John asked how was he traced to his current address.

I heard recently of someone else who was traced to a new address after many, many years and does not in fact now live at the 'new address' but had lived at that 'new address' temporarily.

The Debt Collectors claimed that they had a 'trace' placed on the person to discover the 'new address'.

The only thing this person had done whilst at that 'new address', was make a Benefits Claim, albeit a temporary claim and eventually found work and moved on to an even newer address. The person did not even enter their name on the Register of Electors for that address!!

Part of the Register of Electors for any area is available for sale to any person and there have been complaints recently about this, disclosure of addresses, although the Register is a Public Record.

This then makes me think that someone at one of the Benefits Agencies must be UNLAWFULLY providing or selling private and personal identification information and addresses to these Debt Collection companies?

John said he had a wife and child. If Child Benefit is being claimed, the Child Benefits Agency may be the leaky agency, one or more of whose personnel is/are UNLAWFULLY providing, or more likely 'selling for profit', Claimant addresses and details.

I agree with Conmankiller's advice, but an alternative course of action would be to put the letter back into it's envelope, re-seal it and write on the envelope, RETURN TO SENDER, NOT AT THIS ADDRESS, OPENED IN ERROR and post it back to the Sender. The Sender will then be charged double postage for an unstamped letter and eventually may just get the message that whatever they write is going to be returned to them and not result in any unfair, con-artist trick being successful. And in future try to recognise similar letters from this Company and don't even bother to open them, just R-T-S, N-A-T-A.

And do not telephone anybody in or connected to these dodgy letters!!!!

Skywalker - Most definitely he can still be pursued.!

Debts to the Crown do not fall under the limitations act therefore are always open to pursual with penalty and interest, the Six year statute does not apply to your friend.

Tell him to declare it and explain it as an innocent oversight on his part, HMRC can be understanding if you come clean with them and the payment is not too far overdue.

Payments

Tax due on capital gains made in 2007/08 should be paid by 31 January 2009

Any CGT due for 2008/09 will be payable on or before 31 January 2010.

CMK,

a close friend of mine sold one of his houses recently, it wasn't his main residence, and is under the impression that if the tax man doesn't find out within 6 years, he will escape the CGT. But this is a debt to the Crown? Can he be pursued after the so-called 6 year limitation?

Hi again john - After all this time the original creditor has probably sold a batch of these uncollectable debts for peanuts onto this BPO lot who will seek to successfully collect just a few in order to gain an overall profit....they are simply trying it on don't let it worry you.

Send them a copy of the edited to suit initial Statute barred letter below by Recorded delivery, this letter also invites them to produce proof if there has been activity within the last Six years. If they fail to further provide this proof and still keep harassing you then just post back. Don't ever speak to them on the phone, tempting as it maybe...everything in writing only. !

.............................................. ...........................................

Your Name:
Your Address:
Date

To: Creditor ???

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Dear Sir/Madam

Account No:

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

I/we would point out that under the Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 "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".

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that "it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period".

The last correspondence/payment/acknowledgement or payment of this debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me/us in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I/we suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me/us to recover the alleged amount claimed.

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that "continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statue barred could amount to harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970".

I/we await your written confirmation that no further contact will be made concerning the above account and confirmation that this matter is now closed.

I/we look forward to your reply.

Yours faithfully [print name]

Well it is now 10 months on and a new company has come at me for this same debt called BPO collections part of capquest, stating that i owe them funds and want payment within 7 days.

I have never heard from the other company regarding this debt and have called BPO up stating that I know nothing about this debt and that it must be over 6 years old, they inform me that it is not and was active in 2006 and that they want payment. I told them to not bother contacting me again unless 1, they can provide proof that this debt is mine 2, that this debt is within 6 years.

I cant belive he has lied stating that it was taken out 3 years ago and I laughed at him down the phone stating he was lying but he would not shift on this, at the end he said i had to provide proof that it was not me and when i asked how he obtained my address ( as i have moved and never declared to anyone my prev address ) again he staed that i had taken the debt out in this property.

can anyone advise what i should do?

thanks again, i will keep you posted on anydevelopments

Hi John -- I am well aware people from all walks of life have difficulties that cannot possibly be expected or foreseen, I only try help without being judgemental where possible....So.

1) Yes, it appears so.

2) They would have had to go through this process within the Six years, after Six the courts cannot enforce any action.

