Aktiv Kapital (UK) - Who Are They?

inmypocketnottheirs

Sergeant_Pluck wrote: »

Hi all,

I'm hoping you can give me some advice on the above companies.

Firstly, I live abroad - I haven't lived in the UK since I split with my g/f about three years ago.

A few weeks back, my parents at home received a demand (for me) from a company called Buchanan Clark and Wells, on behalf of Aktiv Kapital....

Now, I haven't lived at that address for 16 years! I'm not registered anywhere in the UK and I no longer pay UK tax etc....unfortunately I'ma civilian defence contractor, dividing my time between Afghanistan and Iraq etc - you can appreciate I ahve more important things on,my mind than dealing with this - it's not even easy to deal with it, given the lack of communications/internet where i am usually....

Anyway, apparently their most recent letter states that they have approval from my local court to commence legal action to recover this debt (a relatively low 1200quid).

Now, it's obviously causing my parents some grief - as far as they're concerned, some enforcement officer will be knocking on the door. My question is really - what can they do? I don't acknowledge this debt - I have no idea what it is for and have told them that. They've also been told repeatedly that I don't live there, but my parents still get letters addressed to me and telephone calls...

What's my best move now? - apart from following the earlier advice in this thread and requesting the Credit Agreement from Aktiv...can I just get my mum to send the letters back as undelivered? What about the court? Can a court appointed Bailiff turn up at my parents address, even though I don't live there, and haven't done for years?

Thanks for any help - I'd like to bury this afap!

Right then, here we go!

Send them a letter demanding proof under the Consumer Credit Act. Send them a p.o. for £1 to cover the statutory fee. You want an original signed copy of any credit agreement and they have to provide this to prove any debt even exists. Ifg the debt is over six years old and there has not been any correspondence, then the debt is statute barred and is not collectable.

Secondly, in the extremely unlikely event that someone turns up at the door, the have absolutely no rights at all whatsoever. If asked to leave they must do so.

Thirdly, the only way a bailiff can gain entry is if a court has given permission, after a judgement has been given. Even if this did happen, they could only cease goods that belong to the debtor and certainly not your parents.

This all stinks to me of usual debt collecting practices. They buy old debts at a fraction of the cost and rely on peoples lack of knowledge to extort cash from them.

Demand proof of the debt and likely they will go away. If by some strange notion you do actually owe this debt, then they will be able to prove it and then you will have to decide how to settle. However, from what you say this is extremely unlikely.

Remember, when sending for the information, do not sign anything, as these scumbags are not beneath scanning your signature and adding it to documents.

Hope this helps!

princesspop

I am currently in dispute with an unknown debt with aktiv kapital , but having seen the threads on this site that aktiv also deal with wescot and buchanan clark and wells etc and the dodgy tricks they employ i am querying re some payments i am already making after receiving threatening letter from them about yr ago: if i am making payments is this an acknowledgement of the debt, can i now request proof i owe this money to them??

inmypocketnottheirs

princesspop wrote: »

if i am making payments is this an acknowledgement of the debt, can i now request proof i owe this money to them??

Yes you can. Write to them using the CCA letter and tell them that you will not be making any further payments until they prove the debt. If they can not prove the debt, tell them that you will be suing them for the return of your money.

HTH

Sergeant_Pluck

Thanks for the advice, inmypocketnottheirs - I'll do exactly that and see what happens!

gsephton2000

Hi,

I could use a some clarification over what to do next with Aktiv. I sent them a letter requesting a copy of the original credit agreement via recorded delivery with the £1 PO. This was sent on the 3/06/08 and today I received a photocopy of the credit agreement, attached to a letter dated 20/06/08. My two issues are:

1) This is longer than the 12 days specified earlier in this thread
2) The credit agreement is a photocopy, not the original

Can I contest the debt or rather keep on paying them?

JosefK_2

gsephton2000 wrote: »

Hi,

I could use a some clarification over what to do next with Aktiv. I sent them a letter requesting a copy of the original credit agreement via recorded delivery with the £1 PO. This was sent on the 3/06/08 and today I received a photocopy of the credit agreement, attached to a letter dated 20/06/08. My two issues are:

1) This is longer than the 12 days specified earlier in this thread
2) The credit agreement is a photocopy, not the original

Can I contest the debt or rather keep on paying them?

You haven't said whether the debt is actually yours or not.

