Really annoyed with a 'debt' I am supposed to owe - help please

January2015

Catalogue 'rewards' are given with clear terms and conditions. The valid time period for you to claim your reward lapsed and the catalogue company were therefore within their right to state the amount you thought you still had as rewards was no longer available to you. As such, you clearly still owed the final balance on the account and needed to pay it - whether you like it or not these are the facts.

I assume that over the past 2 years you have had numerous letters requesting payment before the cost has escalated to the current amount of £129.

If you continue this fight, in my opinion, you will be fighting a losing battle. Catalogue reward T&Cs are very clear and you admit they have informed you from the outset that your rewards had lapsed.

-taff

Sallyford wrote: »

Not in my eyes. There is no debt. There was no debt. Littlewoods created a 'debt' by removing the Reward Money from my account.

Nope.
Your eyes are skewiff. You owe them the final instalment, You failed to pay it.

This failure to pay is resulting in your trashed credit score which is probaby not that important unless you want to apply for credit in the future.

The reward money came with clear terms and conditions. You failed to pay attention to those conditions.

Whether you want to ignore me, or decide I'm talking rubbish, those are the facts.

It's entirely up to you what you do.

If you want to sue them for your failure to read the terms and conditions of the reward money....good luck

Anatidaephobia

Sallyford wrote: »

Not in my eyes. There is no debt. There was no debt. Littlewoods created a 'debt' by removing the Reward Money from my account.

There has always been a debt. You were happy to set up the payment arrangement to pay it off in instalments and presumably when you set this up, you didn't have the £48 reward money available, so you were fully prepared to pay it all back. Unfortunately you missed the opportunity to use the reward money because the time lapsed, as per the T&Cs, but that doesn't mean the original debt is suddenly no longer valid.

I can completely understand why you would be annoyed about this but I can't see that refusing to pay money you owe is going to benefit you in the long term.

January2015

The 'rewards' the OP refers to had clear T&Cs and to put the situation into perspective it is a bit like having a winning lottery ticket and trying to claim 181 days after the draw date. T&Cs state winning ticket is only valid for 180 days from date of lottery draw. Trying to claim on 181st day (or any date after that) means the ticket is invalid and worthless; regardless of whether it won £10 or £10m it's now too late to claim.

The only difference is the winning lottery ticket scenario was not associated with any debt - the situation described by the OP had a debt of £40. The £40 debt was genuinely incurred by the OP through the purchase of goods from the catalogue. The rewards offered by Littlewoods were a bonus given because of the purchases and payments made, but had no direct relation to the debt. The OP had the opportunity, under the T&Cs to use the rewards towards clearance of the debt, but the OP failed to take this opportunity within the timeframe set by the T&Cs. Hence, in the same way a lottery ticket becomes worthless, so did the rewards - however the debt remained and because of failure to understand and accept T&Cs the debt has risen to £129 and is likely to continue to rise as more costs to chase the debt are added, including the possibility of legal costs.

My advice would be to pay the debt now. OP could write to Littlewoods customer services and explain the 'misunderstanding' and request the mark on the credit file is removed (good luck with that one!). If that doesn't work you can request a notice of correction is added to your credit file with the credit reference agencies. This doesn't mean the mark Littlewoods have placed on your file is incorrect but explains to creditors searching your file how the poor mark came about. Text below copied from Equifax site:

"A Notice of Correction is a piece of text, written by you, that you can request to have added to your Credit File. You may wish to do this if there is an item of information on your Credit File, which is factually correct, but you believe it creates a misleading impression. Your Notice of Correction should give a clear and accurate explanation of why you consider a piece of data to be incorrect or misleading. Your Notice of Correction text must not be longer than 200 words"

The important bit here, which OP is likely to dispute, is that Littlewoods have put a poor mark on their credit file with is factually correct. OP owed the money, OP didn't pay; hence poor mark on the credit file. OP may not like it, but it is factually correct.

If submitting a notice of correction is an option OP wants to consider, they would need to file a notice of correction with all the credit reference agencies.

January2015

Sallyford wrote: »

If they're so concerned I hadn't spent the Reward Money, why didn't they automatically use it to reduce what was owed on the furniture - instead of just nicking it off me.