3) I very much think so, because... If they were going to serve a statutory demand to make you bankrupt or were able to, they would not usually pre warn you. Usually a process server would turn up on your doorstep with the demand, which has to be served personally.....I think your's is a bluff designed to intimidate you into contacting them. ?

4) Thank you, if it has helped you it's been worth it.

..........

HelpIfUcan

And any written acknowledgement of any debt, revives the original 6 year period so that it starts to run again for another minimum of 6 years.

Is that not correct?

.......................Yes, that statement is correct but verbal admittance does the same thing if proven. !

I recently read somewhere that Mortgages were now 15 years, but 12 years is generally, 6 years for any debt, plus 6 years, where the debt has been a secured or contract debt.

And any written acknowledgement of any debt, revives the original 6 year period so that it starts to run again for another minimum of 6 years.

Is that not correct?

To Conmankiller,

your help and wisdom has been great and I really appreciate the guidance you have given me in the last 24hours, like i have prev stated you a Hero to an idiot like myself that made silly mistakes

Just to let you now that i am not a bad person, this ll came about because my Brother ( a drug addict who died ) got hold of my bank book and switch card when I was on holiday ( ended up working abroad for 3 months ) and cashed all the cheques using the £100 guarantee card. When i returned i did offer them a settlement and tried to explain wt had happened, to my surprise they did not care and told me to contact the police but the debt remained mine as I should have had better security on my belongings. At the time of this my father was suffering from cancer and was in and out of hospital and i did not want to add further problems on top of my family's shoulders. Family should always come first was my dad's moto.

so I decided not to pay them. Like i have also stated that this was in a part f my life that i have tried get rid off and you have helped put my mind at rest, they still do not now where i reside and by looks of it they are chasing a debt they now they cant legaly collect on.

so in summery

1, the debts fall under the Statute Barred

2, to make me bankrupt they would have to register a CCJ 1st ( but after 6 year this would be difficult )

3, The Demand letter they sent is just a fishing tool to prompt a response of ownership of the debt

4, That you are a very wise person who has save a persons life without even meeting them

regards

PS sorry if it sounds like a sob storry. But I have benifited myself on this.

Hi John --- send a separate letter for each debt with the relevant account number on each letter, recorded delivery to the applicable addresses.

For the benefit of the previous poster, mortgages are actually 12 not 15 years..... bit of further info included below.

.................................. ................................ ..........................

Mortgages - If your mortgage lender is chasing you for a debt left over when your house was repossessed or sold the situation is rather different. Mortgage lenders have 12 years to pursue you rather than 6 years.

Tax & VAT - There is no limitation period on debts to the Crown. You can always be pursued for tax and VAT.

Council tax - The council should not go to the magistrates court and ask for a liability order for council tax if the application is made more than six years after the council tax became due. This is under Regulation 34(3) Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 1992.

Council tax appears to be “due” when the council sent a demand notice to you which may not be at the same time the council tax rate was set. It is important that you check when the demand was sent as this affects when the 6 year limitation period begins. You can also complain to the Local Government Ombudsman if the demand was not sent out “as soon as practicable” after the rate was set.

Thanks for replying to my post, These are unsecured debts that have not been contacted by me or paid by me in 6 years ( this being the last time I spoke or paid the main lender )

at the time of the credit gained I was a non homeowner and I am still a non homeowner

regards

sorry for not being clear.

1 letter relates to a personal loan through the Ryal BAnk Of Scotland

1 letter relates to an overdrawn account though the Royal Bank Of Scotland

Like I said prior I have not been in contact with RBS or any of it's debt collectors in the past 6 years, the last pyment to any of these accounts would have been approx Jan 2002

You have to be careful that your debt is not what is called a secure debt, such as a Mortgage debt, or in any way secured on property. If any part of your debts are secured debts, they do not become Statute Barred for 15 years.

So, if your debts or the one who has sent the Fishing Letter is in any way arising from a secured debt, do not respond, by sending any letter, just keep your head down and hope they give up or that 15 years passes, before they catch up with you.

If you send a letter, acknowledging any debt, you revive that/those debt or debts.

Hi -- Not sure what you mean....is that two seperate debts from the RBS. ?

Provided they each reach the qualifying criteria of the Six year rule etc, then you can write seperate letters and claim both debts are statute barred whether they are separate debts from the same institution or from different creditors.

Sorry but need advise again.

just checked through the paperwork sent and it is for a personal loan and a overdrawn bank account through RBS. can both of these be put on the Statute barred?