Re-appeal an appeal?

Landofwood

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

Bad mistake to pay a penny in such a situation. It is effectively an admission of the debt. He should have shopped his mother to the police. Then you might be in with a chance.

That's what I was gonna say.

How does one even go about instantly paying a 15 year old £7k debt? You'd think it would be written off or sold by now.

I presume your partner was alerted by the numerous letters, warnings and bailiffs. 7k is a large sum of money, they would have tracked him down. I suspect someone is telling porkies.

Also, how does a 15 year old debt then show up as satisfied on his credit file? Credit reference agencies only go back 6 years.

Ask to see his credit file. He is lying.

kingstreet

Were credit files obtained prior to this decision in principle done with Halifax?

Thrugelmir

Landofwood wrote: »

Ask to see his credit file. He is lying.

Does sound as if "someone " thought that they had left a debt behind. The lesson of the tale appears to be unsettled debts do come back to haunt you.

Landofwood

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Does sound as if "someone " thought that they had left a debt behind. The lesson of the tale appears to be unsettled debts do come back to haunt you.

There's more to this than that. This whole tale doesn't add up.

• The story that the "15-year-old debt" was picked up by the lender in the first place is suspect, although not impossible if the debt was connected to Halifax.
• The partner having no knowledge of this debt in 15 years is very unlikely, if not impossible. Lenders don't just sit around and wait. Surely a CCJ would have been issued?
• The partner being able to just ring up and clear this ancient debt is highly suspicious.
• The debt now showing as satisfied on a credit file is impossible. CRAs only store data for 6 years.

This is a web of lies. I'm guessing the mother had nothing to do with this.

I wonder what else he's hiding

DandelionPatrol

Landofwood wrote: »

There's more to this than that. This whole tale doesn't add up.

1. The story that the "15-year-old debt" was picked up by the lender in the first place is suspect, although not impossible if the debt was connected to Halifax.
2. The partner having no knowledge of this debt in 15 years is very unlikely, if not impossible. Lenders don't just sit around and wait. Surely a CCJ would have been issued?
3. The partner being able to just ring up and clear this ancient debt is highly suspicious.
4. The debt now showing as satisfied on a credit file is impossible. CRAs only store data for 6 years.

This is a web of lies. I'm guessing the mother had nothing to do with this.

I wonder what else he's hiding

While your evidence is a possibility, what you are presenting is far from conclusive:

1. You concede that the lender could pick up a 15 year old debt
2. A CCJ could well have been applied without OP's BF's knowledge if all debt collection activity had been focussed on Mother's address and Mother intercepted the post, allowing OP's BF to fall victim to a default judgement.
3. If the debt was outstanding, I cannot believe that any creditor would refuse to accept payment
4. Again, if Mother was intercepting all post, she could have run the credit card for a long time and kept it in arrears to the present day. On the Debtfree Wannabe forum, it seems that some banks do not default accounts which are obviously in default precisely to keep damaging information live on the credit report.

In short, you are premature in calling OP a liar

Landofwood

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

While your evidence is a possibility, what you are presenting is far from conclusive:

1. You concede that the lender could pick up a 15 year old debt
2. A CCJ could well have been applied without OP's BF's knowledge if all debt collection activity had been focussed on Mother's address and Mother intercepted the post, allowing OP's BF to fall victim to a default judgement.
3. If the debt was outstanding, I cannot believe that any creditor would refuse to accept payment
4. Again, if Mother was intercepting all post, she could have run the credit card for a long time and kept it in arrears to the present day. On the Debtfree Wannabe forum, it seems that some banks do not default accounts which are obviously in default precisely to keep damaging information live on the credit report.

In short, you are premature in calling OP a liar

I said it doesn't add up, and I called the OP's partner a liar.

It may be possible to explain each individual point in isolation - and even that's a stretch. But there are just far too many discrepancies in this story.

The OP specifically states that the credit card debt defaulted 15 years ago and the mother stopped making payments. You have not adequately explained this.

Ever heard of Occam's razor?

DandelionPatrol

Landofwood wrote: »

I said it doesn't add up, and I called the OP's partner a liar.

It may be possible to explain each individual point in isolation - and even that's a stretch. But there are just far too many discrepancies in this story.

The OP specifically states that the credit card debt defaulted 15 years ago and the mother stopped making payments. You have not adequately explained this.

OP is silent on when the account defaulted

lmw1804 wrote: »

When we delved further we found out that the bad credit was actually a defaulted credit card from around 15 years ago that my boyfriend's mother had borrowed and stopped making payments on, but hadn't ever made us aware of.

Landofwood wrote: »

... Ever heard of Occam's razor?

Yes. Without intellectual rigor, it can cut the person wielding it.

Thrugelmir

Does appear to be a new theme recently. That's to blame a relative for fraudulently opening an account in one's own name. The account of course has defaulted. In such instances the police take no action. So a crime reference means little other than it's been reported.

Of course there's no way of proving the truth. An admission of guilt means little due to the close relationship between the parties involved.

From the lenders perspective. There's plenty of potential borrowers applying to choose from.

Landofwood

DandelionPatrol wrote: »

OP is silent on when the account defaulted




Yes. Without intellectual rigor, it can cut the person wielding it.

The only information we have is what OP has told us.

If you interpret "was actually a defaulted credit card from around 15 years ago" differently to me, that's fine.

Resorting to comments about my intellect because your counter-arguments are weak is unnecessary.

DandelionPatrol

Landofwood wrote: »

Resorting to comments about my intellect because your counter-arguments are weak is unnecessary.

It seems unnecessary to accuse OP [or rather OP's partner] of lying [OP's partner is not here to defend] in quite unequivocal terms when you have nothing more than a basis to suggest this as a possibility. But as you are comfortable doing that, then you can take a knock yourself.