Partners debts!

joannefred

FireWyrm wrote: »

Right, lets start again from scratch because there are a number of issues to address here.

1) Does he owe the debts? Yes
2) When was the last time he made a payment or acknowledged in writing these debts...list them please. He is unsure of exact dates but is sure that he's not made any payments in the last 6 years We cant help without specific information

3) What previous correspondance has there beeen regarding these debts? Again, be honest, we're not prying, but we cant help if we dont have all the facts. These are the only letters he's had. He moved around a lot after splitting from his ex in 2006 This really is the only permanent address he's has since then

4) Move the car into your name. Do it now as Hollowitch says.

My guess is that all three are bluffing, but withough the information I asked for, there is no way to know for sure. Certainly Debt 1 is probably a bluff, they couldnt/wouldnt go to the trouble of getting a CCJ for less than £1000. Plus, as you say, Debt 1 doesnt show on his credit file. To be sure however, you must obtain the other files from Experian and Equifax. If you're not sure how to do that, search the forum for information.

Holding action as of tomorrow morning....

Write to ALL THREE and state that you have no knowledge of this debt and that you require proof of it in the form of a signed credit agreement etc. Search the forum for 'Prove It' letter. You'll find plenty on here. Send two copies each from different postoffices. Do that tomorrow.

I suspect that one or all of these debts are statute barred which means that they can hassle, but they cannot go through the courts. If their letters contain words like 'may seek court action' etc, then it's probably not serious. Debt collection agencies like to talk big, but when it comes down to it, they dont follow through, especially if they cant. We wont know that until you can tell us, for each debt, when the last payment was made or acknowledgement in writing. Statute barred is 6 years from one or both of those criteria. If it doesnt show on his credit file (all three) then I doubt it's a legitimate debt.

With regard to them walking into your house and taking things, they cant. They can only levy against the property of the debtor. Since the debtor ownes nothing, they cannot levy against it. More to the point, they cannot just walk into your house, they have no righs on your property and you have every right to dispute these debts immediately. Do so.

Come back with more information when you have it, and we'll have more information for you.

Thank you all for the help.

joannefred

FireWyrm wrote: »

People have all sorts of personal setups. As it is, my husband doesnt work and he doesnt claim income support either. Its our choice.

His personal financial situation is beside the point at the moment. We dont even know if these are legitimate debts or not. Your questions are clouding the issue for the OP.

Thank you I am getting a little confused :eek:

joannefred

sistafromanothermista wrote: »

Hi FireWyrm, i was merely trying to get some knowledge of the household situation. Not really to help the OP with the SB side of things but to try and ascertain if there was anything that could be done to increase household income in any way.
True, we don't know if they are legitimate debts or not at this stage. But the fact the OP is having sleepless nights concerned me as i too have had a mare with worry over debt.
Like you said people have their own reasons/choices to work/not work claim/not claim. However not everyone is in the same worrying position as the OP.
If they/he does owe the debt then a bit of background may help the OP assess the situation and increase income accordingly.So are you saying that if he does owe these debts then I would be liable to pay them, so he needs to get a job to make it easier?

That's all.

Sorry I don't understand, If he's got no money do I have to pay?

FireWyrm

joannefred wrote: »

Sorry I don't understand, If he's got no money do I have to pay?

No.

This was why I felt you were getting confused!

Debts are owed by the debtor only, that is, the person named on the credit agreement. In the case of a joint debt such as perhaps a mortage, then the debtor is jointly and severally liabile. In this case, there is nothing to indicate that you are tied to these debts in any way shape or form.

Further, there is no way that ANY civil debt collection agency can set foot on your property without your permission. Unlike debts such as council tax (where the law applies and can be pretty heavy handed), civil debts are not a criminal offence and you cannot be treated like a criminal...at least, not since the 1860's.

Search the forum for a 'Prove It' letter template and write to each three. Do not under any circumstances let any door stepper into your house, regardless of what they tell you. Do not sign anything. They have been known to lie, do not trust them.

They should respond with verifiable proof, a true signed copy of the credit agreement relating to this debt showing beyond doubt that your partner is the debtor and that he is libable for the debt.

Liability must show also that he has MADE A PAYMENT or ACKNOWLEDGED IN WRITING that these debts are his and his intention to pay them within the last 6 years. If NONE of these debts show as defaults on any of the three possible credit files, they are more than likely STATUTE BARRED.

If you are sure that they are, search the forum for another type of letter template using the words STATUTE BARRED and tell all three to take a long walk off a short pier.

You are under no obligation to assist them in any way. It is for them to prove the debt, not for him to prove he doesnt owe it. You must not engage with them verbally, do not give them your phone number. Do not 'confim' your details over the phone and do not listen to their 'we must pass DPA before we can speak to...' etc rubbish. Put the phone down. Correspondance in WRITING from now on, not emails, smoke signals or chinese whispers.

Get on the internet and start researching the terms I have given you above and understand your rights...you'll need to quote them.

If you are sure that NONE of these debts are for Council Tax, the debt collector has very few 'rights' in this regard. Even IF it got to court, they would still need to PROVE the debt and I doubt it will get that far.

