can anyone help? please

dave1104_2

a letter came yeaterday morning..it was for my wife..a comapny called Mcenzie hall..looks like a debt collecting agency..i phoned them up and they said it was for a debt owed on a overdraft with the halifax bank in 1996!!!!..can the reclaim this debt..if anyone can help it would me most appreciated..

rog2

paulroker wrote: »

im afraid yes they can you spent it you pay up

Reported as abusive.

cady

Maybe if you have a word with the company, was it an old account forgotten about, how did it get forgotten? you could try and set up a paymnet plan but it does look like you will have to pay it sorry i cant offer any more advice hth

rog2

dave1104 wrote: »

a letter came yeaterday morning..it was for my wife..a comapny called Mcenzie hall..looks like a debt collecting agency..i phoned them up and they said it was for a debt owed on a overdraft with the halifax bank in 1996!!!!..can the reclaim this debt..if anyone can help it would me most appreciated..

Hi dave - please ignore the comments of 'paulroker' - looks like the first of the Saturday Troll Invasions :rolleyes: .

If the debt refers to an overdraft in 1996, then it is more than likely to be 'statute barred' and, once you have told them that you will not be making any payment towards this 'debt' as it is statute barred, the only reason you need give, then even MH can no longer pursue this 'debt' through the courts and should cease all other attempts at collection.

Have a look at the following link and, if applicable, then you can send the template letter that you will find in the link, to MH:

www.nationaldebtline.co.uk/england_wales/factsheet.php?page=25_liability_for_debts_and_the_limitation_act

rog2

Incisor wrote: »

No, it is not the least bit abusive. It is just plain wrong. The correct way to deal with it is to counter it with the truth.

Then maybe you should have a look at the other posts by the said 'Paulroker'.
But, and taking your point, let us deal with the point by 'countering it with the truth:

TRUTH ABOUT OLD DEBTS:

If a debtor has made no payment towards, nor acknowledged, in writing, a consumercredit debt for a continuous period of SIX YEARS, in England and Wales, then that debt would come within the terms of the Limitation Act, 1980, and, once the 'debtor' has told the creditor, or dca, that he will not be making any payments towards that 'debt' because it is 'statute barred' (the only reason he need give) then the creditor/dca can, no longer, pursue that debt through the courts and should cease all attempts at pursuing for payment.

www.nationaldebtline.co.uk/england_wales/factsheet.php?page=25_liability_for_debts_and_the_limitation_act

It is slightly different in Scotland, where the 'Limitation Period' is, in fact, just five years:

www.nationaldebtline.co.uk/scotland/factsheet.php?page=23_prescription_and_limitation_act

At the moment, Northern Ireland follows England and Wales.

There are certain exceptions, notably property related debts, where the 'Limitation Period' is, legally 12 years, although most mortgage lenders have agreed to abide by the 'six year' rule, but with the exception that 'contact' can., also mean contact from the creditor to the debtor. However the OP was not referring to a 'property related debt, so this is not relevant.

The above is not just 'truth', incisor - it is 'enshrined in Law'.

Please could you tell me how paulrokers post helps the OP?

rog2

Incisor wrote: »

I think that the problem is that you have decided to act against paulroker rather than against the content of what paulroker has to say. That is a mistaken approach.

There is no substance to the content of paulroker's post - the 'you spent it you pay up' argument is trolled to the point of extinction by the debt collection fraternity - it even figures (or used to) in the literature sent out by such 'notables' as MBNA and Mackenzie Hall.
How can anyone be sure that such a 'statement' is in any way factual - we hear of examples where a £30 charge has been levied because a poster went 1 penny into overdraft - how can we be sure that the 'debt' referred to by the OP is not made up of charges? We can't, but, equally, we, and specifically paulroker, can not be sure that the OP did, in fact, 'spend it'.

I'm sorry, incisor, but the person posting under the username of paulroker is a troll - and a rather nasty one at that. Yes, I did jump on the 'evil little scroat', but, having read his other, at the time, 9 posts - 8 of which, including the post in this thread, were abusive in intent, then I am indeed guilty of acting against 'paulroker', but since there was 'no contributory content' in what he/she had to say, then you can not expect me to react otherwise.

Far from being 'mistaken' my approach is quite open, and justified.

churchrat

cady wrote: »

Maybe if you have a word with the company, was it an old account forgotten about, how did it get forgotten? you could try and set up a paymnet plan but it does look like you will have to pay it sorry i cant offer any more advice hth

this is very bad advice as well.
don't "have a word"
and don't "set up a pay plan."

do the debt collecting agencies pay people to post on here in the hope of giving out wrong information and so "force" people to pay up? The op has not said that the debt is his anyway--this could just be "fishing"

rog2

Incisor wrote: »

Not necessary. You only said that this one was, which was mistaken.

Not true, incisor - I have reported seven of paulroker's posts as being abusive to the threads in which they were posted.

rog2

cady wrote: »

Maybe if you have a word with the company, was it an old account forgotten about, how did it get forgotten? you could try and set up a paymnet plan but it does look like you will have to pay it sorry i cant offer any more advice hth

The Law gives a creditor six years to make sure that a 'debtor' pays his debts. Given all of the resources that are available for creditors to use, then it is very difficult to have much sympathy with any creditor who has allowed a 'debt' to go seemingly unnoticed for six years or, as in the case of the OP, even 12 years.
That, or any similar, creditor deserves not to be paid one penny.

rog2

Incisor wrote: »

You are being silly

now you are starting to be abusive

If a post is abusive, libellous, offensive illegal racist or spam it needs to be reported to [EMAIL="abuse@moneysavingexpert.com"]abuse@moneysavingexpert.com[/EMAIL] which is exactly what I have done for seven of paulroker's posts.

Please, incisor, can you let it rest - you are starting to hack me off.

rog2

churchrat wrote: »

do the debt collecting agencies pay people to post on here in the hope of giving out wrong information and so "force" people to pay up?

Without a shadow of a doubt, churchrat.