14yr old debt help please !

John_Jizzle

why dont you just pay what you owe?

rizla_king

DEXTERFAN wrote: »

Hi ive had a reply from BCW today saying the following:i can hearby confirm your concern have been recorded and are currently being investigated in the menatime i have authorised a "cease all action" instruction to be placed your account with immediate effect. a copy of ourinternal complaints procedure is enclosed .

what does everyone think of that, is that normal procedure from them? hope now that i wont be bothered anymore , will have to wait now see what they say. xx

Yes that is normal. Sit tight.

DEXTERFAN

John_Jizzle wrote: »

why dont you just pay what you owe?

if id had the money i wouldve paid them a long time ago, i certainly dont have the money now especially being on the sick after having an operation, but by what others have advised on here (which im glad they did) is that debtors shouldnt be chasing me for a 14 yr old debt anymore anyway

tescobabe69

John_Jizzle wrote: »

why dont you just pay what you owe?

You're new to this arent you ?

I suggest you read something else, this place is really going to depress you.

vax2002

Serve notice of Statute barred debt as final communication and IGNORE them.
They can and will demand and ask you pay and this will continue until they stop getting a response.
They can not enforce this debt via the courts.
Pull up the drawer bridge.

fatbelly

You might be surprised that they agree with you.

Alternatively they might come up with some invented reason (a payment made in 2004 would be the most likely here) why it isn't SB.

It doesn't matter either way. Ultimately only a court can decide if this is/isn't SB and the chances of them spending their money on a court claim are pretty slim.

DEXTERFAN

hi all, right ive had an answer back from BCW it says the following:

final response
i can confirm we have undertaken an investigation into the issue you raised and have concluded that your complaint has been rufuted.
BCW act in good faith on the information provided by our clients, we were not at ANY time advised by our client of any ongoing disputes or unresolved complaint issues.
the above reference letter is the first contact we have received from you advising us that you regard the account to be subject to statue limitations, we placed you account on hold while we investigated.
we have referred matters to our client who have provided us with the enclosed statement , you will note that the last payment you made was 11th may 2011.(which i cant even find any payment of that according to my payment records i last paid scott call in april 11 not november as id thought ,and by debit card) therefore your account is not subject to statue limatations.
we have now been instructed to to resume our recovery propcess until the balnace of £1965 has been settled , as a result of this being first contact from you we would consider that our actions and contray to the office of fair trading and therefore do not consider our actions to be harassment.

They enclosed a complaints prosedure letter and three pages of payments apparently paid by me as from 2006 to debt managers which im not sure is a debt company or various debt companies ive dealt with over the years and westcott credit services who ive not dealt with for at least 13 yrs yet they say i paid them in 2006 ?? so thats wrong.
it shows no payments on there from before 2006 either,im not sure why.
there dates and years are not right , some payment proof i have arent even listed on these payment pages theyve sent me and now this morning i had a letter dated 5/07/12 saying " visit by investigation agent"
saying as a faliure to contact them we are left with no option but to send an agent to your address in order to discuss a repayment plan .

why are they sending me another letter when the response i had off them about my statue bar said FINAL RESPONSE ?
can you give me some advice on what to do next please

thanks

fermi

Typical bullshot and bluster from BCW and Aktiv.

If it was statute barred back in 2009, then it still is now.

No matter what nonsense or fabricated payment history they come out with.

Doesn't matter if you last paid yesterday.

fermi

fatbelly wrote: »

Alternatively they might come up with some invented reason (a payment made in 2004 would be the most likely here) why it isn't SB.

It doesn't matter either way. Ultimately only a court can decide if this is/isn't SB and the chances of them spending their money on a court claim are pretty slim.

As you predicted.

fatbelly

fatbelly wrote: »

It's a common misunderstanding. They had until March 2005 to commence court action. It became Statute Barred at that point and remains that way.

They chose the wrong year. There's no point inventing payments AFTER the debt became SB!

Honestly I could do the harassment/lies thing better than them.