Alleged crisis loan debt

pink_princess

missapril75 wrote: »

They will have done. From when there's a balance and no current recovery it would be automatic. And would be reviewed. They would write to the last address held.

I have changed address once in that time 9 years ago, 5 years after this alleged non payment.

And that would be just since then. There will have been many before that. They don't just sit on what they think is a debt without trying to do something about it.
They say that they have only sent three letters, three months apart starting nine months ago, they admit no contact was made before as they did not think they had my current details. After speaking to people on a consumer forum that deals with this type of thing, it seems a great many people have had this exact thing happen. And like myself they mainly all believe it was paid back.

There are a few possibilities:

Were you ever paid benefit "clerically"? This is when there's some glitch in the computer records. It means they can't "find" you on the computer and they have to pay locally/clerically rather than via the computer. Not to my knowledge, I claimed for a very short period when I was very young. I was never told it was paper based.

It means that because there are no payment records on the computer, there are no records of deductions/recovery either.

You agreed to repay and assumed the deductions started. Perhaps they never did. I repaid via cheque monthly as I started working. My bank said they don't keep records back that far, would that be correct?

Perhaps you had a change in circumstances that interrupted recovery.

The dispute over dates...you say Oct 1998, they say April 99. Perhaps April 99 was actually when recovery was interrupted? After ringing them today they say there were two loans, the date they said yesterday and the date I had. The balance also went down by £100 today and they said they never mentioned bayliffs as that is not an option. That could be because I asked about statute barred :cool: They said the April loan was for new work clothes which could be true and ties in to the dates I started working, I don't remember it but it sounds very likely and I did not pay that back so that amount was repaid today.

If it really was a payment issued when you were in work, well after your claim ended, then you need to dispute it was you that applied/received it.

The subject access route is the way to go. But if you dispute you ever had what they're asking for, you could ask them to check the three minimum signatures involved.

Thanks for your reply, they are still saying that they do not have to provide proof so I will prepare a SAR request in the hope it shows payments in. I am not hopeful as I was told today that they only keep those records for two years (Or they say they do) , I'm not certain on that as I thought all financial records must be kept for six years?

If I owe this I will have no problem paying it but I am sure it was repaid in full, I have never not paid a bill in my life! The fact that they will not even give me details of the payments they think they did receive is so annoying.

pink_princess

sh1305 wrote: »

DWP don't charge for subject access reviews.

Thanks for that, I didn't know.

missapril75

pink_princess wrote: »

I repaid via cheque monthly as I started working. My bank said they don't keep records back that far, would that be correct?

I can believe it...if they could, there would likely be a charge anyway.

...they are still saying that they do not have to provide proof...

Well, if they say they really never wrote before the last few months then I think you have a decent case.

That you have just repaid the other loan should swing it in your favour.

You're convinced you repaid it, their lack of action back then makes you even more convinced it was all finished.

I would think they'd be too embarrassed to follow up - especially having just got something from you. Not to mention the adjustment of £100. That rather sounds like they are not 100% sure themselves.

Seems like a case for "calling it even" and just accepting it was repaid and somehow didn't get recorded properly.

pink_princess

missapril75 wrote: »

I can believe it...if they could, there would likely be a charge anyway.I'd pay a charge if they could go back.



Well, if they say they really never wrote before the last few months then I think you have a decent case.

That you have just repaid the other loan should swing it in your favour.

You're convinced you repaid it, their lack of action back then makes you even more convinced it was all finished.

I would think they'd be too embarrassed to follow up - especially having just got something from you. Not to mention the adjustment of £100. That rather sounds like they are not 100% sure themselves. I keep asking them for proof, that is all I want. Prove I owe money and I will pay it, the fact that they say they don't need to prove it and to just pay up annoys me :mad:

Seems like a case for "calling it even" and just accepting it was repaid and somehow didn't get recorded properly.

If only, because I refused to pay the other one they say that they are going to take "Further action" I asked what this was and they said it could be passed to an outside agency?

missapril75

pink_princess wrote: »

If only, because I refused to pay the other one they say that they are going to take "Further action" I asked what this was and they said it could be passed to an outside agency?

If you believe they will push for it, then consider contacting your MP. Make the point that you believe your cheques cleared the loan and the absence of any contact from them in 13 years or so appears to confirm that.

If you have had ANY dealings with DWP at all since then, that would be the opportunity for them to have picked up.

DWP does take MP's enquiries seriously. If they stick to their guns with the MP involved that's going to look a bit embarrassing that they let it go so long. The fact that they have reduced the amount they originally said shows that something isn't as reliable as it should be.

I wouldn't be surprised if they backed down rather than look silly.

mikey_bach

seems to be happening with over payments as well, one recently from 1993.
Debt had a new system in 2006 and the outstanding debt was recorded on that, no detail just the amount.
when the person came back on benefit again recently its has started to be recovered again out of their benefits at £10.50 per week
Debt have just an amount no details, but it can and is being recovered

missapril75

mikey_bach wrote: »

...Debt had a new system in 2006 and the outstanding debt was recorded on that, no detail just the amount...... but it can and is being recovered

I think it might be a bit different with overpayments. I remember back in the 80s our office was so far behind on O/P action - known overpayments just got noted for calculation later, which was often years away - and many eventually were just written off. Hundreds of thousands of ££ just written off when a small fraction of the money lost could have paid for the extra staff that would have got it back timeously. Typical short sighted government policy.

Anyway, it was my understanding, some years later, that writing off overpayments just became a no-no. Once it was calculated, checked and advised, that was it. Unless successfully challenged, recovery remained appropriate.

pink_princess

missapril75 wrote: »

If you believe they will push for it, then consider contacting your MP. Make the point that you believe your cheques cleared the loan and the absence of any contact from them in 13 years or so appears to confirm that.

If you have had ANY dealings with DWP at all since then, that would be the opportunity for them to have picked up.

DWP does take MP's enquiries seriously. If they stick to their guns with the MP involved that's going to look a bit embarrassing that they let it go so long. The fact that they have reduced the amount they originally said shows that something isn't as reliable as it should be.

I wouldn't be surprised if they backed down rather than look silly.

I haven't had any dealings with them since, I am posting the SAR tomorrow via recorded delivery.