Lowell chasing me

[Carsey1974]

Hi guys

im new to this I'm being chased by lowell for a debt that was over 6 years ago, I sent them a letter saying that I don't owe that debt and don't acknowledge the debt and it will be statuet barred. They sent a letter back saying I made a payment in 2009 but i can not recollect making a payment for £20 as they say and that now sorts the matter and answered my question so we can now set up a payment plan so I have now started to ignore the letters, now they have made an unrecorded enquiry on my credit file and saying that I should make contact to make a payment or they will send bailiffs out can anyone please help.

thank you

Tony

[UnitedFront]

Re: Lowell chasing me

Can you give a timeline of event, please? For example:

1) Original credit agreement entered into - DATE.
2) Stopped paying original credit agreement - DATE.
3) Lowell claim a payment was made - DATE.
4) Started receiving letters from Lowell - DATE.
5) Wrote to Lowell saying it was Statute Barred - DATE.
6) Lowell wrote back claiming a 2009 payment - DATE.

Being as clear as possible with dates can often help avoid any more problems than are necessary.

Cheers,
UF.

[Carsey1974]

Re: Lowell chasing me

Can you give a timeline of event, please? For example:

1) Original credit agreement entered into - DATE.
2) Stopped paying original credit agreement - DATE.
3) Lowell claim a payment was made - DATE.
4) Started receiving letters from Lowell - DATE.
5) Wrote to Lowell saying it was Statute Barred - DATE.
6) Lowell wrote back claiming a 2009 payment - DATE.

Being as clear as possible with dates can often help avoid any more problems than are necessary.

Cheers,
UF.

Hi

1. 1998
2. 1998
3. September 2009 (this is all they have given)
4. January 2013
5. January 2013
6. February 2013

[Carsey1974]

Re: Lowell chasing me

1. 1998
2. 1998
3. September 2009 (this is all they gave no particular date or how payment was made)
4. January 2013
5. January 2013
6. February 2013

thanks

[UnitedFront]

Re: Lowell chasing me

Hi

1. 1998
2. 1998
3. September 2009 (this is all they have given)
4. January 2013
5. January 2013
6. February 2013

Okay, I suppose I should also have asked what the original debt was for...?

Assuming that it is for an ordinary debt (a "simple" contract such as a credit card or catalogue etc, rather than a mortgage etc.) and assuming that you haven't made any written and signed acknowledgements of the debt, then the debt is WELL AND TRULY statute barred!!!

Once a debt is Statute Barred, it CANNOT BE UN-BARRED by any subsequent payment.

You say you made your last payment in 1998 and they claim a subsequent payment was made in 2009. That means that there was a gap of 11 years between payments.

Last payment - 1998.
Debt becomes statute barred - 2004.
Debt cannot become un-barred.

The above obviously assumes that there were no more payments made that are not detailed above. For example, if there was a payment in 2003 and then again in 2006, then it might be a different story...?

I would write to them and inform them of the following things:

1) You don't acknowledge any debt to them or any company that they purport to represent.
2) You don't acknowledge having made any payment to them at any time, but specifically not in 2009.
3) In any event, the alleged debt would have become statute barred in 2004 at the latest.
4) Once a debt is statute barred, a later payment cannot restart the clock - Limitation Act 1980, s.29(7).

Limitation Act 1980, Section 5:
Time limit for actions founded on simple contract.
An action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Limitation Act 1980, Section 29:
Fresh accrual of action on acknowledgment or part payment.

(1) Subsections (2) and (3) below apply where any right of action (including a foreclosure action) to recover land or an advowson or any right of a mortgagee of personal property to bring a foreclosure action in respect of the property has accrued.

(2) If the person in possession of the land, benefice or personal property in question acknowledges the title of the person to whom the right of action has accrued—
(a) the right shall be treated as having accrued on and not before the date of the acknowledgment; and
(b) in the case of a right of action to recover land which has accrued to a person entitled to an estate or interest taking effect on the determination of an entailed interest against whom time is running under section 27 of this Act, section 27 shall thereupon cease to apply to the land.


(3) In the case of a foreclosure or other action by a mortgagee, if the person in possession of the land, benefice or personal property in question or the person liable for the mortgage debt makes any payment in respect of the debt (whether of principal or interest) the right shall be treated as having accrued on and not before the date of the payment.

(4) Where a mortgagee is by virtue of the mortgage in possession of any mortgaged land and either—
(a) receives any sum in respect of the principal or interest of the mortgage debt; or
(b) acknowledges the title of the mortgagor, or his equity of redemption;

an action to redeem the land in his possession may be brought at any time before the expiration of twelve years from the date of the payment or acknowledgment.

(5) Subject to subsection (6) below, where any right of action has accrued to recover—
(a) any debt or other liquidated pecuniary claim; or
(b) any claim to the personal estate of a deceased person or to any share or interest in any such estate;

and the person liable or accountable for the claim acknowledges the claim or makes any payment in respect of it the right shall be treated as having accrued on and not before the date of the acknowledgment or payment.

(6) A payment of a part of the rent or interest due at any time shall not extend the period for claiming the remainder then due, but any payment of interest shall be treated as a payment in respect of the principal debt.

