Time taken from INTRUM to Perch ACI to Perch Verify to Perch TM Legal on Statute Barred Debt?

DankVielen

As I have mentioned before Intrum bought up a load of Statute Barred Debt, it would be totally absurd for them to even attempt to pretend that they did not know that it is Statute Barred and I am preparing a nice little file for for the FCA (widespread practice) and FOS to hopefully finally get the FCA to withdraw the license from Intrum and heavy sanctions for all of the parties they use.

I have seen some posts on here regarding similar behaviour, I am curious now to see if Perch owned TM Legal will risk their standing as Officers of the Court in pursuing debt that they know or should have known was Statute Barred.

So far I have had OPOS cycle of debt enforcement of the Statute Barred Debt and then ACI was appointed, ACI is part of PERCH who say they are the

"UK’s foremost debt collection groups, overseeing the financial well-being of over a million customers and assets exceeding £1 billion."

Sorry, try not to vomit, "financial well being",  "Customers" honestly.

After several letters ACI then threaten doorstep visits from Verify, who they say will write before they turn up.  Sure enough they did, but really it is a fact finding expedition with some intimidation thrown in for good measure.  The letter said that their aim is

 "verifying their place of residence and putting the customer in contact with our client".

Now Verify and ACI are part of the Perch Group, they all have the same offices, there is an avoidance of filing accounts because the parent company files those (according to Companies House), so ACI=Verify=TMLegal=PERCH.  I mention this because it is a bit like illeism in their letters, but worse.

First of all the Customer is the person one provides the service for, in this case ACI's customer is Intrum and ACI can't be Verify's client because you can't be a client of yourself.


So the super scary chap from Verify did make a visit, he got bored quite quickly and put a letter on ACI letterhead through the door.

Apparently...

"We need to speak to you regarding this account and agree a repayment amount that you can afford to pay until the debt is cleared"

I nearly wet myself with laughter!

and

"If you do not get in contact, we may send a Verify agent to call again to make contact with you".

OMG really, please don't !

I make light of this but I know that many are intimidated by these goons.

These poor sods are made to wear what looked to be a very uncomfortable uniform, clearly it was a size or two too small and with this week heatwave I was temped to offer them a glass of water.

What was noteworthy from online research was Perch ACI do not always go to the trouble of sending out mail merged letters in their patch, they sometimes (mostly) send a standard letter and the poor fool has to fill in the details of the debtor by hand.  This might lead to a seven figure sum being demanded because he forgot the decimal point.

I am wondering when they will come again, shall I have some scones ready and a cup of tea or shall I leave them there?

What I particularly want to get to is whether PERCH will give up on this futile venture or whether they will knowingly use their Legal arm TMLegal to harass and abuse people when enforcement action is prohibited by the FCA under CONC rules.

If anyone has any statute barred debt that Perch pursued all the way to TM Legal then please post below.

Before you reasonably tell me just to inform Perch that it is Statute Barred, I did that with OPOS and all that happened was ACI got appointed and the whole cycle started again.

I recently came across the link below that shows Fitch has withdrawn ratings for Intrum who are in administration, I hope Perch got paid upfront, albeit that I suspect they are on commission only.


https://www.fitchratings.com/research/non-bank-financial-institutions/fitch-affirms-intrum-withdraws-ratings-12-06-2025

sourcrates

It seems to be a common theme amongst certain debt purchasing companies to chase statute barred debt and then to misrepresent its status to those they chase for it.

The regulars on here will know who has form for this type of thing, the FCA did issue new guidance on the matter not too long ago, however it doesn't appear to have done the trick.

Personally I think the law itself is at fault, its too wishy washy and non specific, all it does is remove a lenders ability to take legal action, it does not forbid collection activity directly.

It should be brought into line with Scottish law so that the debt is extinguished, and cannot be chased at all.

fatbelly

....preferably after five years

Rob5342

I'd be interested to know how you get on. From what I've seen they clearly intend to deceive people and push things to within an inch of being illegal but I'm not sure anyone would say that they had actually crossed the line.