DLC ruthbridge chasing old car loan debt after car handback

[DaisyMay]

Double post see debt collector

[DaisyMay]

In Aug 1990 my husband took out a 4 year car loan.

Around Mar 1993 he was made redundant and as he had paid more than half the payments he voluntarily returned the car as he was allowed to do according to the rules without any penalty.

He heard no more from them so they were obviously satisfied.

 

In July 2001 out of the blue he got a letter from DLC saying they had taken over the loan and he owed them just over £1200 which if he paid straight away he could have a reduction.

Included was a letter from the original loan company informing us that they had passed the loan over the previous November

 

He went to CAB and they said it was statute barred even if there had been anything owing and just to ignore it.

Nothing else happened,

 

2 years later he got another letter which he ignored again.

Nothing happened again.

 

In August 2006 he started getting letters from Ruthbridge saying they were acting for DLC and all sorts of things were going to happen to him - bankruptcy, being taken to court, having agents call round anytime between 8am and 8pm, having his name in the local papers. In all he has had about 6 letters including one just addressed to The Occupier saying there was a special delivery and to ring a number.

 

He has kept the CAB informed and continued to ignore the letters.

These are obviously just scare tactics as 2 of the letters about 3 months apart threaten to take him to court if he doesn't respond within 7 days.

 

They have now started to ring.

Each time it has been me that answered and I have just hung up on her.

It is a Scottish woman and sometimes she rings straight back and leaves a message on the answer phone.

It is always from a withheld number.

 

Last week she left a message that an agent will call at 8am last Wednesday. (He didn’t)

She is obviously upset at being hung up on that the last time she left a message;

it was addressed to me by name so she has been doing some searches.

 

In fact she used my name about 3 times to emphasise that she knew who I was and told me to stop hanging up the phone as the calls weren't for me.

 

My husband has been to Trading Standards but the woman there was very negative and said we would have to have proof that we had paid the instalments and surrendered the car.

 

As it is over 16 years ago since he took out the loan and 14 years since we last had any contact with anyone we don't have any of the paper work (who does) apart from the original loan form. Even the bank hasn't got statements now.

 

We are waiting to hear back from Trading Standards, but if they aren't any help is there anything else we can do?

 

We are reluctant to contact them because as far as we are concerned there never has been any debt and ignoring them seems to wind them up.

 

I might add that we are pensioners so it is really getting upsetting.

 

She rang again yesterday and all she said was "Are you going to hang up on me" So I did!

 

Trading Standards have said now that they will get in touch with them, but we should try to get evidence that we returned the car etc.

[adelaidebull]

This is taken from the OFT Guide to Debt collecting...

2.14 In the past we have dealt with a number of statute barred debt cases governed by

the Limitation Act 1980, which applies to England and Wales. Based on that

experience our position with regard to England and Wales remains:

a. we accept legally the debt exists

b. it is the methods by which the debt is collected that can be

unfair as follows:

 

•

it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from

 

the creditor during the relevant limitation period

•

 

 

 

if a creditor has been in regular contact with a debtor before the debt

 

is statute barred, then we do not consider it unfair to continue to

attempt to recover the debt

•

 

 

 

it is unfair to mislead debtors as to their rights and obligations, for

 

example, falsely stating or implying that the debt is still legally

recoverable and relying on consumers not knowing the relevant legal

provisions, and

•

 

 

 

continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they

 

will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to

harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of

Justice Act 1970.

 

Hope it helps...

But personally i wouldn't pay em a single penny...if there as been no contact with the loan company or DCA for 6 yrs its statue barred...

the DCA are trying it on...

I have the same problem with a different DCA and i know they can't collect off me....

 

 

[DaisyMay]

Thanks adelaidebull

 

We are hoping that that is the situation.

We have lived at the same address for years prior to handing the car back and had the same phone number so even if there had been any debt they could have got in touch with us.

 

We have done a search on the car and at the last count it had had 8 previous owners and we were the 2nd so there could be no doubt it was in good condition in fact it was still under warranty.

 

It is the fact that there isn't even any debt (we think the amount is probably what they lost when they tried to sell it on) but that isn't our liability as we fulfilled all our obligations when we gave it back.