(7) Subject to subsection (6) above, a current period of limitation may be repeatedly extended under this section by further acknowledgments or payments, but a right of action, once barred by this Act, shall not be revived by any subsequent acknowledgment or payment. [emphasis added]

Please note that I am not a legal expert or a lawyer or anything of the sort. My posts are meant to be helpful but are not authoritative, they are just my opinion and I do not warrant in any way shape or form the accuracy of my posts or any contents therein. I cannot be held liable in any way, shape or form to any extent whatsoever for any harm resulting from the information contained in any of my posts, howsoever caused. Nothing in my post constitutes advice. If in doubt, contact a qualified and insured solicitor or other such expert.

[Carsey1974]

Re: Lowell chasing me

The original debt was for a debit card back then an to be honest I can not remember how I ran up the debt and it was originally owed to Co-op bank the amount is £5400.

I really appreciate all your help and information on this matter.

thank you again

Tony

[UnitedFront]

Re: Lowell chasing me

Okay, well a debt card is a "simple contract" and so falls within Section 5 Limitation Act 1980.

Effectively what you need is to have a SIX YEAR GAP in payments anywhere in the history of the debt. If there is such a gap, the debt is statute barred.

[pt2537]

Re: Lowell chasing me

the mention of bailiffs makes me wonder....

If in 1998 you had a debt, but didnt pay, is it possible that the original creditor has sued you and holds a Judgment?

Its just reference to sending Bailiffs, they would need a County Court Judgment to do that, and of course if they had a Judgment within the limitation period then your limitation defence would fail

[Carsey1974]

Re: Lowell chasing me

I am a member of experian and equifax and have been for the last 6 years or so and I have nothing against me on my file at all is this just a threat???

thanks

[UnitedFront]

Re: Lowell chasing me

Good point PT!!

Did they actually say "bailiffs" or did they mention something more like "doorstep collectors"?

[Carsey1974]

Re: Lowell chasing me

Good point PT!!

Did they actually say "bailiffs" or did they mention something more like "doorstep collectors"?

Hi again


I have double checked and the original account was with Co-op bank and the account was opened on the 12/02/1998 and Lowell have bought this debt.


Please help thank you.


I have received another letter today saying: Your account remains unpaid, we have tried on a number of occasions to help you resolve this debt by offering affordable repayment solutions which you appear to have ignored. We informed you in our previous correspondence we would obtain information from the credit reference agency about you, which we have now done. We will be shortly assessing this information and sending your account to either; an agent who will arrange a time to visit you to discuss payment face to face, the court, where we will proceed with court action, or a process server who will serve you with a petition of insolvency, dependant on if your account meets insolvency criteria.


YOUR LAST CHANCE TO PAY THIS ACCOUNT IS ESCALATED
If you want to avoid what is described above then this is your last chance. If we do not receive payment in full, or, if you have not set up a payment plan on this account within 21 days from the date of this letteree will commence with action against you.


Again, in an attempt to demonstrate to you how flexible we are willing to be, we would like to offer you what we think is an affordable repayment plan. Pay us £15 per month, which is approximately £0.50 per day; alternatively complete the Direct Debit mandate with an amount you can afford; or call is to discuss alternative plans.

it does not say bailiffs my mistake SORRY all explained in letter they sent me above.

thanks

[UnitedFront]

Re: Lowell chasing me

Okay, well PT is definitely the expert in this area - but the fact that they're writing about "court action" suggests to me that they haven't got a judgment already. If that is the case, and there were no payments of written acknowledgements made between 1998 and 2009, the debt is statute barred and so I would refer to my second post in this thread.

Ultimately if the debt is statute barred then they can't take any legal action. Whether you want to pay it, and the amounts that you want to pay, is up to you as a personal choice.

[Carsey1974]

Re: Lowell chasing me

Okay, well PT is definitely the expert in this area - but the fact that they're writing about "court action" suggests to me that they haven't got a judgment already. If that is the case, and there were no payments of written acknowledgements made between 1998 and 2009, the debt is statute barred and so I would refer to my second post in this thread.

Ultimately if the debt is statute barred then they can't take any legal action. Whether you want to pay it, and the amounts that you want to pay, is up to you as a personal choice.

Hi thanks for your reply and I now await PT's reply I will not be making any payments.

thanks again guys for all your help as I am a massive worrier and was unsure where to turn I really appreciate all your help. Ill keep you posted.

tony

[ODC]

Re: Lowell chasing me

THis is just a standard threatomatic letter from the Leeds Losers. If you have told them its Statute Barred its up to them to prove a payment was made by YOU. It is NOT up to you to prove a payment wasnt made. Lowells are well known to invent imaginary payments to extend the shelf life of a debt. According to these shysters I made a payment once when I was on holiday in America and another at a Bank 200 miles away on a Sunday!!!!!! . You have told them that the debt is Statute Barred. Its up to them to PROVE otherwise. You can demand written proof of this so called payment but personally I woulnt get involved in a game of letter tennis with these clowns.

[Carsey1974]

Re: Lowell chasing me

Hi thanks for your reply and I now await PT's reply I will not be making any payments.

thanks again guys for all your help as I am a massive worrier and was unsure where to turn I really appreciate all your help. Ill keep you posted.

tony

Can I also say that in one of there letters to me it reads as follows;

Thank you for your letter, concerning the above account.

We confirm that your account remains legally enforceable by us and is not statute barred as suggested in your letter.

This is because you made a payment in relation to this account on the 4th August 2009 of £20.00.

Under the Limitation Act 1980 , where we have a legal right to recover the outstanding debt and you made a payment towards the debt due, this has the effect of restarting the period during which we are able to legally enforce a debt.