PRA Group - letter threatening court action?

m2017

Hi all,

I'm just after a bit of advice if anyone can spare the time:

I have an old MBNA debt which is owned by PRA Group. I had defaulted on this some years earlier, this is now scrubbed from my credit report. After taking some advice on here and reading other threads I sent a CCA request in a couple of years ago which they sent back stating that it was currently unenforceable. As I wanted it gone and had a little cash at the time I offered them 40-50% in full and final payment which they refused, instead offering me a 5% discount. So, I stopped paying. They have been calling me pretty much every day for the last 22 months (I blocked the number so it goes straight to voicemail) - I did this as I was under the impression that answering their calls was acknowledging the debt? Then, on Friday last week, I received a letter stating that my account is now with their 'Investigations and Litigation Department' to look at the outstanding debt for possible Litigation recovery. Furthermore, it states that if they do not hear from me within the next 30 days then my account will be considered for the next stage which would be putting me on notice that court proceedings may be brought against me, this is not their preferred way forward etc.. This was signed by their 'Legal Manager / Solicitor, giving me a number to contact them on.

My questions are, should I call them? I don't want to if it means that I am acknowledging the debt and therefore restarts the 6 year period. Can they take court action on an UE debt? I have received no other documentation following the CCA request - i.e. at no point have they sent me any communications with documents stating that the debt is now enforceable. How should I approach this? I have a clean credit rating now and will be looking to take a mortgage out next year so can't afford to unwittingly walk into a CCJ situation.

Any and all help or advice would be gratefully received.

Thanks very much.

sourcrates

You won`t walk into a CCJ situation.

You made a sec 77/79 request for information, they wrote back saying they could not comply, the account then became unenforcable, and that still stands now today, so you have a defence against any claim they may care to make.

But, instead of waiting for the legal process to kick in, if indeed it ever does, you should write back to them, remind them they are in default of a sec77 request for information, and that the account is currently unenforcable due to their lack of dilligence.

Should they initiate legal action, it will be rigorously defended on that basis, so they may want to reconcider their options.

Also from what you say, the debt may also be statute barred as well, so you could encompass both approaches as a double whammy, for example -

"The debt you have written to me about was the subject of a request for information under sec 77/79 CCA 1974 (enter date) which you were unable to comply with, not withstanding that, it would also be statute barred now under sec 5, Limitation act 1980, as more than 6 yars have past since the account defaulted".

m2017

Hi sourcrates,
Thanks very much for your response, I will get on with that letter.
Just so I am aware, is it 6 years from when the debt defaulted, or 6 years from the last payment made towards the debt? I defaulted in 2012/13, but only stopped paying the reduced payments in 2019 after they said it was unenforceable and rejected my f&f offer.
Thanks again, much appreciated.

sourcrates

m2017 said:

Hi sourcrates,
Thanks very much for your response, I will get on with that letter.
Just so I am aware, is it 6 years from when the debt defaulted, or 6 years from the last payment made towards the debt? I defaulted in 2012/13, but only stopped paying the reduced payments in 2019 after they said it was unenforceable and rejected my f&f offer.
Thanks again, much appreciated.

Whichever is the latter, if you were paying up until 2019, then you cannot use statute barred as a defence, but the lack of a cca is still very valid, and you should concentrate on that path.