Lowell chasing me after 9 years!

Edforce1

Thank you everyone, some great advice. I have also spoken to the National Debt line and they agree with the comments con here that it all looks a little fishy regarding the date. They advised a Statute barred letter which was sent yesterday. They also said the 3 years from the alleged original dept to default seems very odd, apparently it should be about 3 months for it to go into default not 3 years! They think a default notice would have been issued prior to the Lowel date and they said only one default notice can be issued. Thanks everyone, will let you know what happens.

sourcrates

Yes let us know the outcome, I think fat belly was airing on the side of caution with the December SB date.

Just thinking of potential responses from Lowell, its not unheard of for these companies to move money between accounts internally, then try to convince the debtor it was a payment made by them within the limitation period, just to muddy the waters a little.

They will quite openly try this on with you, in the hope of a result, however its a different matter if they had to rely on something of this nature in court.

On the other hand they may fess up straight away, and agree with you, time will tell.

fatbelly

I doubt that they are going to put a lot of effort in this for a £800 debt but I think the better advice was to follow @mcpitman, send a prove it now, let it get beyond 31 December and then send the SB letter.

Edforce1

So here is an update. Just got a letter from Lowell saying the debt is not statute bared pointing out the 31st December date in 2015, therefore not 6 years, however, they have said they will give me 60 days to respond, no threats or asking for any payment. 60 days takes it to February next year past the SB date, work that out.

Spoke with money advice service and they said ignore it and if they try to chase after the SB date they have no hope, they also said that 3 years to issue a default would likely be thrown out if it was taken to CCJ.

What does everyone think of that?

fatbelly

I would have nuanced the advice a bit but essentially I agree.

If they start a claim after 31 Dec you have a defence to their claim. 3 years to issue a default is something that you could mention in that defence.

As a pre-action letter should be sent first, giving you 30 days to reply, in practice you are there already.

Rather than ignore it there is an advantage in sending the statute barred letter in January, as it points out CONC 7.15.8, which requires them to stop all collection activity

Edforce1

I did rather simplifying MAS response, lol. Will definitely send a statute bar letter again in January, thank you again everyone for the help and advice.

KeithP

...and did this go away, as predicted?

It really is useful to see whether the proposed resolutions work or not.

Grumpelstiltskin

Keith This thread is over 3 years old,, there are many newer threads about Lowell if you search.

KeithP

Grumpelstiltskin said:

Keith This thread is over 3 years old,, ...

Yes I know. I was just hoping that @Edforce1, who has now started another new thread, might come back and explain to us whether or not the suggested resolution worked.