Bryan Carter Lowell (not de ja vu)

[Deleted User]

they can easily be stalled for a few more months by doing the 'return to sender' trick; then in may just give them the sb defence. They're just using scare tactics about court action: I could paper my house with these court action threat letters I've had over the years.

matttye

juanlanesra wrote: »

@matttye - was exactly as fatbelly called it.

I understand that I'm asking what the initial dispute was.

My reason for asking is that what I would do in your situation depends on whether or not their claim is legitimate.

fatbelly

juanlanesra wrote: »

If they were to say £100 and you'll never hear from us again, your report will read part-settled and then will drop off in two months. I'd suffer that.

I doubt that they will contact you with an offer like that. If you wanted to go down that route (I'm not sure I would) then just be aware that telephone conversations do NOT count as acknowledgement.

Deleted User wrote: »

they can easily be stalled for a few more months by doing the 'return to sender' trick; then in may just give them the sb defence. They're just using scare tactics about court action: I could paper my house with these court action threat letters I've had over the years.

I'd generally agree with that. However, Lowell and Bryan Carter solicitors have featured heavily on this board in recent months - just go back through a few 'help, I've had a court claim' type threads.

juanlanesra

matttye wrote: »

I understand that I'm asking what the initial dispute was.

My reason for asking is that what I would do in your situation depends on whether or not their claim is legitimate.

They tried to incorporate a handset's value as a line item on a bill (£350) despite the fact I'd bought the handset from an independent shop

@"Deleted User" apologies if sounding thick but having already replied to them and having opened their latest letter how would I use the return to sender trick... Don't you have to include a reason!?

[Deleted User]

did you acknowledge the debt when you replied to them ? If not, just mark envelopes 'addressee not recognised' and return them. You've only got a couple of months until it's sb, this should buy you enough time.

jadex

juanlanesra wrote: »

They tried to incorporate a handset's value as a line item on a bill (£350) despite the fact I'd bought the handset from an independent shop

so they wanted to tricked you into paying them £350 and now you are prepared to pay upto £100 to avoid court? if it was their fault then let them take you to court.

I do not understand why people are so afraid of going to courts and pay unjustified money to avoid it - courts are there for both sides and going there doesn't mean being sentenced to prison or beheaded; it doesn't hurt and judges are people as well; and you may come up with nice payout covering your stress, costs, inconveniences, lost earnings, etc.
It's not like by taking you to court DCA can automatically laugh all the way to their bank. It doesn't work like that. They would have to win the case and to do that they would need to prove you are liable.

juanlanesra

jadex wrote: »

so they wanted to tricked you into paying them £350 and now you are prepared to pay upto £100 to avoid court? if it was their fault then let them take you to court.

I do not understand why people are so afraid of going to courts and pay unjustified money to avoid it - courts are there for both sides and going there doesn't mean being sentenced to prison or beheaded; it doesn't hurt and judges are people as well; and you may come up with nice payout covering your stress, costs, inconveniences, lost earnings, etc.
It's not like by taking you to court DCA can automatically laugh all the way to their bank. It doesn't work like that. They would have to win the case and to do that they would need to prove you are liable.

The worry is they can prove a relationship and my defence is my word or reliant on the original creditor to provide accurate notes/call recordings (which i doubt they have after all this time)

How can I substantiate a defence otherwise!?

juanlanesra

Update - following advice from forums like this replied leading to a response of "we acknowledge your letter and your account is on hold whilst we retrieve the original documents from the creditor"

Is this the time for me to strike to get them off my back for good?

fatbelly

juanlanesra wrote: »

Interesting! Top advice people

It now comes down to a game of chicken as it seems I'll receive a claim form imminently - although I can send the prove it, first class recorded today!?

As the last payment was May 2008... Can they be stalled!?

No, if by 'strike now' you mean a letter saying that this is statute barred and they are out of time for a court claim, then you are at LEAST a month too early based on this post.

I presume that all you've sent them is a prove-it letter?

I know I've said 'May 2014' in posts above, but if the first MISSED payment was actually in June 2008, then the time starts running from that.

The correct thing to do now is nothing.