Rossendales "Enquiry" Letter

MercilessKiller

Hi Everyone

Luckily I'm debt free and always have been, though my girlfriend (when 18) did have a few problems with various debts. She entered into repayment schemes with creditors who contacted her and has been paying them off since (She's 25 now).

I met her last year, and she moved in with me (in London) 6 months ago (I moved here in January of 2013).

While Kate is not on the tenancy agreement, I did include her on the council tax, and thus the electoral roll.

Kate had lived in a property in Leeds from when she was 19, up until she moved to London earlier this year. That was a registered address on the electoral roll which is where her creditors got in touch with her and when she began the repayments.

Oddly enough, she received a letter at our address in London yesterday from Rossendales Collect. It was addressed to Kate, but underneath the letter-head, it included her old-old address from when she was 18 oddly! (That address was a property provided by the council for her).

The letter sets out as an "enquiry" letter to see if the "Kate" living in the property is the same Kate as the one that lived in the other property 7 years ago, as they need to speak with her and asked her to contact them immediately, or accept their apologies if it's not them.

The odd thing is, she's not aware of any outstanding debts - Her credit records show bad marks for the debts known about, and she is paying all of those off meaning they're "accepted". There's nothing else outstanding on her credit record (I had a look), and she's a little concerned about this. While she's never been good with money in the past, I've been helping her out and she's cleared most the debts now and moving on with her life!

So, what should our next step be? I see the following options:
1) Ignore the letter (I imagine the best option?)
2) Reply and state she's not a legal tenant (It's not a lie, but could indicate she is at the property thus further aggravate the issue)
3) Reply and accept she is here and wait to see what the debt is actually about?

Obviously, this is my property in my name which I pay for so the last thing I'd want is Bailiffs turning up or starting to chase me personally for an old debt of my girlfriends which she doesn't remember!

I'm not too worried at this point as it is just an enquiry letter, but thought I better ask here right at the start before I let it get further and have done something wrong!!

Thanks MSErs!

rizla_king

Something that hasn't reared it's head for 7 years could be statute barred or not hers at all. I would take option (1) and ignore. See if they write with further details or just disappear back into the scummy pond they crawled from befor you are tempted to respond.

MercilessKiller

Thought so - I am the type of guy that likes to respond but as I have no experience in this area, I wanted to ask the experts!

Cheers bud

MercilessKiller

Hi All

Well, an update - it's a month later and I just got a letter containing debt details. It's a debt from around 7 to 8 years ago for a mobile phone (a forgotten debt).

There is just the amount owed and a message saying we must respond within 7 days or recovery action will commence (in red writing of course).

The amount owed is apparently over £400 and this doesn't seem right, so will send a letter requesting proof as per the other post:
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2607247

As it was well over 6 years ago, should they respond with proof, I'll send them the other letter:
http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=34906257&postcount=5

Any further advice would be great but will follow these instructions for now.

Cheers!

sourcrates

More than 6 years and it would be statute barred, write and tell them its statute barred and to fornicate off !!!!

Sparhawke

sourcrates wrote: »

More than 6 years and it would be statute barred, write and tell them its statute barred and to fornicate off !!!!

If you acknowldge it in any way whatsoever then the debt becomes live so this is not the best advice. Ignore it as all they can do is send letters; otherwise get themseles an expensive court order making the debt live again. This is something they are very unlikely to do though as sending out the occasional letter is much cheaper.

fermi

Sparhawke wrote: »

If you acknowldge it in any way whatsoever then the debt becomes live

If it is already statute barred, then no it doesn't.

The LA1980 says that.

a current period of limitation may be repeatedly extended under this section by further acknowledgments or payments, but a right of action, once barred by this Act, shall not be revived by any subsequent acknowledgment or payment.

Heffi1

Sparhawke wrote: »

If you acknowledge it in any way whatsoever then the debt becomes live so this is not the best advice. Ignore it as all they can do is send letters; otherwise get themselves an expensive court order making the debt live again. This is something they are very unlikely to do though as sending out the occasional letter is much cheaper.

This in not quite right.

If a debt has not been acknowledged in writing or with a payment for 6 years then it becomes statute barred.

making a payment or acknowledging after this time, will NOT un bar it, the debt still exists, but they cannot use legal means to chase it, i.e. they cannot take you to court for it, as statute barred is a complete defence.

I would write back with a prove it letter and then with a statute barred letter after that, then I would forget all about it.

They may still send you letters, but there is not much else they could do.

ETA: fermi beat me to it

MercilessKiller

Thanks everyone!

I can't claim statute barred just yet because they didn't put the date of the debt on the letter, and by suggesting I know about it, that could potentially count as proof of liability or something stupid!

So as per Heffi1 suggested, I'll send back the letter of liability to get proof. That will show the debt is more than 6 years, and then I'll send the statute barred letter.

Thanks for the advice guys!

MercilessKiller

Hi All,

After sending the letter asking them to prove liability, I just got a response stating:
1) The debt is from August 2007
2) The address was my girlfriends old address
3) "It is clear you dispute liability, unfortunately the nature of your dispute is unclear"

Due to point 3, they've put the case on hold 28 days until I give them reasons for my dispute.

It's a really badly written letter. For example, one sentence is:
"We can confirm that the outstanding balance is in relation to a Mobile from . The agreement was originally taken out on Aug 2007"

Nope, didn't make sense to me either.

Anyway, should I simply respond and say "Unfortunately, you have failed to provide any proof that the debt is mine - I have re-enclosed the original letter for your review", and just send the old letter again?

I don't want to talk about statue barred until they've proven liability, though in their mind they've done this by stating the date, the company (car phone warehouse), and the address.

Thanks!

MercilessKiller

I think the below should be my reply:

Dear Sir/Madam,

On the 13th of January, I submitted an official request for evidence as to my liability for the debt in question. It appears this has been ignored as your response makes no reference to providing this evidence, but simply asks me to explain the dispute.

I have re-enclosed my original letter for your review. Failing to provide evidence WILL result in a complaint to trading standard and informing the OFT with regards to harassment and unfair methods.

Regards...