MINT Debt sold do RBS still have rights?

dluisam

Good evening,
I was hoping for some advice regarding an old credit card debt that has recently been sold. My question is, if the debt has been sold then does the original creditor still have rights to this debt?
Thanks

jonesMUFCforever

If the debt has been sold no - BUT some collection companies work internally for the original lender.
You have the right to dispute the debt if you have been contacted by the new company and they should refer it back to RBS.

dluisam

Thank you for your reply
They have definitely sold the debt as they sent me a letter confirming this. Plus I made a phone call to make sure this was correct.
The problem I am facing is they are going try to offset monies from a PPI complaint (not related) to pay for this. Am I right in thinking that they cannot do this now?

jonesMUFCforever

dluisam wrote: »

Thank you for your reply
They have definitely sold the debt as they sent me a letter confirming this. Plus I made a phone call to make sure this was correct.
The problem I am facing is they are going try to offset monies from a PPI complaint (not related) to pay for this. Am I right in thinking that they cannot do this now?

You are 100% right.
The new banking regulations forbid this.

agrinnall

Although of course morally you should at least consider using the PPI refund to repay your debt, not that morals seem to count for much to many of the people who post with credit card debt.

planteria

i thought Mint was always part of The Royal Bank of Scotland plcs.

bigadaj

agrinnall wrote: »

Although of course morally you should at least consider using the PPI refund to repay your debt, not that morals seem to count for much to many of the people who post with credit card debt.

Don't disagree but many peoples argument might be that they've been screwed over paying 25%+ for many years on debt and have repaid their debt several times over. It might be argued that this represents a reasonab,e indication of the risk involved in transacting with them, but the loss of the borrowed sum is also a factor in this calculation.

Similarly we always point out that the contract entered into is the determining factor on any transaction or financial matter, and if this can't be enforced then that is potentially die to a failing by the bank rather than any immoral act by the borrower.

agrinnall

bigadaj wrote: »

Don't disagree but many peoples argument might be that they've been screwed over paying 25%+ for many years on debt and have repaid their debt several times over. It might be argued that this represents a reasonab,e indication of the risk involved in transacting with them, but the loss of the borrowed sum is also a factor in this calculation.

Similarly we always point out that the contract entered into is the determining factor on any transaction or financial matter, and if this can't be enforced then that is potentially die to a failing by the bank rather than any immoral act by the borrower.

Equally I don't disagree, but if you bring the contract terms into the argument then they apply in both directions: the debtor agrees to those terms, and if they fail to keep to them then the lender has the right to pursue the debt. In this case it seems that RBS cannot do what they are trying to, but that doesn't absolve the OP of his responsibility.

dluisam

Hi and thank you all for your information. I have since spoke with RBS PPI team who have informed me that I am not with their debt management team. So they would not be able to take the refund money. I completely agree that we have a responsibility to repay what we owe, but they can and do play dirty sometimes.