What happens if....

needuradvice

I'm really getting depressed here. Just been to a local debt advice centre as i was worried incase i wrote the wrong worded letter...the guy told that he can do a letter, but he'll charge me £100 per letter sent and also he is going to tell them that i'm willing to go onto a debt management program!!!

I walked out feeling very angry with myself.

Pls could someone help me...i feel like i'm going crazy.

GeorgeUK

Not been on the site for a couple of days.
Bumping this up so that i know to look for a letter. Will be back at a more civilised time.

Amphibian

needuradvice wrote: »

I'm really getting depressed here. Just been to a local debt advice centre as i was worried incase i wrote the wrong worded letter...the guy told that he can do a letter, but he'll charge me £100 per letter sent and also he is going to tell them that i'm willing to go onto a debt management program!!!

I walked out feeling very angry with myself.

Pls could someone help me...i feel like i'm going crazy.

Okay, take a breath, relax, it's not worth getting stressed over.

Do not agree to enter any debt management process, if the debt is statute barred their is no enforceable debt to manage. Certainly do not offer to pay someone, who has given you such poor advice, money to write letters to this DCA.

The DCA is just trying to scare you and it is clearly working.

I've been through this too, so I know how these scumbags operate, there are standard letters to cover this additional contact, GeorgeUK will probably be along with one shortly, but basically you repeat that the debt is barred and that repeated requests for a statute barred debt can constitute harassment etc...

needuradvice

Thank You so much george and amphibian..at least i know there is someone out there. Last night i typed up a fresh letter, so pls take a look and let me know if this is okay...FYI, both formats from the National Debtline and MoneyExpert letters:-

xxxxxxxx,

xxxxxxxx,

xxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxx

xxxxxxxx, 2010

Mackenzie Hall Ltd
(xxxxxxxx - Accounts Manager)
Unit 1A,
58 Portland Street,
Kilmarnock,
Ayrshire
KA1 1JG

FTAO: xxxxxxxx (Accounts Manager)

* * * * * * FORMAL COMPLAINT * * * * *

Dear xxxxxxxx

Your Reference: xxxxxxxx
1st Credit Ref: xxxxxxxx
Pursuers: 1st Credit Limited
Original Creditor: xxxxxxxx Bank


I write in response to your letter dated xxxxxxxx and I would like to make a complaint against your company. The details are set out below.

On xxxxxxxx I wrote to 1st Credit Limited regarding a debt that was alleged to be owed by myself. That letter was received and signed for on xxxxxxxx as confirmed by Royal Mail tracking.

In this letter I pointed out the following items:

1) Under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 "an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued".

2) The OFT say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period".

3) The last correspondence/payment/acknowledgement or payment of this debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me to recover the alleged amount claimed.

4) The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that "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".

Therefore it is clear that your original contact regarding this debt may well have been in breach of the Office of Fair Trading Guideline referred to in item (2).

Furthermore, your second letter is in breach of Office of Fair Trading Guideline referred to in item (4) and directly constitutes harassment.

As you are no doubt aware, breaches of the OFT's Guidance on Debt Collection are treated seriously by the OFT when considering your fitness to hold a Consumer Credit License.


In particular the OFT has recently stated that:
The Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the Act) requires debt collectors, businesses that offer goods or services on credit and/or are involved in activities relating to credit or hire to be licensed by the OFT. Following implementation of the OFT's new powers under the Consumer Credit Act 2006 on 6 April 2008, the companies could also have specific 'requirements' imposed on them by the OFT. If such a requirement was not complied with, the business concerned could be subject to a financial penalty of up to £50,000. The OFT can also refuse or revoke a licence if it decides that a trader is not fit to hold one. The OFT can take into account any circumstances which appear to be relevant when considering the fitness of an applicant or licensee, including evidence that the company has contravened the Data Protection Act 1988.

