I might not, I really don't remember.

 

I disputed the debt, and wrote a letter to them a few days ago, the template of which I acquired online (not from this site, unfortunately).

The template made reference to the relevant sections of the Credit Consumer Act 1974 as yours does, but made no mention of any fee I had to pay to demand the details of this debt. Consequently, I'm concerned that they now don't need to respond to my letter as it's somehow not valid without the fee.

 

So, I'm a little confused as to where I stand. I acknowledge that I had a bank account around 1994, and that I had one with the bank they mention. I'm certainly not going to try to avoid a debt if I have one, but I really do not remember if I owed this bank anything when I moved. I'm sure these people intend to hound me relentless, so where do I stand?

[gizmo111]

This is statute barred so even if you do owe it - which you don't seem to think you do they cannot enforce it.

It is likley to be made up of charges anyway so I would send this letter and forget it.

[Tezcatlipoca]

Thankyou for a speedy reply, gizmo111. I'm sorry to ask what must seem like a stupid question (this situation is rather new to me), but should I send that letter right away, or should I wait for any response from the letter that's just gone and requests all the details under the CCA 1974?

[gizmo111]

Send it straight away - with proof of posting - recorded or special deliverly or just a stamped cert of posting from the post office.

[Tezcatlipoca]

Thank you!

[Tezcatlipoca]

Right, round 2, and I'd still hugely appreciate advice. I sent the letter suggested by gizmo111 by recorded delivery. This morning I received this reply (this is a direct quote from the letter, take note of that; it's important):

 

"Dear Sir,

 

We refer to your recorded delivery letter dated 24th August 2007.

We have consulted [the bank in question] regarding the account. They have advised the last correspondence sent to you was in February 2003, and therefore the account is not statute barred.

 

Upon receipt of this letter, you must contact us on the below telephone number to discuss repayment options.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

Thames Credit"

Now, is it just me, or does the phrase "the last correspondence sent to you was in February 2003" also translate as "we haven't a leg to stand on, but are going to take a chance that you don't understand English well enough to be able to tell the difference between contacting, and being contacted."?

 

I don't recall this supposed contact in the slightest, so I'm guessing that - if it is true - they're saying a letter was dispatched around that time, which I've not only never responded to, but certainly never received.

 

What I want now is some advice. My first instinct is to write back and advise them that I can actually read English, that cheap tricks at semantics aren't going to work, and that - furthermore - I'd be appreciative if they'd go away and have intercourse with themselves.

On reflection, that might not be a good idea, so my second instinct is to write back thanking them for letting me know when the creditor has apparantly tried to contact me, but pointing out that they require proof I have contacted them or made a payment (neither of which I've done), and that I still do not consider any monies to be owed.

 

But then, is it better to acknowledge that this letter confirms they have nothing to go on, and just ignore it?

 

What should I do?

[make them aktiv runners]

They have advised the last correspondence sent to you was in February 2003, and therefore the account is not statute barred.

Ask for their complaints procedure. You can then ask them to clarify exactly where the Limitation Act states contact to you. Last step to a great complaint to the FOS - bet they are regretting that statement already.

[Valdez is Coming]

Hi Tezcat......1st Credit have their own interpretation of (a) the law and (b) acceptable business practices - both of which defy reason & belief. How they are still in business, l don't know.

 

Search the forum and you will find many references to their, shall we say, unorthodox methods.

 

You have nothing to worry about on this. As previously mentioned, any 'debt' is statute barred now.

 

If you ignore them, they will go away and pester someone else.

They are pond-life of the very lowest level.

 

Regards.................Valdez

[Tezcatlipoca]

Thanks to both of you for your advice, but I'm still not sure what to do. Having slept on it, my instinct now is to basically just ignore them, but at the same time I - obviously - want this nonsense dealt with.

[djdave]

As you'll be aware, the Statute Barred clock is reset only if you make a payment or acknowledge the debt in writing.

 

A creditor can contact you all they want, that doesn't make any difference. Thames are bluffing, in my opinion, and I agree that you should instigate their complaints procedure.

