statute barred

rog2

Okay pru - let's just move on one stage. You say that you are expecting a call from the 'credit agency' - I assume you mean Debt Collection Agency - this evening. Firstly, I would advise that you only deal with these people in writing, as they are experts in 'twisting' your words so it seems that you admit liability. Have they actually written to you? If so, you have a couple of options - the first being to send off the 'Statute Barred' letter in the NDL link that fermi suggests.
Another option is to ask the dca to provide you with a true copy of the original cca (consumer credit agreement) deeds of assignment (to prove that they can 'legally' pursue the debt and a full up-to date statement of the account. This will show if any payments/acknowlegements have been made during the 'limitation period' and should also show whether the bank carried out your instructions regarding your disassociation.
If they do not provide this information within 12 working days, then the agreement is unenforceable without a court judgement, and if, after a further 30 days, they do not provide the cca, then they are committing a criminal offence.

iolanthe07

I agree with rog. His advice above is excellent. I just want to emphasise, do NOT talk to them on the phone because you must not admit the debt. Deal only in writing, and statute barred is the only reason you need give in your letter. You seem to have had a bloody awful time and to have been right royally screwed. I really hope things improve for you.

pru

o.k...
As soon as they ring...all I will say is that I am responding in writing and thats all...

I do not want to ask them for copies of anything because would that not be deemed as acknowledgement? Them being experts at twisting I mean...

I will await their response to my letter and then ask for copies of agreements in round 2!

No they havnt written to me only sent me a statment of demand giving me until the 18th February to respond or pay.

tyllwyd

So did you actually sign the loan documents?

You say that you sent a letter to the bank saying that you no longer wanted to be a signatory on various bank accounts. But if you had already taken out a joint loan with your ex-partners and yours was one of the names on the loan, it seems very unlikely to me that just writing to the bank and saying that you no longer wished to sign on any of the accounts would have made any difference to your liability for that loan.

Can you contact the former administrator and find out if the loan was mentioned when the company was wound up?

From what you said, your partnership was pretty informal - did you sign any kind of a partnership agreement when it was set up? Were there any formal agreements about how any assets/debt should be split when it was dissolved? To be honest, it sounds like a strange set up if all it ever did was take out a loan. All I can think is that maybe the bank wouldn't lend money to the company itself, so that is why you and your colleagues had to take out the loan yourselves? Was it used to buy anything - if so, would those assets have been sold when the company was wound up? What would have happened to that money?

I have no idea whether the loan would be statute barred by now, but if they won't accept that, I think you need to find as much of the paperwork as possible and get some proper legal advice.

pru

Yes it was a weird set up.
The bank wouldnt help the company...so we came up with this. The idea being that the loan would pay off the HP agreements within the company and the money saved would then be redirected to the partnership account to make payments.
Yes it was informal and nothing signed other than the loan agreement with the bank. It was a form of refinancing we discussed this with the bank manager and he approved. All payments to the loan would have come from the company.

No formal agreements were signed.
Yes the assets would have been sold at the point of administration including the items that now had no HP agreements attached to them.

I just wish for once things were simple.

I have sent the statute barred letter off today (registered) and wait to see what comes back. They didnt ring last night. I am expecting a response and then will request the cca and all bank statements to find out whether statute barred still applies.

I am suprised that the bank didnt put a claim into the company at the point of the administration.

pru

iolanthe07 wrote: »

I agree with rog. His advice above is excellent. I just want to emphasise, do NOT talk to them on the phone because you must not admit the debt. Deal only in writing, and statute barred is the only reason you need give in your letter. You seem to have had a bloody awful time and to have been right royally screwed. I really hope things improve for you.

I left school at 17 and went into this company...worked up the ranks...then a MBO to these two clowns (who left school some 30 years ago) so they didnt know anything else...you assume at that age that they know more than you...in life...business. I lent them money...as an investment for the future myself and a colleague...all verbal...(yes I know naive) He was screwed too...eventually... I've learnt alot and am back on my feet...yes I have this debt...and I will pay it off...I have a good job...my children and family...and lots of people I can talk to...which is the key...talking...never feel ashamed..
I read some of the tails on here and its very much ...'its not the end of the world and there is a way out' I wish I could send that to every one worrying about debt.

I know this isnt the end of this saga but I do feel more stronger knowing that I have this 'site' behind me...a big thankyou...

tyllwyd

I'm not an expert in these things, but from what you've said I don't see why the bank would have done anything about the loan when the company went into administration. The money was lent to you and your ex-partners, so as far as the bank was concerned it would be down to your partnership to make any claim. But if the money was used to buy assets, I would have expected that your partners (and you) should have made some kind of a claim at that time. I wonder if they did, but the company didn't have any cash to pay out? I do think you need to try to get some information from the former administrator if you can.

The other thing that is puzzling me is why they are coming after you for the full amount after all this time. I wonder if they have been in contact with the other people named on the loan?

pru

I suspect they have sent the other 3 the same demand for the full amount. In a hope that they can recover it from them also (a quarter of it or all of it)...I think its scare tactics...LLoyds bank are probably feeling the 'credit crunch' from the US and decided to clean up old issues to see if they can get any of it back.

If anything (its hope I'm looking for) the loan was initially for £15k the demand is for £15k which probably confirms that there has been no payment on it...so the statute barred letter should do something...

If all attempts fail and I lose (again!) then I will make an offer to pay 1/4 of it at £10.00 per month or they can be added to my debt managment programme and get £2.50 up to them...but at this stage I am holding fast with statute barred.

Bear in mind that I left some 2 years previous to the company going bust...so I had no control on what assets were sold or claims to be made..

pru

Been thinking (and worrying).
At the end of the day (immaterial where the money went or used for)
4 names on an account with a loan attached.
No payments/No acknowledgements/No contact
statute barred?

rog2

pru wrote: »

4 names on an account with a loan attached.
No payments/No acknowledgements/No contact
statute barred?

Absolutely, pru.
Just out of interest - who is the particular company that is chasing you?
It may well be that the original creditor has long since given up hope of getting any money back and would, ordinarily, have 'written off' the debt.
However, there are certain dca's who specialise in trying to collect 'debts' which, if the 'debtor' were aware of their rights, are no longer enforceable through the courts. These dca's 'buy' the debt from the original creditor - often for just a few pence in the pound. They, then, take on the risk element and sometimes they lose, but, in the majority of cases, alleged debtors will often pay up, or make a full and final settlement offer, just to get these scavengers off of their backs. Since probably less than 5% of the population have even heard of the Limitation Act or the Consumer Credit Act, the odds are pretty heavily in favour of the dca's.
It's money for old rope.