Statute barred debts and the Limitation Acts

sourcrates

Jonhn wrote: »

Hi,
I have a debt which is over six years old, last time I made a payment on this account via a debt management company is on 01/10/2010. I can prove this by my previous bank statements.
When I stopped making the payment to the debt management company on the above date. I just wan to know, Even if I stop paying the debt management company, if they have continued paying for the creditors for few months more (eg until 01/02/2011); will this count as a payment towards the debt? and then the debt would be statuary barred after 01/02/2011. Instead of the day I last made the payment to the debt management company 01/10/2010.
Can I still be able to defend my self on a ccj claim because I wasn’t liable for the payment made by the debt management company to the creditor on behalf of me?
I just want to cover all the basis before I go on the statuary barred route your advise on this matter would be highly appreciated thanks

Best to post once only, I have answered on your other post.

FreeFrom

I wonder if I could receive some support here?

I have two old style student loans which were sold on to link and erudio and are statute barred from around 20 years ago. Due to a prolonged disease during that time I am now trying to finish that degree.

I was advised by the student loans collections department that no debt was showing up to pay and that I could proceed with confidence for a tuition fees loan.

I was subsequently rejected. The Appeals one stage states because:

Eligible part-time students 137.— (3) A person (“A”) is not an eligible part-time student if— (b) A is in breach of any obligation to repay any loan

Any ideas of what I can do?

CRW1966

Hi, If a debt that was agreed whilst living Scotland as a Scottish national, would I be correct in thinking that an agreement entered in to as a Scottish resident would have been done so iaw the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973, and as such the 5 year Statute Barred period applies even if I have moved to and address in England at a later date - or does the fact that I have moved to England for work mean that the Eangland and Wales 6 year rule is applicable?

Thank you for any guidance...

fatbelly

CRW1966 wrote: »

Hi, If a debt that was agreed whilst living Scotland as a Scottish national, would I be correct in thinking that an agreement entered in to as a Scottish resident would have been done so iaw the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973, and as such the 5 year Statute Barred period applies even if I have moved to and address in England at a later date - or does the fact that I have moved to England for work mean that the Eangland and Wales 6 year rule is applicable?

Thank you for any guidance...

The Govan Law Center is pretty clear when it happens the other way around.

http://www.govanlc.com/suedinengland.htm

I would say you are now subject to English Law.

Amywhite412

Hi I hope somebody can help me.
I had a credit card debt with a bank of £1,000
I last made payment 7th November 2011
No further contact was made since I made this payment.
The debt was made defaulted 28th June 2012 as no contact or payments since November
The debt has been sold to a debt collection agency who are now threatening court action.
I have explained the debt is statute barred and sent the letter however they have sent a reply saying it isn’t statute barred as the default date recorded is June 2012.
How do you suggest I respond to this.
Thank you

fatbelly

Amywhite412 wrote: »

Hi I hope somebody can help me.
I had a credit card debt with a bank of £1,000
I last made payment 7th November 2011
No further contact was made since I made this payment.
The debt was made defaulted 28th June 2012 as no contact or payments since November
The debt has been sold to a debt collection agency who are now threatening court action.
I have explained the debt is statute barred and sent the letter however they have sent a reply saying it isn’t statute barred as the default date recorded is June 2012.
How do you suggest I respond to this.
Thank you

I suggest you ignore them now.

You say it's statute barred.

They say it isn't

Only a court can decide.

Your logic is correct in my opinion. DCAs seem to believe that the default date always constitutes the cause of action. A decent judge would rule in your favour. Similar case here

https://consumercreditlitigationanddebtcollection.wordpress.com/2017/06/13/the-pra-case-bmw-v-hart-and-statute-barring/

Danbrand1

Hi all,

Is there a hybrid letter for a response to alleged payment with a statute barred debt and now (in my case) hoist portfolio changing the default date fraudulently in order to have the debt reappear on my credit file? I don't want to contact hsbc/hoist for original default date and inadvertently acknowledge the debt. Ideally I just want it removed again from my credit file as it was.

Cheers
Dan

fatbelly

Danbrand1 wrote: »

Hi all,

Is there a hybrid letter for a response to alleged payment with a statute barred debt and now (in my case) hoist portfolio changing the default date fraudulently in order to have the debt reappear on my credit file? I don't want to contact hsbc/hoist for original default date and inadvertently acknowledge the debt. Ideally I just want it removed again from my credit file as it was.

Cheers
Dan

Not specifically, no.

Once a debt is statute barred, it cannot be reactivated.

What you seem to have is a false default date on accredit file, so you complain to the credit reference agency and they investigate.

You'll need to check all 3 reports

Mackhie

Two questions;

Having just received two letters from PRA Group regarding two debts that I know to be well over six -years old and therefore statute barred (and I have in no way acknowledged the debts in that time), I found this thread and printed off the letter ("I do not acknowledge any debt to you..."), two copies, one for each "debt", and posted them.

I then read further down and saw the letter to send if they continue to send you letters that you should send to the ombudsman. In it it says that you sent xxx a letter and "that letter was received and signed for on xx/xx/2008 as confirmed by Royal Mail tracking".

Also, on the National Debtline website, where this letter can be downloaded, it says to sign each letter. I am loathe to sign letters to debt collection agencies, as they have been known to use this signature to fabricate letters claiming that you have acknowledged the debt (which, by the way, is fraud, but proving it is another matter).

So, my questions;

1) Should I have sent the letters by Recorded Delivery/ Registered Post?

2) Does refusing to sign the letters make any difference.

sourcrates

Mackhie wrote: »

Two questions;

Having just received two letters from PRA Group regarding two debts that I know to be well over six -years old and therefore statute barred (and I have in no way acknowledged the debts in that time), I found this thread and printed off the letter ("I do not acknowledge any debt to you..."), two copies, one for each "debt", and posted them.

I then read further down and saw the letter to send if they continue to send you letters that you should send to the ombudsman. In it it says that you sent xxx a letter and "that letter was received and signed for on xx/xx/2008 as confirmed by Royal Mail tracking".

Also, on the National Debtline website, where this letter can be downloaded, it says to sign each letter. I am loathe to sign letters to debt collection agencies, as they have been known to use this signature to fabricate letters claiming that you have acknowledged the debt (which, by the way, is fraud, but proving it is another matter).

So, my questions;

1) Should I have sent the letters by Recorded Delivery/ Registered Post?

2) Does refusing to sign the letters make any difference.

Hi,


(1) if you haven't, don't worry about it, mail is delivered in bulk anyway to these large organizations anyway.


(2) Bit of a damp squib this one, in reality, makes no real difference, just print your name.