Help with RuthBridge Ltd

thatchamlad

fermi wrote: »

On a side note, if the DCA knows that a debt they have is unenforceable, then they tend to start off being as agressive as they possibly can.

The idea of that is to scare you into paying up before it occurs to you to check whether you really need to.

Seems like that may be true here................

I honestly believe you are correct. I have had dealings with Cabot and BCW in the past for debts that are indeed enforceable and i am now paying back. At no time have i ever encountered an attitude like i did today or threats to go to my landlord etc. The bully tactics i'm sure scare a great number of people into panic and they then surrender and start paying:mad:

Why dont the authorities deal with this mob and shut them down? The net is riddled with stories of harassment, bullying and scaremongering by this company.

fermi

thatchamlad wrote: »

Why dont the authorities deal with this mob and shut them down? The net is riddled with stories of harassment, bullying and scaremongering by this company.

Because the regulator (OFT) doesn't appear to want to. :huh:

It's a major bone of contention on this and other forums I'm afraid as to why that might be?

EDIT: I mean the above for a certain class of DCA in general, not just Ruthbridge.

fermi

Not disappeared.

thatchamlad

Update

Today she received a letter with "Without Prejudice" across the top.

It goes on about how they have advised their client to pursue Bankruptcy proceedings against her.

They have offered a 50 % discount if she pays before 08/02/2010

We sent the SB letter yesterday by recorded delivery so should i just ignore this letter and wait to hear from them again?

Also, what are the chances of them actually pursing it to the courts?

Thanks in advance

DarkConvict

They can advise the client all they like, it does not mean they are going though with it.

To force bankruptcy the debt(s) with the creditor must total at least £1500.
It costs the creditor about £500 in fees, and then more in solicitor costs, so take a rough stab at £1000 they have to pay out. Thats a reason why they dont usually do it, but try to scare you.
They generally only do it when very large amounts are owed, and they know the creditor has assets to pay the debt, i.e. a house, expensive car, savings that cover the debt etc.
They also like to be the main creditor (who shes owes most money to) as forcing them bankcrupt means assets are split fairly between all creditors. If one creditor is owed 98k, and another 2k. The creditor with 2k debt, only gets 2% of her estate.

In all honestly they would usually go for a CCJ first.

thatchamlad

Afternoon all, a quick update............

They have called her again today saying they have received her SB letter and told her the debt is not statute barred as it defaulted in 2005.

She is positive she has made no payment since 2003 and knows it was on her credit file until the end of last year when it disappeared.

What is the best course of action now as they have said they have sent out the details of the agreement she signed etc for her to look over?

The woman she spoke to said that once she receives the paperwork she has to call them back to sort it out!!!

She is now stressing again and any help would be appreciated.

RAS

It is irrelevent when the default was posted. What is relevent is when she last paid or acknowledged the debt in writing.

Can she get her old bank accounts records and check her credit record?

thatchamlad

RAS wrote: »

It is irrelevent when the default was posted. What is relevent is when she last paid or acknowledged the debt in writing.

Can she get her old bank accounts records and check her credit record?

She has not acknowledged the debt in at least 6 1/2 years nor has she made any payment in that time. This is the first she has heard about it since 2003, unfortunately she is unsure which bank she was with between 2001 and 2003

RAS

In that case, regardless of when the account was defaulted, the debt is statute barred.

You really really have to stop talking to them on the phone. All that does is allow them to bambozzle you.

if you have told them it is statute barred and they are still pursugint eh debt, report them to the OFT.

The problem is that because you are speaking to them, you have no proff of their illegal activities.

DarkConvict

Taken from 2 other posts of mine.

Credit taken out 17th April 2002
Payment made 26th June 2002 - (SB date - 27th June 2008)
Payment made 26th August 2002 - (SB date - 27th August 2008)
Payment made 26th October 2002 - (SB date - 27th October 2008)
Payment made 26th January 2003 - (SB date - 27th January 2009)
Payment made 26th April 2003 - (SB date - 27th April 2009)
Default Issued 12th September 2003 - (SB date - 27th April 2009)

--Imaginary SB Line -- 27th April 2009

Payment made to DCA: 3rd June 2009 (Already SB)
Payment made to DCA: 3rd July 2009 (Already SB)
Payment made to DCA: 3rd August 2009 (Already SB)
Payment made to DCA: 3rd September 2009 (Already SB)

As above, statute barred is when you have not paid or acknowledged the debt in writing for 6 years. Once statute barred, always statute barred. Based on what you have said, your debt is statute barred, and for them failing to recognise this i would kindly reply stating that you have reported them to the Office of Fair trading ( link ) as for someone in their position they should be aware that a default does not count against it not been statute barred, as such they may need to consider reviewing their license to practice.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

Statute barred debt
2.13 This guidance applies to the pursuit of debt regardless of its age. We will be
carrying out further work on this aspect of debt recovery including analysis of
relevant legislation and practice throughout the UK.
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.

Further more Trading Standards and the Financial Ombudsman have been notified of this given their position as a debt collector.

Sorry im been sarcastic in the letter advice, but its true!

As to the default, it must be placed within 6 months of you actually defaulting, also you must have received a letter telling you about it for it to be lawfully applied to your credit file.