Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

[Angry Cat]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Hi Guys on a more serious note - I have just checked all my bank statements going back to 2006, and I have a couple of concerns.....

Firstly, am I right in saying that if a debt is SB, it cannot effectively be un SB'd if you make payments and realise after that its SB'd??

OK so here is what I found, in 2008 I had made x3 payments to DCA from my card for the amount of £10, I seem to of then made a payment of £11.50 every month for that amount until October 09. This was all done via card.

Now if I'm really honest - I was pregnant in 2008, gave birth in 2009 and I am 100% certain I had no contact with any DCA after having my son. So was gobsmacked at discovering these card transactions.

I don't know what debt it is for but I'm not sure where I stand now....

Once again your help is greatly appreciated.

Yes, if you affirm the debt by payment or word within the 6 years; the clock starts ticking again!

Funny old world, thought that you are a Man...
anyhow, I suggest that you check with your Bank RE: these payments.

Good luck!
X

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Firstly, am I right in saying that if a debt is SB, it cannot effectively be un SB'd if you make payments and realise after that its SB'd??

Yes.

See section 29(6) - link - of the Limitation Act 1980.

Now if I'm really honest - I was pregnant in 2008, gave birth in 2009

And I'd formed the impression that you were male.

That does now seem relatively unlikely.

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Firstly, am I right in saying that if a debt is SB, it cannot effectively be un SB'd if you make payments and realise after that its SB'd??

That's correct, once there's a clear 6 year period without payment or written acknowledgment, it becomes SBd and any payments made AFTER that do not affect SBd status. :thumb:

OK so here is what I found, in 2008 I had made x3 payments to DCA from my card for the amount of £10, I seem to of then made a payment of £11.50 every month for that amount until October 09. This was all done via card.

Now if I'm really honest - I was pregnant in 2008, gave birth in 2009 and I am 100% certain I had no contact with any DCA after having my son. So was gobsmacked at discovering these card transactions.

I don't know what debt it is for but I'm not sure where I stand now....

It would all depend on whether there was a clear 6 year period without payments before 2008. :noidea:

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Hi Guys on a more serious note - I have just checked all my bank statements going back to 2006, and I have a couple of concerns.....

Firstly, am I right in saying that if a debt is SB, it cannot effectively be un SB'd if you make payments and realise after that its SB'd??

OK so here is what I found, in 2008 I had made x3 payments to DCA from my card for the amount of £10, I seem to of then made a payment of £11.50 every month for that amount until October 09. This was all done via card.

Now if I'm really honest - I was pregnant in 2008, gave birth in 2009 and I am 100% certain I had no contact with any DCA after having my son. So was gobsmacked at discovering these card transactions.

I don't know what debt it is for but I'm not sure where I stand now....

Once again your help is greatly appreciated.

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Just imagine the waste of time and money if, everybody wrote to firms advising them that the individual is not resident at their address...maybe, send them a selection of junk mail, minus a stamp of course!

Send them a brick, wrapped up in a lot of newspaper.

Affix a 1p stamp and clearly mark the package "Excess postage will be paid by addressee."

[MIKE770]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

See below, I think we've found the reason. :nerd:

Optician called the Krank wagon, so I did a runner! lol

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Must go to ther opticians - seeing double post this morning

See below, I think we've found the reason. :nerd:

Are you posting from a mobile device by any chance? I've seen at least a couple of double posts, that happens to me sometimes when I post from my phone or iPad.

That may also explain how you quoted me as saying something about your family. :lol: :lol:

Hi Flaming Parrot, I was posting from my mobile I wondered why that kept happening - people on here will think I'm mad, or REALLY trying to get my point across!:director: hahaha

[MIKE770]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Must go to ther opticians - seeing double post this morning

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

[QUOTE=Angry Cat;380789]The OP or, his Aunt does not have to respond; the addressee/ victim is not resident at that address!

The Leeds Losers are notorious for sending out letters to various addresses; scatter gun strategy.

Just imagine the waste of time and money if, everybody wrote to firms advising them that the individual is not resident at their address..[QUOTE=.maybe, send them a selection of junk mail, minus a stamp of course![/QUOTE]

Made me chuckle! Thank you

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Are you posting from a mobile device by any chance? I've seen at least a couple of double posts, that happens to me sometimes when I post from my phone or iPad.

That may also explain how you quoted me as saying something about your family. :lol: :lol:

Hi Flaming Parrot, I was posting from my mobile I wondered why that kept happening - people on here will think I'm mad, or REALLY trying to get my point across!:director: hahaha

[Angry Cat]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

My reply Cloggy was along the lines of "you can not be serious" although I was having difficulty getting words out as my flabber was gasted!

You are on excellent form tonight, have you been over to Yorkshire?

The OP or, his Aunt does not have to respond; the addressee/ victim is not resident at that address!

The Leeds Losers are notorious for sending out letters to various addresses; scatter gun strategy.

Just imagine the waste of time and money if, everybody wrote to firms advising them that the individual is not resident at their address...maybe, send them a selection of junk mail, minus a stamp of course!

[FlamingParrot]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

Are you posting from a mobile device by any chance? I've seen at least a couple of double posts, that happens to me sometimes when I post from my phone or iPad.

That may also explain how you quoted me as saying something about your family. :lol: :lol:

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

It means next to nothing - it is merely indicates that someone liked one of your posts.

Ah...when I first saw "reputation notification" I thought it was a bad thing and it might of been because I was discussing law of land and getoutofdebtfree.

I know, I know...my mind sometimes runs away with me. I thought I might of offended someone. But then I got points.

[strong123]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

It means next to nothing - it is merely indicates that someone liked one of your posts.

Ah...when I first saw "reputation notification" I thought it was a bad thing and it might of been because I was discussing law of land and getoutofdebtfree.

I know, I know...my mind sometimes runs away with me. I thought I might of offended someone. But then I got points.

[jon1965]

Re: Contacted by lowell - following a letter from BC solicitors

No - why?

My passport needs updating.

Thought maybe you had been on the funny stuff (Mind you not much good comes from there...even my grandparents escaped)