[whizzard]

Hi DaisyMay,

A shot in the dark perhaps, but maybe you could contact DVLA, and ask if they can produce any documentation which relates to transfer of ownership for the car, don't forget all vehicle need to be registered when changing ownership.

Also, have you thought about contacting the company you got the car from and asking them for written terms and agreements.

You could then try using this as proof that you have done nothing wrong

Also, you can contact your phone supplier and get certain numbers barred, so they can't get through.

And hey, it sounds pretty statute barred anyway. And from what I have read on this site you could send them a letter Re; harrassment, (look in library sections) for more info,and a template letter letting them know that it is statute barred, (also in the library section).

Don't let them get to you, there is so much help on this site, read as much of it as you can, and you will realise that you can fight back.

Knowlege is Power!!

Good luck to you.

[DaisyMay]

Hi Whizzard

At the moment we are still waiting for them to respond to Trading Standards. We think they might have got the letter as so far this week there have been no more calls.

We did manage to trace the manager from the original loan company as his name and address were on the agreement. He is retired now and doesn't specifically remember us returning the car, but said if there had been any problems he would have been on to us straight away, as he wouldn't have been doing his job otherwise.

We will wait and see

[DaisyMay]

This is just an update.

Since my last post there has been no contact whatsoever from Ruthbridge, so it looks as thought Trading Standards has scared them off.

We got in touch with DVLA and got a poor photocopy of a new owner in May 1993.

Just had a letter this morning from Trading Standards to say she has written to them twice and had no reply.

We know there is no way they can frighten us into paying a debt that never existed in the first place.

On another note. On the website "London on line" there is a feature where you can write reviews about businesses in London. There were some very heated reviews about Ruthbridge by some people who to put it nicely hadn't been treated very well by them.

There were also some which I suspect had been put up by Ruthbridge themselves as they said what a lovely company they were and how nicely they had been treated.

Now the reviews on that particular listing have been disabled. (So Ruthbridge must have friends in high places) Fortunately for my own benefit I copied most of them so I knew I wasn't the only one being targetted by them.

[DaisyMay]

Apart from a letter in April from Trading Standards asking if we had heard from Ruthbridge as she had written to them twice and not heard back from them. We hadn't heard anything and the calls and letters had stopped so we thought she had some clout.

Last week we got a letter from Ruthbridge's Debt counselling service offering us free debt counselling!!!!!

If they don't hear from us they are going to start chasing us again.

As I said before there is no debt as the car was handed back in 1993 under the 50% rule so we don't owe a penny and it was at least 8 years later before we started getting chased for this (alleged)debt

We went to Trading Standards again this week and the woman there was so dismissive of everything I said about what I had found out on this site.

She even says it isn't statute barred as we could have missed a payment (we haven't) It is now 14 years since the car went back, and we had any contact with anybody about it.

We are now back to waiting for letters and phone calls. We thought passing it to TS would put an end to it.

She said some thing about the type of agreement we had which was a conditional sale agreement wasn't covered by being statute barred (if that makes sense)

[DaisyMay]

Sorry for bumping this up, but is there any way this couldn't be statute barred.

We thought we were doing the right thing by getting trading standards involved but Ruthbridge just seem to ignore them.

[renegotiation]

I would phone national debtline and see if they can direct you to someone who can confirm 100% if the debt is statute barred or not. If it is, then write to Ruthbridge one last time and state it to them, with an explanation of how you got the information. Also, state that if they heep harassing you will take them to court. Keep a photocopy of this letter and send it special delivery and keep a receipt. Then if they continue to harass you keep a record of all letters and recordings of all phone calls. After another month or two take them to court. They take the stance that people won't ever take them to court. Take a stance and do it.

[bigandyuk1]

A hire purchase or conditional sale agreement means that goods will be hired to you for an agreed period during which you pay instalments. You do not legally own the goods until you've paid the last instalment. During the hire purchase agreement the goods belong to the hirer so you must not sell the goods without getting their permission.

 

There is a 50% rule which you seem to have adhered to. There doesn't seem to be a debt to be statute barred ??????

 

For what its worth, this seems to be another case of a DCA buying very old debts (even if they do not officially exist) and then chancing a bit of bullying in an attempt to make some money.