Furthermore, that the OFT has recently enforced their guidelines by placing a legal requirement on Mackenzie Hall Ltd to cease pursuing statute barred or disputed debts.

Therefore I wish to formally notify you that unless I received confirmation that this matter is now closed, then I will not hesitate to make a formal complaint to the 'Office of Fair Trading' and also to 'Trading Standards'.


Furthermore, any attempted contact (other than to confirm that this matter is now closed) by any:

• "trading style" of the Mackenzie Hall Limited group
• constituent member of the Mackenzie Hall Limited group
• a third party acting on your behalf
• a third party that claims to have been legally assigned this debt

will result in an immediate complaint to the aforementioned regulatory bodies.


I understand that you must send a written acknowledgement of my complaint within 5 business days of its receipt. If you are unable to resolve my complaint within 4 weeks you must send a holding response, explaining the reasons why and indicating when you will make further contact.

If you fail to resolve my complaint within 8 weeks, or if matters are not settled to my satisfaction, I will have no alternative but to escalate my complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service. This could result in you being ordered to pay compensation if my complaint is upheld.

I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely

xxxxxxxx

theteacher_2

needuradvice wrote: »

I've just had a reply!! I've typed the letter below....I'm so worried....what do i do now????

HELP ME PLS!

Read my post re McKenzie Hall, that should help to calm your concerns with regards these leeches, they are all the same so therefore treat them all the same. :j

theteacher_2

needuradvice wrote: »

hi guys,

Thanks for the help from this forum. I've already taken my 1st steps of hopefully erradicating my debt, by sending some statute barred letters to 1st credit. I sent these via Recorded Delivery last week.

1. Royal Mail website shows that the letters have been delivered via their REIGATE delivery office, but there is no Electronic Proof of Delivery, but is the EPOD important?

2. Many people on here say that I may never receive a reply. My main concern is that i'm planning to buy a property in about 3-5mths time, but what if i don't get a reply and only receive a threatening correspondence once i have bought a property? Can they still fight me?

3. Can i chase up my statute barred letters and force them to give me answers more quickly?

Thanks

I'm an advanced customer service advisor with Royal Mail, and with regards the EPOD, it is important in cases of this nature to obtain an EPOD, call on 08457 740740 and speak to one of us and ask if we can obtain a manual EPOD which we can then email to you. Hope this helps :j

needuradvice

thanks theteacher. I read ur post regarding mackenzie. I will not contact them via phone, but only write to them to threat them that harassing someone who is statute barred risks them being reported to OFT.

Also i have already contacted Royal Mail regarding EPOD and they sent me an email with a clearly scanned signature and receipt.

Now i only need a confirmation from someone that my letter posted previously is okay to send.

thanks

GeorgeUK

Sorry for the delay - i had to go into work today.

I think the letter makes it quite clear; possibly overkill but there is no way they should be pursuing the debt or contacting you again.

I don't know if it would be worth also putting in the section 10 of the Data Protection Act refusing them permission to process your data. If they continue to do so the ICO may have more teeth to deal with them than TS or OFT.

As a result of the above, you should now consider this letter a statutory notice under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any personal data stored on your systems/records and data relating to this account with immediate effect. This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies.

Should you refuse to comply, you must within 21 days provide me with a detailed breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data. It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’; You must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends.

needuradvice

thanks george. If ur saying that the letter is already an overkill, then should i still add that extra section? Bear in mind that i want a minimum response from these guys that the account is now closed.

GeorgeUK

If you're going to send a letter like this that then you may as well throw everything at them.

What you have is more than a simple letter requesting they stop contacting you as the debt is statute barred. You are making a formal complaint, stating that they've breached OFT guidelines, demannding that they provide confirmation that the matter is closed and threatening to report them to the regulators.

If you add this other part and they continue as they have been, they will be in breach of the Data Protection Act as well and can be reported to the Information Commissioner. I'd look at it as just another nail in their coffin - before you pour the cement over them