Credit card debt from 10 years ago (amount disputed with the bank at
>the time, lots of mitigating stuff etc.), ccj registered and ignored
>by the debtor. No further correspondence or communication of any kind
>received by the debtor for at least 8 years but more likely 10 years. >
>ffw to present day...
Routine check on credit file reveals a search carried out by "Bcw
>Group Plc T/a Buchanan Clark", aka "Thames Credit", aka "Aktiv
>Kapital". This credit search is to establish the ID of the alleged
>debtor at their current address (been there 15+ years so no hiding
>involved) with the search referenced as "outstanding debt".
>Quick google reveals numerous horror stories in connection with the >above companies. >
>Question(s):
>
>Is this credit search legal when it has been carried out without the
>person's permission in connection with a statute barred debt (no
>longer legally exists)?
>
>How does one go about finding a solicitor who specialises in this (or
>indeed any) particular area?
>References:
>
formatting link
>
>If a lender allows time to pass without receiving any payment an
>action for recovery may become barred.
>
>Under the Limitations Act 1980 the time limits are
>
> * in simple contracts, 6 years
>
>
formatting link
> >Statute barred debt >
>2.14 In the past we have dealt with a number of statute barred debt
>cases governed by the Limitation Act 1980, which applies to England
>and Wales. Based on that experience our position with regard to
>England and Wales remains:
>
>b. it is the methods by which the debt is collected that can be
>unfair as follows:
>
>· continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they
>will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to
>harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice >Act 1970.
Checked the "statute barred" position again and find previous advice may be incorrect as ccj was originally obtained. But this situation seems to be open to interpretation, even 'experts' at insolvencyhelpline.co.uk cannot provide a definitive answer to this question. One advisor there is adamant that despite a ccj being entered, as no correspondence or contact of any kind has been made with the 'debtor' for over 8 years the matter is still "statute barred". Their own website offers information which disputes this.
What is fairly certain is these chancers masquerading as 'professionals' will have no legal right to collect anything, the ccj in question has long expired and general opinion seems to concur that no court would grant a request to 'rekindle' the action when the 'debtor' has been present at the same address for over 15 years.
However, another legal area has cropped up namely, the "Notice of Assignment". It seems that someone (the original lender or the newly acquiring debt owner) is legally obliged to 'serve' the debtor with an "Notice of Assignment" in order to fully own the debt and secure legal rights to collect. This has never happened, at no time has any "Notice of Assignment" been received in connection with this debt.
Any help with details of the "Notice of Assignment" gratefully appreciated, eg;
1.) Who (which co.,) should it have been served by or on behalf of?
2.) What if they claim to have served it?
3.) Can they serve it retrospectively (post collection activity) ?
4.) Is there any truth in claims that making contact in order to collect this debt without first serving an "NoA" effectively nulls the debt and closes the entire matter?
Thanks again,