Debt collection agency-again?

struggle2

Good morning all,
To cut a long story short, my ex-husband used my credit card without my permission in 2006. He was ordered to pay by the Court and he didn't.I started getting letters from debt collection agencies, explained the situation time an time again, but they were pursuing me as the debt was in my name. The ex was made bankrupt 2009 and the debt was registered against his bankruptcy. I have now received a letter, "Verification regarding private business", which is from yet another debt collection agency. This is now 4th company. Are they allowed to come after me again and how should I deal with this? Help, please!

ValHaller

Who did the court order him to pay? If it was the credit card company, then as I see it, you are in the clear. You can just refer them to the judgement.

If it was you, then the court have left the primary responsibility for the debt with you

FireWyrm

...if you didnt acknowlege the debt (as in, 'it was me guv') or made a payment, it would have been well statute barred by now....

It does sound like a threat-o-gram, but just in case it isnt, break out your paperwork and advise where the money went (if anywhere) and who paid it...to who etc.

struggle2

The order stated that ex would be responsible for the debt, but he is unfortunately one of those, who seem to be shying from responsibilities. However, when the letters and calls started, I told the agencies, sent the paperwork, details of official receiver - you name it, I sent it and the Official Receiver even wrote to Experto Credite ( at the time) to confirm that the debt is not my responsibility as ex had accepted liability in the Court.
Any other thoughts? Hugely thankful for your help.

FireWyrm

Then it simply isnt your debt. I assume you still have that letter? If you do, send one of your own with an attached copy saying that you are not the one they are after and if they dont leave you alone, they'll find themselves on the receiving end of a complaint to the OFT and FOS.

Just out of interest, how DO they keep associating you with this? Presumably, somewhere a creditor thinks you are responsible...in which case, it might be worth finding out who and then slapping them with a complaint as well on the basis that they are selling and reselling a debt that has nothing to do with you.

ValHaller

struggle2 wrote: »

The order stated that ex would be responsible for the debt,

But the point is did they leave him responsible to the credit card company or did they leave him responsible to you???

dollward

hey im new to this so im sorry if im on wrong thread etc

ive got a few worries and was wondering if someone can answer a few questions?

i had a loan for 10k with halifax (last payment to them was 2004/2005) under personal circumstances i cud no longer pay i buried my head in the sand lost my job etc coudlnt afford.

i moved house got a few letters saying a its been passed to 1st credit they have sent me letters since 2007..thats when the default shows on file.

credit report has no sign of default anymore its gone !! no ccj has been issued either

i get letters all the time saying if i pay 50% they will pay the other half etc ...foolishly i made 3 payments to them cos wanted to get this sorted ...however i think my loan may have been stat barred cos i hadnt paid anything before them 3 payments so long before!!

ive read that if debt is 6 years or more it can be stat barred ? and cannot issue a ccj is this correct?
even if i made a payment after the stat barred applied???

ive now stopped paying this debt until i find out further info on this....1st credit send me letters saying i owe the debt and they "may" take legal action if not payed but ive had them letters for the past 4 years or so and nothing yet???

i think they must have bought my debt for a pittence cos why wud they even wanna reduce costs so much??

like i say the debt is old now i understand may exist but can they legally enforce court action ?? cos halifax last payment was in 2004/5 so even though i did make some payment to 1st credit 7 years on? there issuing money statments after i think was stat barred?? help im confused myself lol sorry if this makes no sence im new to this and just worried !!

ValHaller

dollward wrote: »

hey im new to this so im sorry if im on wrong thread etc

Please just start a new thread. There are some fairly precise questions struggle2 needs to answer and your post on this thread detracts form answering both your problem and struggle2's question.

struggle2

Experto Credite went away after the OR had written to them and stated that the debt is now attached to bankruptcy. The Court Order (Consent Order) states, that ex is responsible.

struggle2

Here we go again - second letter has arrived! This time saying that Buchanan Clark & Wells has been instructed by Aktiv Capital UK, who bought the debt from Experto Credite, who in turn received all the paperwork, including a copy of the Court Order and the letter from OR to advice them that the debt ( originally Virgin Money Card(MBNA) is attached to ex's bankruptcy. What now?
P.S. Just checked email from OR, who confirmed that Virgin was added in as one of his creditors.

ValHaller

struggle2 wrote: »

Experto Credite went away after the OR had written to them and stated that the debt is now attached to bankruptcy. The Court Order (Consent Order) states, that ex is responsible.

Therein lies your problem. You 'sorted' this as part of the divorce, which squares things between you and your ex. Except that the consent order is probably overridden by the bankruptcy.

Sorry to be bearer of bad news, but it looks like you never sorted this with the credit card company - the divorce proceedings did not include the credit card company, so they have not yet had their day in court. Right from the outset you needed to be making the case that this was fraud and squaring up matters between yourself and the credit card company.

In viewing this as part of the divorce, you seem to have inadvertently taken on tacit responsibility for this debt.

Now that is my take on the legals - I may be wrong, but I doubt it. Let's see if someone else has a different take on this. Please argue me down if you think that I have not got the legal position right - but if you are to do this, I think you need a solid grasp of how this works.