Some questions on statute barred letter

[linnite]

Hi everyone,

I'm a pretty infrequent poster on here because I have just been sitting tight, ignoring letters and waiting for Statute Barred Day. That day is now upon me for about £12000 of the debt with a further £2500 that I have to wait for June for. Another £6000 is being paid either because they had an enforceable CCA or because I bottled it on receiving a LBA rather than finding out if they did. Not a bad score in my opinion.

Really glad to see the forum still going despite, I assume, the unenforceability loophole having been closed for many newer CCA's???

Anyway. I'm a bit anxious about sending statute barred letters for 3 reasons, if anyone can advise?

1. I last paid anything against about 6 debts on 8/1/18. That was a DMP payment with StepChange. In principle can I send the letters on the 9/1/24, or do I leave it a full calendar month given my previous payment frequency was monthly, to account for any delay StepChange might have made in passing the funds on to the creditors, just to be sure, or maybe you would suggest some other time period to hang fire for?

2. The two that I have to wait until June for are with Lowell. Some of the time barred ones are also with Lowell. If I start sending bolshie time barred letters to Lowell am I poking the hornets' nest, showing them how I behave and goading them into action on some pretty sleepy accounts?

3. I have some queries about the standard letter because it refers to "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period". But I have heard from them - they send statements and requests to get in touch????

One one hand I would like the certainty of having sent these letters and hopefully getting some sort of acknowledgement from them that they cannot pursue these debts in the court, but on the other I don't much care about the letters they send and I can always act if they ever tried to escalate matters.

Can anyone please help me weigh up the pro's and con's? Thanks in anticipation of any help.

-linnite

[Still Waving]

Hi everyone,

I'm a pretty infrequent poster on here because I have just been sitting tight, ignoring letters and waiting for Statute Barred Day. That day is now upon me for about £12000 of the debt with a further £2500 that I have to wait for June for. Another £6000 is being paid either because they had an enforceable CCA or because I bottled it on receiving a LBA rather than finding out if they did. Not a bad score in my opinion.

Really glad to see the forum still going despite, I assume, the unenforceability loophole having been closed for many newer CCA's???

Anyway. I'm a bit anxious about sending statute barred letters for 3 reasons, if anyone can advise?

1. I last paid anything against about 6 debts on 8/1/18. That was a DMP payment with StepChange. In principle can I send the letters on the 9/1/24, or do I leave it a full calendar month given my previous payment frequency was monthly, to account for any delay StepChange might have made in passing the funds on to the creditors, just to be sure, or maybe you would suggest some other time period to hang fire for?

2. The two that I have to wait until June for are with Lowell. Some of the time barred ones are also with Lowell. If I start sending bolshie time barred letters to Lowell am I poking the hornets' nest, showing them how I behave and goading them into action on some pretty sleepy accounts?

3. I have some queries about the standard letter because it refers to "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period". But I have heard from them - they send statements and requests to get in touch????

One one hand I would like the certainty of having sent these letters and hopefully getting some sort of acknowledgement from them that they cannot pursue these debts in the court, but on the other I don't much care about the letters they send and I can always act if they ever tried to escalate matters.

Can anyone please help me weigh up the pro's and con's? Thanks in anticipation of any help.

-linnite

Hi

The first thing to say is don't take the date of your last payment (plus 1 month) as the definitive starting point for the 6 year period. There are other actions which can determine when a debt becomes SB.

The second thing is, we don't normally bash out a SB letter just because the relevant date has been reached (I have never sent a SB letter). The advice here is just to continue to keep silent.

I don't know how it is with you as you say you haven't updated here for some time, but my experience was that by the time mine got to SB I was receiving very few letters, and they were mostly discount offers. They eventually petered out altogether.

The best thing to do with any letters regarding accounts you think are SB, is to file and ignore, unless they look serious.

[linnite]

Hi

The first thing to say is don't take the date of your last payment (plus 1 month) as the definitive starting point for the 6 year period. There are other actions which can determine when a debt becomes SB.

The second thing is, we don't normally bash out a SB letter just because the relevant date has been reached (I have never sent a SB letter). The advice here is just to continue to keep silent.

