Cabot - Offering full and final settlements!

fermi

- As said, debts are statute barred after 6 years of no payments or written acknowledgement. Nothing at all to do with being on your credit files of not.

- To be clear, just because debts are no longer on your credit file, this DOES NOT mean they are unenforceable. You can still be taken to court for them if you don't pay, and that would put a fresh CCJ on your credit file. You cannot just stop paying with impunity once debts drop off your credit file, as you risk a CCJ.

- Hence why some DMPs run longer than 6 years, and people can't just stop paying without risking consequence.

McKneff

ylesia wrote: »

Effectively calling me stupid is a funny way of helping.

Can someone please confirm or not if a debt is unenforceable after it drops of your credit file - even if you have been making payments?

So far I have only actually paid 1 of the debts and due to pay the others.

I never said or inferred that you were stupid, clearly you are not.

And I had the grace to apologise for unententionally offending you.

Hope you sort things out for your mum.....and good for you for doing it.

ylesia

fermi wrote: »

- As said, debts are statute barred after 6 years of no payments or written acknowledgement. Nothing at all to do with being on your credit files of not.

- To be clear, just because debts are no longer on your credit file, this DOES NOT mean they are unenforceable. You can still be taken to court for them if you don't pay, and that would put a fresh CCJ on your credit file. You cannot just stop paying with impunity once debts drop off your credit file, as you risk a CCJ.

- Hence why some DMPs run longer than 6 years, and people can't just stop paying without risking consequence.

Thank you

As I have said, this is exactly what I thought and never questioned until McKneff came on and called me stupid for paying them.

I said my mum was on a dmp in my first post so obvious that they were not statue barred.

ylesia

McKneff wrote: »

I find it incredulous to be honest or did you not know this.

Yes this offended me and I took it as you calling me stupid.

ylesia

McKneff wrote: »

I never said or inferred that you were stupid, clearly you are not.

And I had the grace to apologise for unententionally offending you.

Hope you sort things out for your mum.....and good for you for doing it.

I know you apologised but to me it felt tongue in cheek, especially with the comment about not being able to help me - as if I wasn't listening.

If you had apologised and said something along the lines of "I didn't realise your mum was stilling paying towards them" then I would have taken it as a sincere apology.

Maybe I am too sensitive - this has been a long running tension in our family for many years and to be honest sometimes all I want is someone to say I am doing a good job of helping her - doesn't take much to tip me over the edge (as I am sitting here in tears).

Thank you for the good wishes

McKneff

It wasnt tongue in cheek. It was an apology, full stop.

You are being too sensitive, you are reading into things that are simply not there.

You are taking your tensions out on the wrong people.

My comments about helping people was a general comment.

Please dont cry, no need, you are sorting it. Up an' at 'em.

Regards
Annie.

McKneff

You are doing something good in helping her, you know that yourself and I said so when I sent you good wishes.

Its always nice to be appreciated, even if a total stranger has to say it, although it should be your mum who is saying it. She will appreciate it, she just doesnt realise she needs to say it out loud.