Discontinued claim... but now enforcing judgement??? robbersway/HSBC

[vjohn82]

Already found the guidance... http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/debt-letters.pdf

 

Very interesting. Not very good at getting their act cleared up.

 

My letter has a nice THIS DEBT WILL NOT GO AWAY message... nice eh?

[sevenhorsestakes]

I have a similar problem with with Lowell which is Cap One. This default does not appear on my credit report. The original last payment was made Sept 2004 defaulting on Oct 2004. I sent an s.5 on 5th Jan and have this is the replied saying that Capital One sent a default notice (Which I did not receive) and I was defaulted by them on 18th March 2005.I'm sure like you that I will receive a fat statement telling me I am wrong and that I have acknowledged and that they are entitled to claim. The question is it a case of:

 

That under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.” There for it's from October or should I try and avoid answering and bid my time, or send a SAR to Cap One to obtain the copy of DN?

[vjohn82]

Bide your time... won't take long. Be here before you know it ;-)

[dpick]

It's from the date the payment was missed then 6 years (5 in Scotland) and no acknowledgement in writing from you. If the a debt was statute barred 6 years after being defaulted then a creditor would never default a debtor.

 

dpick

[the_shadow]

It's from the date the payment was missed then 6 years (5 in Scotland) and no acknowledgement in writing from you. If the a debt was statute barred 6 years after being defaulted then a creditor would never default a debtor.

 

dpick

 

Agree with this... the cause of action in this case is the non payment of a monthly bill hence when the bill comes due the cause of action starts and hence the 6 year limit.

 

S.

[sevenhorsestakes]

I am sure I will get more letters and they will turn up the heat, but I thank you all and agree. They can't do a thing unless they can prove payment - which I haven't - and acknowledgment - Which I am pretty sure of as I'm always confused as to what acknowledgment couid be interpreted as. I passed the letters to a DMC and told them that I was passing the information regarding the alleged to them. They issued an s77/78 - which they received 20th August 2010. And now I haven't heard from them until 21st December.

 

So it's up to them Prove it one way or another. If they think they have a case, then they can take me to court. As far as I know the T&C was audited by the DMC at the time and breaches found. So they will have to be confident to believe it's worth it.

 

SSS

[vjohn82]

I am sure I will get more letters and they will turn up the heat, but I thank you all and agree. They can't do a thing unless they can prove payment - which I haven't - and acknowledgment - Which I am pretty sure of as I'm always confused as to what acknowledgment couid be interpreted as. I passed the letters to a DMC and told them that I was passing the information regarding the alleged to them. They issued an s77/78 - which they received 20th August 2010. And now I haven't heard from them until 21st December.

 

So it's up to them Prove it one way or another. If they think they have a case, then they can take me to court. As far as I know the T&C was audited by the DMC at the time and breaches found. So they will have to be confident to believe it's worth it.

 

SSS

 

Acknowledgement is anything in writing from the debtor. Telephone calls do not count. Acknowledgement could also be a payment, a payment arrangement (again in writing with the permission of the debtor).

[sevenhorsestakes]

So as I wrote a letter saying I am passing the alleged debt to the DMC. that is acknowledgment enough?

So you're saying I', stuffed! I have not made a payment or arranged to pay. They sent a Lowell statement of account, I disputed the alleged debt and sent it to the DMC who issued the s77 and so on.

[vjohn82]

What I mean by "anything" is "anything acknowledging the debt or liability for it".

[sevenhorsestakes]

Phew! Thanks for that. Lets hope that the lack of clarification of acknowledgment is right on my part. As I remember I have always disputed their alleged debt. The rest was done by the DMC. the last contact I had with them is over 6 months - so I guess they thought it was time to ask. I sent the s.5 and the rest is there denial that it is SB. They still say it's from the date that Cap One sent the default notice in march - coinciding with the same date they took the alleged debt!.

[dpick]

They are talking rubbish if SB was from default date then no creditor/DCA would ever put a default on file so that the debt never became SB. See post 9 on this thread.

 

dpick

[sevenhorsestakes]

You are absolutely right - which is why I am not going to rise to the bate - though obviously tempting - and let it drift passed there so called default date. WHICH I hasten to add isn't even on my credit report! Work that one out. I also didn't get a DN anyway. Thanks for that.

[sevenhorsestakes]

Just a quick one to continue from above. Have today received a letter from Lowell Financial, saying that we have answered your letter and can you now set up a repayment plan. Despite the change of name it's signed by the same person.

 

I am going to issue this as a follow up letter to my original s.5.

 

This letter does not admit liability nor does it acknowledge the alleged debt.

 

Thank you for your letter of 24th January, Received 4th February the contents of which have been noted.Regarding your previous contact about the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by me.

 

I would again point out that under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”

 

I would also point out that the OFT say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that “it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period.

 

The last payment of this alleged debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from us in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, we suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against us to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that “continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could lead to a prosecution under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed and that no further contact will be made concerning the above account after that last letter.

Is this correct?