 

Regards

[dx100uk]

sorry only just seen this dreadful thread.

you poor thing.

 

fire off a CCA request to them now [costs £1]

it is def statute barred unless there has been a CCJ issued against you.[which you would know about for sure!!!]

they will not have an agreement for sure too!

 

just ignore them but as suggested keep the letters for now.

 

i'll look back later

 

dx100uk

[rory32]

There doesn't seem to be a debt to be statute barred ??????

I would agree with this.

[DaisyMay]

We queried taking Ruthbridge to court with this woman from Trading Standards but she was so negative and more or less told us that there was no guarantee that we would get a judgement in our favour and we would have to stand all costs. Listening to her you would think we were in the wrong. The facts are we don't owe a penny to anyone and we have never been in debt, but according to her the onus is on us to prove it.

She has been trying to get a response from them since February but they just seem to have run circles round her and started threatening us again

[rory32]

Seems like you're being fobbed off by TS. The onus is always on the creditor to prove any "alleged" debt. If it wasn't I could make a fortune by just going through the phone book and mailing everyone saying you owe me x amount of money.

[bigandyuk1]

Why not apply for the trading standards complaint procedure and complain about this employee !!! :?

[sillygirl1]

Some Trading Standards offices and some CAB offices offer help in 'name' only, they don't have any real teeth. The CAB were really off with me as I was a single white female with no kids and had worked most of my life until being made redundant by NHS cuts. They were as much use as a dead teabag in helping me.

 

I would think the so called debt is statute barred, and that Ruthbridge are fishing for info, try the Information Commission and the FOS people and they may be more help.

[jampot]

As far as I know, the finance company wouldn't/shouldn't accept the car back in voluntary termination, unless the account was paid up to date with no arrears - so providing it was handed back (duh, of course it was!) then there *IS* no debt, so there is *NOTHING* to be statute barred.

 

Agree with the course of action stated above. Send stern but polite letter asking them to prove that a debt exists, including a breakdown of all costs, charges etc, complete with dates and times. I wouldn't send it as a S.A.R. but simply a "put up or shut up" request for them to prove a debt exists.

 

Plainly and simply, there *is* no debt.

[bigandyuk1]

Letter M on here - Creditors and DCAs - Letter Templates & Budget Planner

 

Have a look it might be the easiest way.

 

Regards

Andy Banwell

[DaisyMay]

Thanks to you all. We will be following your advice.

Since we started getting the letters in 2001 we have kept copies of everything, letters, answerphone messages and anything to do with Ruthbridge.

It is good that you agree with us that there is no debt.

There is definitely no CCJ against my husband and he hasn't applied for credit since the car went back.

[DaisyMay]

For the past few weeks my husband has been getting calls from foreign sounding people who can't even pronounce his name properly.

When I ask what it is about they say something like they need to write to him.

The number is usually from a switchboard that doesn't transmit numbers.

Today however when I did 1471 I got 08002889838

I looked it up and came up with several possibilities GDR, JDR and JB debt Recovery

I rang back using my Skype phone so they couldn't trace it and the woman that answered was definitely American but she didn't give a company name and said all their agents were busy.

We had a lot of threats from Ruthbridge last year for a debt that never even existed from 1993 but after we got Trading Standards involved we haven't heard a thing. Could this be connected?

[mrmarmite]

could well be. you say sound americal?

ever had any dealings with citi financial loan/mortgage/credit card?

[DaisyMay]

Mrmarmite

When I rang it was American voice until an agent came on and she was Scottish but she wouldn't tell me anything until I gave her my phone number which I wouldn't as I was using Skype. All she would say was it was to do with a legal matter

The only dealings we have had with debt collectors was my thread.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/66629-harassment.html

 

It was a Scottish women who used to ring up then from Ruthbridge.

We have never had any debts owing and don't have any credit cards and the mortgage was paid off over 10 years ago

[loyalbrummie]

0800are free to phone numbers arent they if so , im gonna have some fun this weekend lol

[DaisyMay]

Be my guest!!!

 

I just happened to be listening to some old country music when they rang and I just happened to leave the phone next to the loudspeaker and I just happened to accidently turn up the volume