I get vouchers from Sainsbury's occasionally - given because I could have got my shopping cheaper at Asda. If I don't spend them within the time frame stated on the voucher I lose the value of the voucher. I think very similar to your statement above "why don't Sainsbury's either just reduce the balance I owe, or add it to my nectar card so I can't lose it or miss out on using it". However, whilst I think that, I do know they do this (like Littlewoods) because it is an incentive to make customers continue shopping with them and they know that not all customers will use their vouchers/rewards - so they have a system of rewarding customers that will not cost them the potential full forecast cost. It's called marketing (wrapped up nice and tightly with associated T&Cs)

sourcrates

January2015 wrote: »

The 'rewards' the OP refers to had clear T&Cs and to put the situation into perspective it is a bit like having a winning lottery ticket and trying to claim 181 days after the draw date. T&Cs state winning ticket is only valid for 180 days from date of lottery draw. Trying to claim on 181st day (or any date after that) means the ticket is invalid and worthless; regardless of whether it won £10 or £10m it's now too late to claim.

The only difference is the winning lottery ticket scenario was not associated with any debt - the situation described by the OP had a debt of £40. The £40 debt was genuinely incurred by the OP through the purchase of goods from the catalogue. The rewards offered by Littlewoods were a bonus given because of the purchases and payments made, but had no direct relation to the debt. The OP had the opportunity, under the T&Cs to use the rewards towards clearance of the debt, but the OP failed to take this opportunity within the timeframe set by the T&Cs. Hence, in the same way a lottery ticket becomes worthless, so did the rewards - however the debt remained and because of failure to understand and accept T&Cs the debt has risen to £129 and is likely to continue to rise as more costs to chase the debt are added, including the possibility of legal costs.

My advice would be to pay the debt now. OP could write to Littlewoods customer services and explain the 'misunderstanding' and request the mark on the credit file is removed (good luck with that one!). If that doesn't work you can request a notice of correction is added to your credit file with the credit reference agencies. This doesn't mean the mark Littlewoods have placed on your file is incorrect but explains to creditors searching your file how the poor mark came about. Text below copied from Equifax site:

"A Notice of Correction is a piece of text, written by you, that you can request to have added to your Credit File. You may wish to do this if there is an item of information on your Credit File, which is factually correct, but you believe it creates a misleading impression. Your Notice of Correction should give a clear and accurate explanation of why you consider a piece of data to be incorrect or misleading. Your Notice of Correction text must not be longer than 200 words"

The important bit here, which OP is likely to dispute, is that Littlewoods have put a poor mark on their credit file with is factually correct. OP owed the money, OP didn't pay; hence poor mark on the credit file. OP may not like it, but it is factually correct.

If submitting a notice of correction is an option OP wants to consider, they would need to file a notice of correction with all the credit reference agencies.

You are correct in your above post January, the OP has mistaken the link between owing money, and been owed money, and the only option available to her, after complaining, and been refused, was to take it to the FOS, who would of looked at it on the balance of fairness, and in all honesty, i reckon Little-woods would of made her an ex gratia offer in relation to this, and everyone would of been happy.

Unfortunately the time limit for this has expired, if it was me, i would of re-jigged the complaint and tried again, but as it is a fairly small sum, i would probableby make an offer to the DCA to settle this, before the charges get really stupid.

matttye

You have no case. T&Cs are clear. The 'reward money' is given to you in lines with their terms and conditions and has to be used in line with their terms and conditions.

Pay up and put it down to experience.

Seriously. You. Have. No. Case.

FBaby

Oh dear, you went about it totally the wrong way I had a similar experience than you, but went about it totally differently. I wrote, clarified that I was in the wrong for not reading their terms and reference properly, that I was taking full responsibility for the error, but that I would be very grateful as a loyal customer if they could as a gesture of goodwill right it off. They did!

If you go and accuse them of doing wrong when they haven't and you did (you should indeed have informed you of their T&R), then don't expect a break!

matttye

FBaby wrote: »

Oh dear, you went about it totally the wrong way I had a similar experience than you, but went about it totally differently. I wrote, clarified that I was in the wrong for not reading their terms and reference properly, that I was taking full responsibility for the error, but that I would be very grateful as a loyal customer if they could as a gesture of goodwill right it off. They did!

If you go and accuse them of doing wrong when they haven't and you did (you should indeed have informed you of their T&R), then don't expect a break!

Yes you're much more likely to succeed if you're not an !!!. Commonly known as the "attitude test" !