I don't know how it is with you as you say you haven't updated here for some time, but my experience was that by the time mine got to SB I was receiving very few letters, and they were mostly discount offers. They eventually petered out altogether.

The best thing to do with any letters regarding accounts you think are SB, is to file and ignore, unless they look serious.

Many thanks for the quick reply, somehow I must have got the impression that getting those letters out was the done thing, to achieve a sort of closure, I'm actually really happy to go the way you are saying and just carry on ignoring everything knowing they have now lost their fangs.

Lowell seemed to have stepped up their letter writing in the last 6 months, I assumed it was because they knew SB day was coming up, there was no sense of escalation though just frequency of letters. All very ignorable. There is nobody that has stopped writing altogether though.

Many thanks again,

-linnite

[Roger]

Many thanks for the quick reply, somehow I must have got the impression that getting those letters out was the done thing, to achieve a sort of closure, I'm actually really happy to go the way you are saying and just carry on ignoring everything knowing they have now lost their fangs.

Lowell seemed to have stepped up their letter writing in the last 6 months, I assumed it was because they knew SB day was coming up, there was no sense of escalation though just frequency of letters. All very ignorable. There is nobody that has stopped writing altogether though.

Many thanks again,

-linnite

I 100% agree wirh Still Waving take a pessimistic view of Statute Barred! Silence is golden! DCA's vet and look at forums such as this one and at times the Courts have been referred to forum entries as evidence of acknowledging a Debt!
Its a tactical game now a good Diary with observations and comments can deter a DCA !!! Tells them their games up!
Tactics are very important! Silence is golden!

[Sparkles]

I agree with the above comments, leave it to fizzle out. There's no point contacting them unless they try and take court action.

[MisterK]

Although I agree with much of what has been said here about the inadvisability of routinely sending out SB template letters, I also think that there will be situations where this issue needs more thought. Absolutely one shouldn't send out such a letter the day following 6 years from the last payment, definitely give it more time than that. Perhaps the longer the better on the basis that the longer you leave it then the passing of time is working for you and also the less likely it is that something untoward might crop up. Apart from which the date of issue of the default notice comes into the picture and so most people would want to leave it until 6 years after the final date specified in the default notice. This is the last date to make a payment at which point the account is closed. That's usually about a couple of weeks or so after the date of the default notice and it will differ from the date that is 6 years after the first date that a monthly payment was missed.

Also it doesn't make any difference to the SB clock if you have been receiving statements or demands for payment during that time. What matters is whether you yourself have put anything in writing (or put on record) that could be taken to be an admission that you owe the money. Receiving a letter or email about the debt does not do this, so no need to worry there.

One possible exception to the strategy of not sending out SB letters is if you are thinking of moving to another address. Do you want to pay the exorbitant fees that the Royal Mail charge for their redirection service, which in any case can only be for a limited period and may also be unreliable. If you don't do this then you probably won't receive any possible claims which could then go unchallenged resulting in a creditor obtaining a default CCJ. That might be quite difficult to overturn if you didn't find out about it for months or even years later. So advising a creditor of a change of address might seem to be a good idea but to do that might not necessarily be wise particularly if there is any doubt about whether a debt is really SB or not. For example if a default notice was never issued etc.

Sending a SB template letter in that circumstance might be the way forward especially if it brings forth a reply stating that they agree not to bother you any more. Then you can move house confident in the knowledge that you've put a stop to the demands. Much cheaper and longer lasting than paying for the mail redirection service.

Remember also that just because you yourself know that your debt is statute barred does not mean that the court will know this in your absence. The creditor is not going to volunteer the information and so if you don't point it out because you are not there (as you didn't know about the claim) then the judgement might well go against you and that could quite easily result in a default CCJ.

So that's at least one situation where the SB template letter might be an effective way of warding off future problems. I hope that's helpful, those are my thoughts on this.

[linnite]

Although I agree with much of what has been said here about the inadvisability of routinely sending out SB template letters, I also think that there will be situations where this issue needs more thought. Absolutely one shouldn't send out such a letter the day following 6 years from the last payment, definitely give it more time than that. Perhaps the longer the better on the basis that the longer you leave it then the passing of time is working for you and also the less likely it is that something untoward might crop up. Apart from which the date of issue of the default notice comes into the picture and so most people would want to leave it until 6 years after the final date specified in the default notice. This is the last date to make a payment at which point the account is closed. That's usually about a couple of weeks or so after the date of the default notice and it will differ from the date that is 6 years after the first date that a monthly payment was missed.

