Not accepting cca letter?

DarkConvict

Fair point rog2, i see where your coming from.

captainhaggis

rog2 wrote: »

....try to argue, at a later date, that the debtor had acknowledged the debt by making a £1 payment towards it.

This is one of the main things I fail to understand about the whole CCA thing.... Surely most of us have been paying the creditors for years - either the amounts originally agreed to or reduced amounts under an arrangement.

Can't they argue that these years of payments are acknowledgement of the debt?

I'm trying to prove unenforceability on a number of debts at the moment but I've been making payments on them since taking the accounts out back in 2002-2005.

never-in-doubt

captainhaggis wrote: »

This is one of the main things I fail to understand about the whole CCA thing.... Surely most of us have been paying the creditors for years - either the amounts originally agreed to or reduced amounts under an arrangement.

Can't they argue that these years of payments are acknowledgement of the debt?

I'm trying to prove unenforceability on a number of debts at the moment but I've been making payments on them since taking the accounts out back in 2002-2005.

You're getting confused between unenforceability and statute barred mate. With unenforceability you are implying the agreement cannot be enforced (i.e. the debt cannot be pursued) because the agreement is unlawful. You can pay yesterday and then claim unenforceability tomorrow if you like - it doesn't have any bearing on payments made/not made.

With statute barred, you cannot be chased for the debt after the limitation expiry date which is 6 years from date last acknowledged or payment made.

never-in-doubt

rog2 wrote: »

Yes, and as I said, he can, reasonably, expect that the letter was received within two days of posting. A 'copy' letter, by first class post, will re-inforce that situation.
I am, therefore, trying to cover all angles.

This is where the 12 + days comes from, 12 days for the letter to be responded with 2 days postage time allowed (thus 12 + 2)......

Bottom line is, whether they sign for it or not, if they do not comply then you put them into default and refuse payments - its not really important (the 12+2 day issue) in my opinion

fermi

captainhaggis wrote: »

Can't they argue that these years of payments are acknowledgement of the debt?

See NID's psot above.

Some creditors/DCA will try to spin you the line that since you have paid/acknowledged the debt then it is enforceable.

It is twaddle as far as pre April 2007 agreements are concerned. Whether the court is entitled to make an enforcement order depends on the agreement, not payment history.

never-in-doubt

fermi wrote: »

See NID's psot above.

Some creditors/DCA will try to spin you the line that since you have paid/acknowledged the debt then it is enforceable.

It is twaddle as far as pre April 2007 agreements are concerned. Whether the court is entitled to make an enforcement order depends on the agreement, not payment history.

I recently seen a letter from Argos (of all people) who confirmed that as XXXX made a payment to the debt, and went shopping with the card at regular intervals they are admitting liability to the debt and any court would see this as being the case.

Imagine the reply I sent back.... if I remember rightly the phrase 'you may like to think you're heads-above the rest, but unfortunately in this case you're so far off the mark you may as well be in Mars' was used - along with a subtle and respectful request that they seek legal advice prior to their next response, in which case I received a reply from their solicitors confirming I was right

Point is, they try anything to get [STRIKE]their[/STRIKE] our money back!