I have emailed experian to tell them the situation. Will have to wait to see what they come back with. Reading what DonkeyB said then I may take action for damages . But I am worried about contacting them in case they start proceedings again. I did have a few letters last year from the other debt saying I can pay a reduced amount. But that was also thrown out. Certainly don't want to go through all that again. However it is ruining my credit file which if had been left alone I would have had no defaults shown from next year. Got my £5 cashback though

I do indeed have 2 new Default notices. 1 from August 2009 from First National Bank around the same time this claim was thrown out. Was thrown out because they couldnt produce a default notice. The other is Last month for another claim that was also settled in 2009. I just want to rip the heads of these bastards right now.

Wow I thought this had all been resolved. Really sorry that this is dragging out for you. I had to refresh myself. I havnt checked my credit file as I'm too scared to. I have heard nothing at all from either Santander or GE Money or Link. I am hoping the statute barred is now in effect. I know when I last checked they had added various Default notices but when I checked with Experian they said they had no record which I thought was wierd. Going to take advantage of the 30day trial and £5 cashback from Quidco and see what it says about me these days. Will let you know if anyone has added a DN.

Wow this thread is a year old now. Sorry to dig this up after all this time but I just received a letter from Lewis Group disguised as ukdefaults.co.uk saying I have to pay and not to ignore this letter WHOIS Query Well I'm ignoring the letter anyway, no NoA, default notice, etc. Has anyone else encountered this? Especially as this has been in and out of court. Thanks

Was just replying in another Link thread and just realised that GE money is now changing to Santander. This is going to to confuse things again. Maybe that's why I havn't heard anything yet.

Hello, I was in a similar situation early last year. They supplied the DN and CCA but in the end it boiled down to a lack of NoA so was thrown out. GE money took it back but as far as I can tell they terminated the agreement in order to sell it to Stink Financial. First class post is not sufficient for the NoA. It must be signed for. Without the NoA you owe them nothing. Hope that helps if you need extra info! This post confused me a little as I didn't realise that GE Money is now Santander. How many times are they going to change?

Hi Magda, How are you getting on with this now? I have heard nothing yet. Still biting my nails! I have however contacted experian to see how to remove all the defaults on my credit file that asset link added.

Happy new year...possibly! Well all I can say is what a bunch of freaks. They can send someone round to me if they want. I can be not very nice!

very strange. So all they are doing is informing you they are adding charges to a terminated account!!! Ah well let them carry on then. Maybe this is what I will get in the new year.

Sorry to hear you have been down. All you can do is laugh . Especially at incompetence. I think I will be in the same position in January if their letters are to go by. The last letter I got from GE just said they have the right to inform me every 6 months.

I can't offer advice as such as I would be afraid to get it wrong but there are plenty of us in the same boat as these clowns but with some degree of success http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/152360-asset-link-first-national.html http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/191761-link-debt-sold-back.html I'm sure someone with a clearer mind will be along to help soon

Moved to Legal Link Financial

Yes I agree it is the hassle. You go through it once, well not in your case , and think it's all over. Then it's tried again. I dont think it is even worth it in my case. It has cost them more money now surely?

Yeah I am watching your thread with nervous interest!!!

but wouldnt this be a different claimant? I would think the terminating of an agreement would be the best route, somehow?!? To bring action agreement must be terminated, etc?!