[Tezcatlipoca]

Thanks. That's made my mind up to make a complaint (not, I'd guess, the first they've ever had to deal with!).

 

With regards to said complaint, and to what 'make them aktiv runners' said about the Limitation Act, is there a letter template for this kind of contact? I'm obviously happy to write something myself, but want to make sure that any contact I send them fully protects me where the law is concerned.

[Curlyben]

Actually Dave the Statute Barred clock can NEVER be reset.

Once barred it is permanently barred.

 

This is a classic for Thames.

So you had an account in 94 and stopped using it then.

You left the country and returned in 2001, OK so there's you Statute Barred straight off.

This letter in 2003, whether or not it exists, doesn't matter at all as the debt is BARRED anyway.

 

As ever Thames are urinating in the wind.

 

Try this for good measure.

 

Thank you for your letter of DATE, the contents of which have been noted.

 

I refer to my letter of DATE where I told you that this alleged debt is Barred under Statute, a copy of which I have included for your perusal and ease of reference.

Now your contention is contrary to this.

That being the case I would request that you substantiate your claims that this alleged debt is indeed enforceable and not barred by statute.

I am familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance.

Which states that it unfair to mislead debtors as to their rights and obligations, by falsely stating or implying that the debt is still legally recoverable and continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred.

This could amount to harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 and if your demands continue I will be reporting this matter to the relevant authorities.

 

I would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my liability for the debt in question.

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in writing

 

 

Yours faithfully,

[dannyboy660]

If you follow their complaints procedure you will more than likely hit a brick wall, after a long pointless wait. They can not take you to court to recover any debt..... but there is nothing in the law which prevents them from trying to get you to pay.

 

The letter quoted in #6 makes no reference to court actions etc, and they very clearly state the correspondence was sent to you. There is no mention of acknowledgement or liability, and it's just a cleverly worded 'invitation' to pay. CB's letter should be enough to do the trick, rather than getting bogged down in a complaint.

 

You could safely and legally ignore them, and I'm quite surprised they would even have the nerve to try it on with the 'smoking mirror'.

[Tezcatlipoca]

and I'm quite surprised they would even have the nerve to try it on with the 'smoking mirror'.

I confess I have a mild urge to break out my smoking mirror and rain destruction down upon their puny, mortal heads...

 

Thank you to everyone who has posted advice here. It goes without saying that I'm extremely grateful resources like this website exist.

[Curlyben]

Tez, if you like us that much why not click the scales

 

We like to be tickled.

[djdave]

Actually Dave the Statute Barred clock can NEVER be reset.

Once barred it is permanently barred.

Correct, but I meant if the 6 years wasn't yet up then a payment would restart it.

[ODC]

Just for the sheer hell of it write to Thames and DEMAND a copy of their complaints procedure. If they mess about or fail to satisfy you then you can make a complaint to the FOS who will charge Thames £ 400 to investigate your complaint. Thats what I call a RESULT!!!!!

Hit Thames in the pocket thats the only way to deal with shysters like them.

 

I too got a letter from them regarding an old debt and telling me how clever they were tracking me down (Ive lived here for 20 yrs) and that I better cough up the money. No mention of who its supposededly owed to or anything like that. A bunch of Our Soles

[Tezcatlipoca]

Round 3. I sent this letter - recorded delivery on the 6th of September:

 

Dear Sir,

 

Thank you for your letter of the 31st August, the contents of which have been noted.

 

I refer you to my letter of 24th August, in which your position was clearly described. To reiterate, you were informed that this alleged debt is Barred under Statute in accordance with Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980. I have included a copy of this original correspondence for your perusal and ease of reference.

 

As your letter contests that this is the case, it is now your legal obligation to substantiate your claims and to prove that this alleged debt is indeed enforceable and not barred by statute.

You should be aware that I am a member of the CAG (Consumer Action Group), and fully familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance, which states that it is unfair to mislead debtors as to their rights and obligations by falsely stating or implying that the debt is still legally recoverable and continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred.

 

You should also be aware that if you are unable to substantiate your claims then your behaviour will be considered harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and may result in my choosing to pursue action against you.

