Help with scotcall

si2008

just had a caller from scotcall about a debt the wife had with barclays. the wife took out a loan in 1999.and had problems paying it back she stoped payments and the dept got passed to a debt collection ,and has been further passed to several debt cllection agents ,
well this collector from scotcall turned up this morning and asked her how she going to pay it told them i wanted a copy of the agreemet she had with barclays this door step collector had no idea what i was on about ,
did i do the right thing i thought they could not chase me for this debt after so many years on non payment, please help with advice what do i do if he comes back

fermi

Presumably at some point there has been a period of 6 years where she neither made any payment or acknowledged the debt in writing?

si2008

yes there has been over 6 yrs where she has paid no payment or knowlaged the debt , was surprissed he turn up on door this morning she thought that the debt was with cabot,,and this guy from scotcall this morning said they have took over the debt of course we said we had no idea about the debt
so what should i do next if they come back again

fermi

The debt is statute barred then, and so legally unenforceable.

Send Scotcall the letter in this link.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2606811

si2008

hi thanks for that, i would love to send them the letter but i dont even have a account number would just putting in barclays bank be enough or just dont bother writting back to them

fermi

Well, a reference would be preferable.

You could always print out a copy and have it ready to hand to anyone who calls?

It's also quite possible that you will now be sentt a letter, since they weren't successful with their "visit". If so, then that should have an account/reference number on it, and you would then be able to reply.

Culex

Perhaps you should send them the usual letters withdrawing any implied licence to visit your house and telling them not to call adding that, as the alleged debt is statute barred under section 5 of the Limitation Act 1980 and hence unenforcible whoever may have incurred that alleged debt, you consider it could be helpful if they were to study the full meaning and import of the works of the celebrated retort in the case of Arkell v. Pressdram.

FTW

SB letter's best, but send it recorded delivery, and do not sign it.