Payplan, cleardebt and debtadvisorycentre misleading info on Limitations Act 1980

Rednelly_2

fermi wrote: »

Thank you for that.

Sorry to be a pain and a bit forthright.

Usually if I try the "softly softly" approach with companies, I get nowhere.

I do however think that companies should check carefully information they put on their websites that has legal implications like this.

WE agree - and we aim to respond as well to "softly softly" as we do to the more forthright approach.

kev-1977

SB stands for Statute Barred.

Here's a link for the full explanation

http://www.thinkmoney.com/debt/debt-help-debt-advice/when-does-a-debt-become-statute-barred-0-5274.htm

Not recommending Think Money.
They have a good explanation of SB.

fermi

kev-1977 wrote: »

Not recommending Think Money.
They have a good explanation of SB.

They don't. It's full of horrendous and misleading errors. :eek:

fermi

Above 2 posts moved from another thread.

Shows another example of even finance websites getting this very wrong.

fermi

Cleardebt factsheet is still wrong.

Useless......

http://www.cleardebt.co.uk/debt-advice/downloadable-debt-help-guides/out-of-date-debt/

If the creditor does not contact you (the debtor) for 6 years or more, you (the debtor) may be able to claim that the outstanding debt is Statute Barred under the conditions of the Limitations Act. Statute Barred means the creditor cannot use the legal system to enforce payment.

Utterly misleading, as you well know that the creditor contacting the debtor has no effect on limitation whatsoever.

Effective acknowledgement must be made by the debtor, in writing, and signed by them.

fermi

Another website repeating this rubbish.

http://www.debtadvisorycentre.co.uk/advice/what-does-statute-barred-debt-mean-0-3991-0.html

Former_MSE_Andrea

The Debt Advisory Centre has asked us to post a reply on its behalf.

MoneySavingExpert doesn't endorse anything a company says on the forum.

Hi, I work for the Think Money Group - Debt Advisory Centre is one of our websites. Thank you for pointing this out (and thanks to Fermi for the email). We have immediately removed the page you mention from our website (and any other pages we have on the same topic) pending review by our legal team. Softly softy or forthright is all the same to us - we want to get things right, and if we do make a mistake then we'll correct it as soon as we can.

Thank you,

Ian

rizla_king

Idiots have put it back up with the same utter tosh in the article.