Also it doesn't make any difference to the SB clock if you have been receiving statements or demands for payment during that time. What matters is whether you yourself have put anything in writing (or put on record) that could be taken to be an admission that you owe the money. Receiving a letter or email about the debt does not do this, so no need to worry there.

One possible exception to the strategy of not sending out SB letters is if you are thinking of moving to another address. Do you want to pay the exorbitant fees that the Royal Mail charge for their redirection service, which in any case can only be for a limited period and may also be unreliable. If you don't do this then you probably won't receive any possible claims which could then go unchallenged resulting in a creditor obtaining a default CCJ. That might be quite difficult to overturn if you didn't find out about it for months or even years later. So advising a creditor of a change of address might seem to be a good idea but to do that might not necessarily be wise particularly if there is any doubt about whether a debt is really SB or not. For example if a default notice was never issued etc.

Sending a SB template letter in that circumstance might be the way forward especially if it brings forth a reply stating that they agree not to bother you any more. Then you can move house confident in the knowledge that you've put a stop to the demands. Much cheaper and longer lasting than paying for the mail redirection service.

Remember also that just because you yourself know that your debt is statute barred does not mean that the court will know this in your absence. The creditor is not going to volunteer the information and so if you don't point it out because you are not there (as you didn't know about the claim) then the judgement might well go against you and that could quite easily result in a default CCJ.

So that's at least one situation where the SB template letter might be an effective way of warding off future problems. I hope that's helpful, those are my thoughts on this.

Thanks for this!

[Roger]

Tactics have changed in the last few years.
linnite
I really wish you had started an AAD Diary because you are asking generalised advice!
You name Lowell for instance!
You see you don't say which Company in the Lowell Group was Assigned the Account

Read the following excellent advice that also covers Default Judgments!
An AAD Diary means particular Advice could/will be given!
What else might have been uncovered by a Diary!

Sadly generalised can be a Hell Pit of worry!

• 
  Sam Audley started a blog post Lowell Portfolio
  18 March 2021, 13:58
  • Share
  • Tweet
  
  Lowell is one of the UK’s largest credit management companies. According to Lowell’s website ‘Lowell is a group of companies that includes Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd and Lowell Financial Ltd. Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd take on debt from lots of different companies. Lowell Financial Ltd manage that debt on behalf of Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd. Lowell Financial Ltd works with customers to help them find the best way to manage their debt……. ….Our business in the UK is comprised of a number of legal entities, and are in some cases authorised and supervised by regulatory bodies.’
  
  Lowell claim that they will not issue County Court Judgments (CCJ’s) without following the proper process, although in our experience, this is not always the case. Like most debt purchasers, they claim to help you to manage your debt through affordable repayments, and to support you through the process.
  
  In common with most debt purchasers, their real aim is to maximise their investment in the debts they purchase. To this end, they will sometimes accept repayment plans, but may require proof of your income and expenditure before agreeing terms. Be aware, however, that these plans are usually informal and can often be reviewed or revised, usually every 6 months. A repayment plan does not stop Lowell from issuing a claim. We have many clients who have had court proceedings issued against them while they are in such repayment plans.
  
  Our view is that these companies, once they issue proceedings must show us and the courts that they have complied with the statutory requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the Law of Property Act 1925. If they have not, then they are not legally entitled to enforce these debts. We defend all cases vigorously with a near 100% success rate.
  
  Lowell Portfolio 1 Limited usually issue the claims against consumers in bulk using a firm of Solicitors, Lowell Solicitors Limited who are also part of the Lowell Group of companies.
  
  If you have received a letter of claim or a County Court Claim from Lowell, or Lowell have obtained a default judgment against you, we can advise you how to proceed. These claims can be defended. Our view is that these companies once they issue county court proceedings must show us and the courts that they have complied with the statutory requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA) and the Law of Property Act 1925. If they have not, then they are not legally entitled to enforce these debts. We defend all cases vigorously with a near 100% success rate.
  
