Link Financial telling fibs

[MarianG]

I have recently been contacted by a company called Link Financial. They rang me at first saying that they had purchased a debt from Abbey relating to a loan and made it clear that they knew I had returned to my maiden name and was no longer with my husband (stating his name). They followed this up with a letter dated 12 June 2007 claiming that I owed £3777.95 and enclosing a letter, supposedly from Abbey, also dated 12 June 2007, informing me that the debt was being sold to them (why didn't Abbey write to me direct?). This was sent in my married name so the next day I received a letter dated 13 June 2007, with enclosure from Abbey also dated 13 June 2007, in my maiden name.

 

I checked a back copy of my credit file (2005) as this debt has been removed from the current one and the original default was May 2000 so as far as I was concerned it was statute barred. The current balance and the default balance were the same (then £3075).

 

Last night I received another call from Link Financial and I asked them to speak to my partner for fear of saying something I shouldn't. He told them it was statute barred, but they insisted that I had made a payment in July last year of £1, which I hadn't, and said that the six years would start again from then and wouldn't become statute barred until July 2012, but looking at my credit file it was already statute barred. (I did find a copy of a letter dated 12 June 2006 I had written in response to one from DLC, who were dealing with the matter then, asking them if they were acting on Abbey's behalf or if they had purchased the debt, and requesting a copy of the original signed agreement. I received no response.) My partner asked the woman at Link for proof of this £1 payment and she said that I needed to write in with a payment. He also asked her for a copy of the original agreement and she ignored this. She just kept harping on about the £1 payment I had made and that it would be passed to their legal department. The woman left her name and number and asked me to call her, but of course I won't. I must admit, I am worried as to what they might do next and how to deal with it. Any ideas out there?

[Vampyra]

Why is she talking to your OH? She is breaking the DPA, write in and complain.

 

Also demand in writing proof of the £1.00 payment. PAY THEM NOTHING! They are trying to get a payment off of you to start being able to collect the debt.

If it is Statute Barred I think you need to speak to TS about their harassment and conduct.

Someone with more knowledge will I'm sure be along soon to help you.

[Dispirited]

And don't talk to them on the phone - Hang Up! Make them write to you.

[djdave]

To be honest, if you've asked them to speak to your OH then they're not breaking the DPA.

 

However, that doesn't mean that they're right about the debt.

 

As Dispirited says, do not speak to them on the phone. Keep everything in writing and ensure you include "I do not acknowledge any debt" in your letters.

 

Write to them and ask for a copy of the agreement, plus proof of the £1 payment. I'd be surprised if they have either.

 

You'll need to include a quid for the CCA, but include this paragraph:

 

"Please find enclosed cheque / postal order number XXXXXXXXX in respect of the statutory fee only. Under no circumstances is this to be put towards any alleged debt. If you are unable to supply the documents requested you should return this fee."

 

Be careful with Link, they're sneaky barstewards, but it sounds like you're in the right!

 

[MarianG]

Thanks everybody for your helpful replies. I will certainly send the Link Financial cretins a CCA letter and also request proof of the £1 payment I was supposed to have made. Should I reiterate though that the account is statute barred? I think I shall also contact TS - another complaint won't go amiss!

[diskmandave]

This 1.00 payment... Could it be the result of a previous CCA request where the payment has been applied to the account by the OC?

 

Also, if you're happy it's Statute Barred nothing can reverse that and a word to Trading Standards as previously mentioned would be a good idea...

Trading Standards Central - Trading Standards and Consumer Protection information for the UK

 

No harm at all in sending them the Statute Barred letter...

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/20758-creditors-dcas-letter-templates.html#post162366

 

Good luck, Dave.

 

[make them aktiv runners]

The default date is usually 2-3 months after the last payment. The Limitation Act goes on payment not default date. However, for simplicity I will use the defaultdate of May 2000. It became statute barred by May 2006 at the very latest. Once statute barred, always barred, any further payment does not count in restarting the limitation clock. They are claiming a payment of £1 (though it was also just a CCA request payment) in July 2006 which is when it was already barred anyway.