As was stated in my last letter, any attempt to contact me by telephone regarding an alleged debt is an offence under section 127 of the Telecommunications Act 2003.

 

In addition, I hereby demand that you now supply me with information regarding your complaints procedure. Failure to comply will result in the complaint being escalated to the FOS (Financial Ombudsman Service), who will charge you for investigating my complaint.

Finally, I expect no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide clear evidence as to my liability for the debt in question, or your written confirmation that this matter is now closed.

 

Yours faithfully,

This morning, I get this:

 

Dear Sir,

 

We write in reply to your recorded delivery letter dated 6th September 2007

 

As requested, please enclosed find a copy of our complaint procedure [a leaflet was enclosed with this letter - Tez].

 

We have requested a copy of the application form along with copy statements for the above referenced account and ask you to be patient whilst this is being collated.

 

Once this information has been received we will contact you without delay.

 

Yours faithfully,

Now is it just me smelling an almighty rat here? They mention asking for the 'application form'. Would this be the application form when the bank account was opened? In 1994? Er...still statute barred, chaps.

They also mention copy statements. No luck there either, I'm afraid. Banks are only legally able to keep statements going back 6 years, IIRC, which would be 2001. When the account hadn't been touched since 1994.

 

So this letter seems to me to be an almighty attempt at wasting time, since even if this 'application form' and copy statements were available, it's still far too long ago to be enforceable.

 

What I'm now after is a little more of your excellent advice. do I wait, as their letter suggests, or do I write and point out the above, once again demanding they drop this nonsense.

 

I have, incidentally, already decided to raise a serious complaint with the FOS anyway; partly out of principle, and partly because anything that damages a 'business' like this is a good thing in my book.

 

Oh, and I've just noticed that their complaints leaflet has the words 'Quality', 'Efficiency' and 'Ethics' printed on the front. Thames Credit are, apparantly, not without a sense of irony...

[ODC]

Make sure you complain to Thames first and give them an opputunity to resolve your complain (they wont) as the FOS requires this befor they will investigate your complaint.

 

I note they are trying to get a copy of an application form. If they were able to get this it would be useless because apart from the debt being statute barred an application form is not an executed agreement under the CCA

[Tezcatlipoca]

an application form is not an executed agreement under the CCA

 

Aaah, is it not? You don't happen to have the relevant sections of the CCA covering that do you? I'd like to use it to add to my already sizeable Thames-Credit-Whipping stick...

[ODC]

Aaah, is it not? You don't happen to have the relevant sections of the CCA covering that do you? I'd like to use it to add to my already sizeable Thames-Credit-Whipping stick...

There is a sticky here

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collectors-debt-collection/105315-my-agreement-enforceable-useful.html

[babybear39]

Subscribing...

[Tezcatlipoca]

Am busy knocking up a draft complaint letter and in doing so I've gone back over the initial letter I received from them and noticed that the section which mentions the debt states, and I quote: "The current balance due, inclusive of accrued interest, amounts to £567.97."

 

Am I right in thinking I read somewhere that DCA's aren't allowed to add interest?

 

 

Oh, and something else has just occured to me. Do DCA's come under the FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act)? I'm thinking of adding a demand to my complaint letter that they supply me with full records relating to the number of complaints they've received in the last X years, the number they've resolved, the number that have been escalated, and so on. I really want to put them to as much trouble and hassle as possible, just for the hell of it really...

[make them aktiv runners]

Oh, and something else has just occured to me. Do DCA's come under the FOIA (Freedom Of Information Act)? I'm thinking of adding a demand to my complaint letter that they supply me with full records relating to the number of complaints they've received in the last X years, the number they've resolved, the number that have been escalated, and so on. I really want to put them to as much trouble and hassle as possible, just for the hell of it really...

 

Unfortunately no, they are not a public body, just a public nuisance.

[ODC]

It would probably be easier for them to tell you the number of thank you letters they have received in the last 50 years

 

Emm let me see that would be

 

 

erm

 

 

 

 

 

mmm

 

 

 

 

 

 

emm

 

 

 

 

 

 

oh around about NONE give or take a few:D