  Here are some examples from the many claims we have successfully defended against Lowell Portfolio:
  
  Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Greenwood (2021) (Blackpool County Court) Successfully defended this claim which was for monies alleged to be owing under a Vanquis credit card, EE Finance plc and a catalogue company. Application made for summary judgment and /or strike out. Claimant discontinues claim against EE Finance Plc and the catalogue company prior to the hearing of the Defendants application. At the hearing the court strikes out the claim in relation to the Vanquis credit card.
  
  Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v Ogundu (2020) (County Court at Manchester) – permission to appeal granted – real arguments that his obligation to the claimant was extinguished by the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 and that the claimant is not entitled to enforce debt due to breach of S.78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 – (Claimant subsequently consented to appeal and dismissal of claim).
  
  Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd v R (2019) (Oxford County Court) successful appeal– although not pleaded by litigant in person in defence, claimant had not complied with s.78 CCA 1974 and no evidence that a compliant default notice was served.
  
  Please note that County Court decisions are not binding on other judges. Each case has to be argued and defended on it’s merits.

[MisterK]

No problem Linnite, I'm pleased to be of help.

The statute barred letter you mentioned in your first post apparently states the following "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period".

It may well be unfair to "pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period" but as I understand it this is actually besides the point. A debt becomes statute barred if the debtor has not acknowledged the debt within the period, irrespective of any communicatiion that may have arrived from the creditor. I'm a little surprised therefore why this particular statute barred letter should have thrown in this extra statement and I can see why it could well be misleading. It's also questionable whether that letter would be a good one to send to a creditor who HAS been bombarding the debtor with demands for payment.

You say it's the "standard letter" but I'm not quite sure what that means exactly because more than one such letter has appeared in recent years. For example AAD used to have one which I can no longer find here.

Would you be able to remember where you found that particular letter, and if anyone else happens to know where to find the best statute barred template letter (one that clearly sticks to the legalities) I'm sure the forum would much appreciate it.

I don't hold myself to be an expert on this so if anyone is better informed on the subject then please share your knowledge even (or especially) if it challenges my own understanding!

[Still Waving]

It's establishing unfair practices, which in itself is in contravention of CONC rules.

Since Linnite has said that particular scenario doesn't apply here, then IF he/she was intending to send an SB letter (which again, I wouldn't), then that particular part could be omitted.

[linnite]

No problem Linnite, I'm pleased to be of help.

The statute barred letter you mentioned in your first post apparently states the following "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period".

It may well be unfair to "pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period" but as I understand it this is actually besides the point. A debt becomes statute barred if the debtor has not acknowledged the debt within the period, irrespective of any communicatiion that may have arrived from the creditor. I'm a little surprised therefore why this particular statute barred letter should have thrown in this extra statement and I can see why it could well be misleading. It's also questionable whether that letter would be a good one to send to a creditor who HAS been bombarding the debtor with demands for payment.

You say it's the "standard letter" but I'm not quite sure what that means exactly because more than one such letter has appeared in recent years. For example AAD used to have one which I can no longer find here.

Would you be able to remember where you found that particular letter, and if anyone else happens to know where to find the best statute barred template letter (one that clearly sticks to the legalities) I'm sure the forum would much appreciate it.

I don't hold myself to be an expert on this so if anyone is better informed on the subject then please share your knowledge even (or especially) if it challenges my own understanding!

It's in the template letters here https://all-about-debt.co.uk/forum/d...mplate-letters

[MisterK]

Thanks Linnite, for some reason I'd been unable to find that template.

Mostly the creditor would have been demanding payment at some point during the previous 6 years and so - as Still Waving recommends - you'd probably want to tweak the AAD letter for that scenario and leave the sentence out.

If you hadn't been contacted at all during the six years concerned then you could send the letter just as it stands - but that might be quite unusual. If you'd not heard anything at all in six years it might suggest that your account had slipped so far off the radar that you'd never hear anything more and so you'd actually be better off just letting sleeping dogs lie.

If you've gone for six years with no demands for payment at all then you've probably got very little to worry about.

