Son doesn't seem to care

fibonarchie

Comms69 wrote: »

Read the article? Ofcourse not - because I understand the law...


Like I said it's largely irrelevant.


Bailiffs:
1: Don't want to seize anything, they get pennies to the pound
2: Are bound by strict legislation, mostly theyre just looking for payment


BUT before all that there are default notice, pre action letters, court letters, letters from bailiffs.... There is SOOO much advance notice that this would not be a surprise

Ah, you know better.. of course

Yes, for sure there'll be letters beforehand, etc, and presumably at that stage the parents will panic and pay off the debt before the bailiffs come round. So the son's got them over a barrel, hasn't he, really

Comms69

fibonarchie wrote: »

Ah, you know better.. of course

Yes, for sure there'll be letters beforehand, etc, and presumably at that stage the parents will panic and pay off the debt before the bailiffs come round. So the son's got them over a barrel, hasn't he, really

I didn't say I know better, I said I know the law. If you don't, then yes I know this subject better than you. But then you'll know plenty I don't.


I don't need to read an opinion piece, when I can just read legislation.


Yes literally dozens of letters. Dozens of opportunities to return to sender, no longer at this address. Dozens of opportunities to tell the son to pull his finger out.


If the Op panics and pays, well that's as much his fault as the sons.

Comms69

pickledonionspaceraider wrote: »

It is more a case of they having no proof that the debtor doesn't live there, so they will proceed chasing at the last known address - where the debt was taken on

But the parents at that stage can tell them where he lives now. They will also check electoral roll, credit reference agencies (which record addresses when obtaining more credit) etc.

fibonarchie

Comms69 wrote: »

If the Op panics and pays, well that's as much his fault as the sons.

Well, what an attitude to take!

The son's living in his parents home and getting into debt, knowing that his parents will pay it off long before it gets to the stage where the bailiffs call round. And in your opinion it's the parents who are at fault here? I suspect they have spoilt him a little, but the onus is on the son as a 21 year old man to act responsibly.

(I am still wondering what on earth he's spent all that money on, he can't have that many needs and outgoings, surely?)

Comms69

fibonarchie wrote: »

Well, what an attitude to take!

The son's living in his parents home and getting into debt, knowing that his parents will pay it off long before it gets to the stage where the bailiffs call round. And in your opinion it's the parents who are at fault here? I suspect they have spoilt him a little, but the onus is on the son as a 21 year old man to act responsibly.

(I am still wondering what on earth he's spent all that money on, he can't have that many needs and outgoings, surely?)

1: If it gets to that stage, which is a long way off
2: Who's fault is it that he knows or thinks they'll pay it off...?
3: I agree he should act responsibly, but he's treated like a child
4: I suspect gadgets, games, going out (Drink, maybe drugs), most likely clothes and car

fibonarchie

Comms69 wrote: »

1: If it gets to that stage, which is a long way off
2: Who's fault is it that he knows or thinks they'll pay it off...?
3: I agree he should act responsibly, but he's treated like a child
4: I suspect gadgets, games, going out (Drink, maybe drugs), most likely clothes and car

I was wondering that..

He's a grown man, and it's about time he acted like one, IMO. The parents could be paying off his debts out of fear that they'll get the bailiffs knocking, or they might just be spoiling him, or a mixture of both.

Savvy_Sue

BrassicWoman wrote: »

Wat incentive does the son have to start caring?

Doesn't sound like he has much, does it?

ska_lover wrote: »

Why would he need to be incentivised? Surely basic parental respect should be free

It should, but if his parents have not managed to instil any yet then it's a bit late now.

paddy's_mum wrote: »

Be aware that your wife's attitude and behaviour might be almost the bigger problem, especially if she would rather risk damaging your relationship than compel your son to face up to financial reality.

Yup. Of course I'd have loved to have my sons at home longer, but I was at the same time glad they felt ready to leave when they did!

unholyangel

fibonarchie wrote: »

Did you read the article?



There's no point in being all teenage and rebellious about it, - bailiffs could come round to the parents house and there could be a messy situation. OP is right to be concerned. See the bit in bold.

There is no article. You've linked to what is essentially another forum.

Now this is an article, admittedly about a lodger who was silly enough to let bailiffs into the house but (at least as far as it relates to the debt), there aren't different rules for family members.

She has spoken to solicitors, who have offered conflicting advice, from “report the bailiff to the police” to telling her she was foolish for making a voluntary payment.

The police told her it was a civil matter, while her local MP directed her to the Wiltshire Law Centre. She says: “They confirmed that bailiffs are allowed to ask for receipts, but said that it should have been sufficient and reasonable to prove that I was the householder by producing a council tax bill, mortgage statement, utility bills, insurance and that therefore I owned all the goods in the house.”

If bailiffs are recovering someone else’s debt, say you will contact the bailiffs’ head office to explain and tell them to leave. Inform the head office that you are not the person on the notice of enforcement and you can send evidence of this. Do this even if the debt belongs to someone you live with, such as your partner or a housemate. Ask them to put your case on hold while they look into it — they must do this if you ask.

As I said, there is a reasonable assumption in law that whoever the owner/tenant is, owns whatever is in the house unless there is evidence to the contrary.

pickledonionspaceraider wrote: »

It is more a case of they having no proof that the debtor doesn't live there, so they will proceed chasing at the last known address - where the debt was taken on

How would you prove that I don't live with you if they knock on your door chasing me for a debt?

fibonarchie

unholyangel wrote: »

There is no article. You've linked to what is essentially another forum.

Oh that's just semantics, it was a site giving legal advice for this specific situation.

They can go into any room, once they're in the property (and presumably the parents aren't going to keep all their doors shut all the time, and why should they have to) and it won't take them long to figure out who owns what.

It shouldn't get that far, anyway, as has been said already.

ska_lover

unholyangel wrote: »

How would you prove that I don't live with you if they knock on your door chasing me for a debt?

Hi Unholy angel

I really don't know the answer to your question, but the only thing I am certain of, is that they will proceed to attempt to chase the debt, at the last known address of the debtor, where the debt was taken out. But hopefully a word at the door, and being told would suffice

It would be interesting to know though

When I moved in to my home, it emerged over a few months that the previous owners were in debt to their eye balls as there were mounds of debt collection agency letters turning up. I opened one of them to check and then returned ever single one to sender, end of story. Took a good couple of years for the letters to stop though, as there were so many