Edited February 4, 2011 by sevenhorsestakes
mistake

[sevenhorsestakes]

I have just this as an email from Cabot. I sent them a Prove it/harassment letter and they replied only to the harassment part and ignored the ‘prove it’ section. I am now planning to send an s.5, which I hope will do the trick. At least from that point they have to prove it.

Also just as a matter of fact, is it true that a CCJ cannot be made after the six years’. As far as I am aware I haven't acknowledged and have always disputed. But I guess it's up to them to prove I have acknowledged.

 

Thoughts on this would be appreciated.

We’ve still not received any satisfactory response from you about repaying the above amount. Unless you contact us within the next 7 days we’ll take action to recover this debt. We’ll either:

·

Instruct an external collection agency to call on you to recover the debt.

Or

·

Instruct a solicitor to start legal action. This may result in a County Court Judgment being obtained against you, which could severely affect your ability to obtain credit in the future.

County Court Judgment

If a County Court Judgment is enforced, this may lead to one or more of the following:

·

A Charging Order – this means if you currently own your property we’ll register a Caution against your Title to the premises at HM Land Registry. Then if you sell the property all the money you owe to Cabot will be deducted from the proceeds of the sale and paid direct to us.

·

An Attachment of Earnings Order – this means that the Court will order your employer to deduct set amounts from your pay to settle your debt to Cabot.

·

Order to Obtain Information – this means that you’ll be questioned in Court about your income, expenses and financial assets.

[Bigdebtor]

Looks like they're misleading you if they say "We'll" which is short for We WILL. They usually say "We MAY" - Can you double check because making empty threats or not following through on threats is against OFT guidelines.

 

Interested in you saying you got an "e-mail". I am trying to get e-mail addresses for OC's and DCA's - much easier and cheaper than letters and safer than phone calls - but don't have one for Cabot. Can you post it up here please?

 

Thanks

 

BD

[sevenhorsestakes]

Hi BD,

 

I can assure you that it reads:

 

We’ll either:

 

Instruct an external collection agency to call on you to recover the debt. etc. etc.

 

I have been advised to disregard email and phone calls and only deal by letter. Since then I have sent the Statute Barred Letter - this was over 3 weeks ago and have so far heard nothing. However - with Cabot and the major injection of cash the received last year from Barclay's I doubt that this is the end for good. Normally though in letter for they reply within 7 days maximum. So am a little surprised not to have been served something. There email is cabotcustomer at cabotfinacial dot com.

 

Very interested in your threats/empty threats statement - but to be honest - I just hope that the s5 SB letter does it.

 

SSS

[Bigdebtor]

SSS

 

Thanks for the e-mail address.

 

Good luck!

 

BD

[DonkeyB]

I’m getting confused here... whose thread is this?

[Bigdebtor]

If you look at post 1 you'll see the name of the OC - but I don't believe that confers "ownership" of the thread.

 

Why do you ask?

 

BD

[DonkeyB]

Cos it’s rude to hijack a thread!

[Bigdebtor]

I suggest if you read through this thread you will see the OC seemed to be quite willing to help sevenhorsestakes and did not complain about "hijacking" of "his" thread. I accept that on very large or busy threads it is important not to have unrelated "multi threaded" contributions but do not feel this thread is currently in danger of its OC's objectives being swamped.

 

For my own part, by seeking Cabot's e-mail address I was endeavouring to help both myself and other CAGGERS as Cabot do not put any e-mail addrress on their letterheaeds.

 

However I note your sensitivity to what I personally regard as a trivial point and accept your right to have different priorities. I shall therefore try not to contribute to any threads started by you in case you misinterpret this as "hijacking".

 

BD

[vjohn82]

So there DB...

[DonkeyB]

Are you bored? VJ is too polite.

 

I suggest if you read through this thread you will see the OC seemed to be quite willing to help sevenhorsestakes and did not complain about "hijacking" of "his" thread. I accept that on very large or busy threads it is important not to have unrelated "multi threaded" contributions but do not feel this thread is currently in danger of its OC's objectives being swamped.

 

For my own part, by seeking Cabot's e-mail address I was endeavouring to help both myself and other CAGGERS as Cabot do not put any e-mail addrress on their letterheaeds.

 

However I note your sensitivity to what I personally regard as a trivial point and accept your right to have different priorities. I shall therefore try not to contribute to any threads started by you in case you misinterpret this as "hijacking".

 

BD

[victoria_siempre]

Hi guys

 

Can we declare a no fly zone to minimise friendly fire?

 

x

 

v

[Bigdebtor]

Are you bored? VJ is too polite.

 

I would say VJ was, quite rightly, just trying to be helpful to a new CAGGER and not get too hung up on "ownership" - but let's agree to differ and drop this.

 

I would hate to see new CAGGERS put off from seeking help for fear of treading on the toes of an over-proprietorial OC - so the least air time this disagreement gets the better. We should all be here to seek help and give help when we can - not to score points or be over zealous regarding site protocol etc.

 

You've had three posts on this point and have made your feelings clear. I have also had three posts to reciprocate - so please accept my plea to get back to CAG's objectives without further exchanges.

 

BD