Start tomorrow morning with the prove it letters and work up to the 'get f**kd, its statute barred' letter.

Stop worrying. You are absolutely NOT LIABILE IN ANY WAY.

joannefred

Phew... Thanks

sistafromanothermista

Sorry for confusing you OP :rotfl:
Hope you get it all sorted out.

joannefred

sistafromanothermista wrote: »

Sorry for confusing you OP :rotfl:
Hope you get it all sorted out.

Don't worry about it. It doesn't take much to confuse me

joannefred

Right I have checked out the 3 credit files (noodle, experian and equifax) here's what i've found...

Debt 1 £495 t mobile one
This only shows up on equifax with a date of last payment showing as 06.2008 however the telephone number linked to the account is one partner has never heard of. He used to have a T mobile phone but that phone has not been used in at least 5 years.

Debt 2
Original debt not on noodle but is shown on there as a debt to Lowell. It shows as original debt on equifax with a last payment date of 02.2007 and was apparently satisfied (no idea what this means) on 08.2012.
It shows up on experian under both original lender and Lowell.Original lender states it as satisfied. However this is really confusing as in the info it stats that it was originally taken out 07.2004 and defaulted 11.2007 yet when you look at payment history they started 06.2008 (no entries before then) and last payment made 11.2009.
Lowells entries has 3 defaults for the last 3 months.

DEBT 3
Absent from experian. Showing as owing to Arrow global on noodle with a default date of 04.2007 no history before that date. Showing on equifax as owing to Arrow Global with a last payment date of 10.2006 and default date of 04.2007.

Further more Equifax shows an O2 account he's never heard of showing as settled and ending 06.2008 the name on this account is slightly different to partners but the adress is one where he used to live 6/7 years ago.
The noodle account has a search on it by Mem Consumer Finance Limited dated 06.2011 stating they are 'checking Credit Application' the address on it is given as the same as the one above.

Hope this info will help in advising us. Thanks in advance

joannefred

Just another quick question if partner was to fill out a SOA what would have to go on it. My income? Joint tax credits claim? Would my income be included when it came to the expenditure? As far as I can see that would be unfair as these debts if he owes them have nothing to do with me.

FireWyrm

joannefred wrote: »

Right I have checked out the 3 credit files (noodle, experian and equifax) here's what i've found...

Lets take them one at a time then.

joannefred wrote: »

Debt 1 £495 t mobile one
This only shows up on equifax with a date of last payment showing as 06.2008 however the telephone number linked to the account is one partner has never heard of. He used to have a T mobile phone but that phone has not been used in at least 5 years.

OK, this sounds like Fraud. First, it would be statute barred by June next year if you did nothing at the moment. The default is already on the file, so 'satisfaction' wouldnt give him any particular advantage even IF this could be proved to be his - which I doubt. Second, it's £495....I doubt they would dare waste the courts time with a CCJ for it although you should certainly keep an eye out for official court papers.

Resolution :

1) Send a Prove It crossed with a 'this is fraud, not my debt' letter. You can find templates on here by searching, or use your common sense. You can write something that will do the job. They are likely to claim that because this is a mobile phone debt, that they dont have to produce a credit file, which would be right (since it doesnt apply to mobile technology) but they MUST have a statement of account.

My long term aim would be to simply run them around in circles until summer next year and then send them the 'statute barred - go away' letter. Dollars to donuts, the debt was bought for pennies.

joannefred wrote: »

Debt 2
Original debt not on noodle but is shown on there as a debt to Lowell. It shows as original debt on equifax with a last payment date of 02.2007 and was apparently satisfied (no idea what this means) on 08.2012.

Right. Definately statute barred AND its showing as satisfied anyway (meaning someone paid it). Tell them to take a hike.

joannefred wrote: »

It shows up on experian under both original lender and Lowell.Original lender states it as satisfied. However this is really confusing as in the info it stats that it was originally taken out 07.2004 and defaulted 11.2007 yet when you look at payment history they started 06.2008 (no entries before then) and last payment made 11.2009.
Lowells entries has 3 defaults for the last 3 months.

Confusing. My guess is fraud. Try disputing the default entries with Equifax and go from there. Send Lowell a 'prove it' letter and go from there.

joannefred wrote: »

DEBT 3
Absent from experian. Showing as owing to Arrow global on noodle with a default date of 04.2007 no history before that date. Showing on equifax as owing to Arrow Global with a last payment date of 10.2006 and default date of 04.2007.

Statute Barred. Simple as that. Nothing you could say would un-bar it.

joannefred wrote: »

Further more Equifax shows an O2 account he's never heard of showing as settled and ending 06.2008 the name on this account is slightly different to partners but the adress is one where he used to live 6/7 years ago.

Defintely lending towards fraud then. I would include this in all three letters. Dispute the debts entirely as not yours.

joannefred wrote: »

The noodle account has a search on it by Mem Consumer Finance Limited dated 06.2011 stating they are 'checking Credit Application' the address on it is given as the same as the one above.

Dispute with the reference agency and send them proof that he doesnt live at that address. This is fraud. He needs to deal with this since its apparent that he is their favourite toy and has been since at least 2007.