RAS

gsephton2000 wrote: »

Hi,

I could use a some clarification over what to do next with Aktiv. I sent them a letter requesting a copy of the original credit agreement via recorded delivery with the £1 PO. This was sent on the 3/06/08 and today I received a photocopy of the credit agreement, attached to a letter dated 20/06/08. My two issues are:

1) This is longer than the 12 days specified earlier in this thread
2) The credit agreement is a photocopy, not the original

Can I contest the debt or rather keep on paying them?

Hi

if they produce it within 12+2+30 days, that is OK,

But the big question mark is whether what they have sent is a correct CCa or just an application form which says iut is a CCA.

Please hold on until either I get back with the docs or someone like fermi paost them to you.

Have to go shortly, so it will be later or tomorrow.

gsephton2000

Yeh sorry,

It is mine, originally through First National for a mesh pc, £1098 @ 29.9% apr in 2004. After about 2 years they must have sold the debt with a balance of around £1400. Started the direct debit with Aktiv and been paying them £60 ever since. However, the balance didnt seem to be going down particularly so I googled Aktiv and found this forum and decided to request the original credit agreement, which as I said earlier they did 17 days later.

I'm guessing as they have obtained it and the debt still exists then I should just keep paying it, but before I do I just wanted do double check.

Thanks

RAS

gsephton2000 wrote: »

Yeh sorry,

It is mine, originally through First National for a mesh pc, £1098 @ 29.9% apr in 2004. After about 2 years they must have sold the debt with a balance of around £1400. Started the direct debit with Aktiv and been paying them £60 ever since. However, the balance didnt seem to be going down particularly so I googled Aktiv and found this forum and decided to request the original credit agreement, which as I said earlier they did 17 days later.

I'm guessing as they have obtained it and the debt still exists then I should just keep paying it, but before I do I just wanted do double check.

Thanks

gsephton2000

Please will you read my earlier post?

Even though they habe sent you a "CCA", it may not be legally valid.

Will trey and find the information.

RAS

Here is weller711's post on this.

hi

A true executed CCA has to have the following information in it:

IS MY AGREEMENT ENFORCEABLE( Via section 127(3) CCA1974)
PRESCRIBED TERMS FOR THE PURPOSES OF SECTIONS 61(1)(0) AND 127(3) OF THE
CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974 Taken from sced.6(1983/1553) regulations

**What do we mean by unenforceable?
In the Consumer Credit Act section 127 there is a provision for making an agreement unenforceable if it does not contain certain pieces of information.

Subsections 1,2,3,4 state which pieces of information these are, and everything mentioned there must be included within the body of the agreement, if one is missing the agreement is unenforceable.

How does unenforceable differ from enforceable with a court order only?
When an agreement is unenforceable it means that the court or the judge cannot make a ruling on it. The court cannot make it enforceable.
When an agreement is enforceable only by ruling of the court it means that the agreement can be stopped by the debtor but the court has the power to re-instate it and allow the credit to continue to enforce.**

The Prescribed Terms are these

A Amount of credit
A term stating the amount of credit

B Repayments
A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following-
(a) Number of repayments;
(b) Amount of repayments;
(c) Frequency and timing of repayments;
(d) Dates of repayments;
(e) The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable.

C Rate of interest
A term stating the rate of interest to be applied to the credit issued under the agreement
D Credit limit
This may be a term or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit.

---

Which of these applies to you depends on the type of agreement you have?

For a Running Account (credit card) agreement

BC and D Apply

For a Restricted Use Debtor Creditor Supplier

• Where the dealer is the supplier and the creditor is the one providing the finance.
• The money can only be used for the purpose it is given.
• There is no interest on the purchase (the cash price is the same as the total price)
• And there is no advance payment

A is applicable

For a fixed Sum Credit Agreement
A conventional credit agreement with none of the above restrictions

A and B apply

For a Hire Agreement

B is Applicable

This paper only covers section 127(3) of the Act agreements can also be unenforceable by contravention of sections 1 and4 this will be the subject of the next paper.
Please note that these Prescribed terms where not changed in any way by the 2004/1482 Ammendments although the form in which they appear on the agreement was. Subsection127(3) was repealed on the 6th of April 2007 so that unenforceability due to 127(3) will only apply to agreemens executed before that date.


So I would guess that if it is an application form, then it wont state the credit limit, therefore not enforceable.



And this thread http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=722923