Judgment for Claimant - Arrow Global

STAS

Sorry Guy's, yes the original default has long gone from my credit file......well over 9 years.

STAS

Hello Again,

Thanks to everyone for their help so are.

Just to let you know I received notification from my local CC that the Notice of hearing of application is schedule for early April.

I just hope that my defence that the debt was statute barred at the date of the judgement and that I never received the Claim Form is a strong enough defence.

Is there anything else I should be saying in by defence.

Thanks again for your very welcome help.

Hanky_Panky

Are you in a position to pay it now ?

That would certainly make it go away.

Interhacker

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

Are you in a position to pay it now ?

That would certainly make it go away.

Why pay, its statue bared and its off his credit file, the ccj will also be removed if all he has said it correct?

Hanky_Panky

Interhacker wrote: »

Why pay, its statue bared and its off his credit file, the ccj will also be removed if all he has said it correct?

Whilst it may be SB now the money is still owed and it would certainly make his current problems re court etc disappear immediately.

Ben8282

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

Are you in a position to pay it now ?

That would certainly make it go away.

I disagree. Why should he pay this scumbag dca for a statute barred debt that they have resorted to illegal methods to collect?

Ben8282

STAS wrote: »

Hello Again,

Thanks to everyone for their help so are.

Just to let you know I received notification from my local CC that the Notice of hearing of application is schedule for early April.

I just hope that my defence that the debt was statute barred at the date of the judgement and that I never received the Claim Form is a strong enough defence.

Is there anything else I should be saying in by defence.

Thanks again for your very welcome help.

Do you still have the court documents from 3 years ago showing that the matter was set aside then as already statute barred? As a debt cannot become un-statute barred, this should be sufficient.

I'm actually wondering if they will bother to turn up for the hearing. I wouldn't be suprised if they don't and you get another 'judgement in default' in your favour as they havn't bothered to turn up.

Sending out bulk claims to their local court to try to get judgements is one thing. Actually incurring the expense of travelling to your local court and probably paying a barrister as well is something else entirely.

STAS

Yes when I submitted form N244 I included as additional information all paperwork relateing to the original hearing.

I'm defending this case not knowing if the debt actually belongs to me, like then and know and after requesting the original signed agreement I still have not receive any paperwork to show that this bebt relates to me.

nottoolate

so cant prove its your debt? and statute barred also?

plenty of grounds for set aside then

udydudy

From what you have posted and as other posters have already meantioned, if it was statute barred in 2009 then thats the end of it. These guys are trying what was rampant practive in the US for mortgages(robot signing) somebody at arrow global has just filed to recover a whole lot of outstanding debt without looking at the paperwork(whetehr it is statute barred). It is common practice (though not legal) but works wonders for DCA's as having bought tons of debt from lenders/creditors at say 10p in the pound if they can make even 30% pay up they make money. If like Hanky Panky advised(I think wrongly) people pay up just to get rid of the nuisance then the DCA makes tons of money.

I would say you should send a demand to these guys all costs and more for knowingly and wrongfully damaging yor credit file despite an earlier 2009 court judgement set aside the debt as statute barred. And also mention that you would be chasing that demand for recovering the costs and damages in court.

It would be satisfying to make them pay for their actions. Also make a complaint to the OFT with proof of the 2009 judgement. Let these guys have to sweat it out explaining their actions. If enough people comlain then maybe they lose their licence, but I would not hold my breath for that. OFT is unconcerned, they do not bother to cancel licences even when informed that companies are in liquidation and have increased their marketing whilst in liquidation to get as mcuh money in as possibe with the intention of defrauding the consumer.