[Pat]

I am not a fan of sending SB letters but sometimes they are necessary . Rather than using that somewhat (in this case) inappropriate line you may want to look herehttps://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/CONC/7/15.html and see if something fits. Then you could quote it. It is worth going back to the link as it does seem to keep getting tweaked.


Having said that over the years I have had accounts closed because I have told someone the only think I could think of was long time barred and another to Cabot saying 'but you can't fulfil my S78 request'. Clearly they knew they would never be able to even though Natwest had sent perfectly good copies of the agreements when I first started my journey. I also think that at the time it was rapidly approaching 6 years.

Keep fighting the fight

[Roger]

linnite
Background you joined 2014 (ten years ago)
" I last paid anything against about 6 debts on 8/1/18. That was a DMP payment with StepChange "
So my thinking is your debts existed prior to 2014 Obviously do not know how long you were with StepChange
Now you may or many not not know there are all sorts of issues with Banks and their Processes there are also changes in the CCA 74 especially in prior years to 2014.
IRON MOUNTAIN comes up in some cases
The Banking crisis especially created issues
" Another £6000 is being paid either because they had an enforceable CCA or because I bottled it on receiving a LBA rather than finding out if they did. Not a bad score in my opinion. "

You mentioned one DCA Lowell you do not mentioned others!
But there are Other Blogs here which cover most of these

Since you generalise I personally wouldn't advise anything except perhaps talk to @JCS You will of course need to provide particulars to them But the first consulation is free.
Who knows they may even save you paying more on the debt you bottled.

The danger here is on presumptions against generalistions

[Pat]

Hi everyone,

I'm a pretty infrequent poster on here because I have just been sitting tight, ignoring letters and waiting for Statute Barred Day. That day is now upon me for about £12000 of the debt with a further £2500 that I have to wait for June for. Another £6000 is being paid either because they had an enforceable CCA or because I bottled it on receiving a LBA rather than finding out if they did. Not a bad score in my opinion.

Really glad to see the forum still going despite, I assume, the unenforceability loophole having been closed for many newer CCA's???

Anyway. I'm a bit anxious about sending statute barred letters for 3 reasons, if anyone can advise?

1. I last paid anything against about 6 debts on 8/1/18. That was a DMP payment with StepChange. In principle can I send the letters on the 9/1/24, or do I leave it a full calendar month given my previous payment frequency was monthly, to account for any delay StepChange might have made in passing the funds on to the creditors, just to be sure, or maybe you would suggest some other time period to hang fire for?

2. The two that I have to wait until June for are with Lowell. Some of the time barred ones are also with Lowell. If I start sending bolshie time barred letters to Lowell am I poking the hornets' nest, showing them how I behave and goading them into action on some pretty sleepy accounts?

3. I have some queries about the standard letter because it refers to "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period". But I have heard from them - they send statements and requests to get in touch????

One one hand I would like the certainty of having sent these letters and hopefully getting some sort of acknowledgement from them that they cannot pursue these debts in the court, but on the other I don't much care about the letters they send and I can always act if they ever tried to escalate matters.

Can anyone please help me weigh up the pro's and con's? Thanks in anticipation of any help.

-linnite

Hi
And sorry if I didn't give my thoughts in full earlier

1) I would not send SB letters. For a start, although you say the last payment was on 8th jan, it may have taken a few days or even weeks for that to be credited to your account - I am sure that is arguable but better not to argue.

2) The debts that threatened you and you haven't sent a CCA request off to, there is nothing stopping you doing so now. They might trigger some something but it is your right to ask.

3) While UE agreements are much less common now since the changed in 2007 , there is far more to unenforceability than just a credit agreement. For example was a compliant S87 (1) DN sent, if so can they prove it? Have they been sending your regular statements etc. Is the assignment legit and what are its terms- for example many years ago I saw one that said after 6 months the OC would not help the new owner, seek documents or otherwise be supportive.

It is odd that so many of my agreements were technically enforceable , even one for 15K but did not go to court.


If you can afford it then yes a lawyer is useful, if not people here may be able to help. Remember any initial interview will be time limited and a one off - I would save it until you have something to worry about.

By the way, with one exception, I never hear from my SB creditors with one exception who send me a statement every year, thanks for reminding me I owe you £1000 :-)