Disputed debt back to original credit company?

[ispartacus75]

My credit company has passed my debt onto a 3rd party who are giving me a week to come to a payment plan (because in 1 month it is the 6th year annivesary of the debt and I believe they cant issue proceedings after that??)

 

The amount that the 3rd party say I owe is disputed because it includes unlawful charges. Is there law or legal precident that says the 3rd party HAVE to send the debt back to the original credit company?

 

The 3rd party apparently BOUGHT the debt so they would have to get their money back.

 

Really need something to quote on this as I need to write to them this week t try and halt the legal proceedings, at least as long as the 6th anniversary

[Seminole]

Have you acknowledged the debt in writing or made any payments against it in the past 6 years?

 

You probably can't stop them from issuing proceedings but you do have a defence against that part of the total that is made up of unlawful charges, interest on those charges and you are entitled to statutory interest for your counter-claim.

 

You need to bear in mind that the company chasing you is a parasite debt buyer who paid peanuts for the debt or certainly less than its face value. They are going to be reluctant to have to deal with someone who has a sizable counter-claim

[ispartacus75]

I can DPA the 3rd party company for all files to work out charges etc, but as we know they have 40 days to comply with the DPA request, whereas they are only giving me 7 days to offer payment proposals before starting legal proceedings for recovery. I am pretty sure that this is because they only have less than a month before the debt is 6 years old.

 

I have made payments previously but not to this 3rd party company, and I seriously get the impression that they are worried about it getting too close as I believe that after the 6 yr anniversary they can no longer sek legal action for recovery. I do need clarification on this.

[BankFodder]

After 6 years they are dead in the water. Don't respond to them or give them any indication of life

[Seminole]

The six year only applies if you haven't made any payments or acknowledged the debt at any point in the last six years. If you made any payments, including to the original creditor, then you acknowledged the debt I'm afraid. When the debt was sold all rights and obligations under it were assigned to the new owner,

 

If what you said is correct then the six year rule will not apply in this case.

[BankFodder]

It depends on what they sue you for. If they sue you in debt then they can sue you 6years sonce the last tome that you acknowledged the debt or made a part payment.

 

if they sue in contract then they can sue you 6 years from the date of the breach upon which they base their action.

[ispartacus75]

Ah now that completely changes the landscape on this one.

 

The 6 yr anniversary was for the signing of the contract. My breach would have been 3 years ago with last action possibly 2 1/2 years ago.

 

So It looks like I will acknowledge the debt, in part, but dispute charges applied and seek to have the amount owed reduced to cover the costs etc.

 

Does that sound like the best way to go given the dates?

[BankFodder]

They are not opposing. Merely that one is more explanatory. As to what to do, consult the Limitation Act 1980 which is linked in the library and decide for yourself.

[ispartacus75]

This topic was closed on 03/06/19.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group