My Moorcroft quandary

by **buzard** » Mon Aug 13, 2012 12:30 pm

Hello to all,, brand new member,,, and im totally confused :-(

Thats because im having an information overload,, i need advice but searching thru these forums has unfortunately not provided me with the direct advice i seek so,,, firstly here is my current status :-)

- I have a debt to my old bank Natwest for about £5000

- They passed it on to Moorcroft in about 2006 (debt has not been sold to Moorcroft, debt still with bank, account still active but no longer used)

- I have been paying Moorcroft since 2006 at about £35 per month - Phone agreement, from a new (different) bank account that has no debt.

- I can no longer afford to pay Moorcroft their £35 (and i no longer wish to)

So my questions are:

As i have no signed obligation with Moorcroft could i just offer to pay them like £2 per month and just change my Standing Order?
(obviously they wont agree to this, but im in control of my standing orders right?)

or

Am i better off attempting to fight to wipe this debt completely?

After all,,, i did borrow this money and spend it,,,,, but im not intimidated by these freak debt collectors anymore,,,, so what would be my best course of action here?,,, im not bothered about future credit but am i better off,, fighting them to the death or, keeping them sweet with a minimum payment?

Also im a noob so,,, plz forgive my lack of understanding, im gonna need an answer for dummies!! lol

by **Advertising** » Mon Aug 13, 2012 1:08 pm

by **againstthesystem** » Mon Aug 13, 2012 1:08 pm

HI, Im fairly new here to, but I heard somewhere (correct me if im wrong Ceylon) that a debt more than six years old - uncollected becomes statute barred. i.e. written off and legally non enforceable. I think though, however, that certain requirements must be met as to last date of contact, collection, agreement, etc

Im sure Ceylon will be along to clarify this for you.

by **Advertising** » Mon Aug 13, 2012 1:16 pm

by **buzard** » Mon Aug 13, 2012 1:16 pm

againstthesystem wrote: a debt more than six years old - uncollected becomes statute barred. i.e. written off and legally non enforceable. I think though, however, that certain requirements must be met as to last date of contact, collection, agreement, etc

Im sure Ceylon will be along to clarify this for you.

Hey thx man,, all replies are appreciated tho,,, and if this is true then that will certainly thicken the plot a tad more! :-D

I have however been paying some of this debt off for the past 6 years,, so i have no idea where i stand really,, would this be classed as a debt uncollected?

Either way im sure ill get to the bottom of the solution with the help of the clued up and righteous on here,, really great forum indeed people!!! :-)

by **againstthesystem** » Mon Aug 13, 2012 6:17 pm

MY understanding of a debt being statue barred is this: it means that you have had no contact with the DCA for the last six years, or have been in contact with them for the last six years. If you have been MAKING payments, then Im not sure this would class as statute barred.

Basically, you have to disappear for six years. I had it once myself on an old car loan. I kept changing addresses, not answering mail when they DID catch up etc and just generally kept a low profile. Then after six years I resurfaced and they caught up again, only to be told by my solicitior that the debt was then, statue barred - result!

by **buzard** » Mon Aug 13, 2012 7:17 pm

OK well,, probably not relevant in my case then as i have been making payments and i have had phone contact with them, even within the last 6 months.

I'm pretty sure however i have signed nothing,,, only the original bank loan agreement over 6 years ago.

I think i need to establish my options at this point,,, i find myself wanting to know morally, if i am trying to get out of this debt without paying at all or,, if im trying to 'pay what i have borrowed', but using legal means in my favor to pay a very small amount.

The trouble with paying a very small amount is,, ill be paying these clowns forever,,, hmmm

Suck it up and pay what i owe,,,,, or,,,, 'Get out of debt free' ??

Is that even a question? lol

by **lambchop** » Mon Aug 13, 2012 7:53 pm

Only you know what you moral standing with your self is, so the balls in your court with that one, but think about how much you "borrowed" against how much you have paid back also think on where the "money" came from...
give the forum a good look through and look into how the banks ect work this may change the balance of your morals 8-)

seek out the truth,lose the fear and fight for your right..

by **buzard** » Mon Aug 13, 2012 8:59 pm

Hey thx for the reply lambchop,,, i guess i didn't really need to ask that question lol, of course id like to get out of this debt!,, but i have never attempted to 'fight back' before,, this is awfully confusing and i have no idea how much hassle id get by trying to get out of a £5000 debt.

Based on the unlawful actions banks, the corrupted and unfair system they function within, usury, bank charges and bonuses, not to mention the current state of everything,, if i think about it,, i have no moral issue!

Of course if i borrowed £5000 from somebody i know then i would obviously have the moral obligation to pay it back,,, but if i can get out of this one then id like to know how.

I think its about establishing my current obligation also, but how do i do this?,,, i initially agreed to pay the bank back the loan,, it failed,, they passed it on to Moorcroft but did not sell it,,, so i still owe the bank (technically) but im paying Moorcroft,,, who has the contract? anybody? lol arrrrghhhhhhhh!!!

by **jasonessex** » Tue Aug 14, 2012 3:57 am

buzard it's all to do with contracts! Now when you agreed to pay moorcrap money the chances are a court would enforce as a contract because there is a history of you making payments. If you can't afford payments and want to play safe then google tns radio's official offer. Also this is something thinking about, when you made the verbal agreement what were the terms discussed if any? Why don't you call them and ask where's the terms and conditions that both parties agreed too. Make up your own implied terms? Not sure if cca 1974 has covered DCAs?

by **buzard** » Tue Aug 14, 2012 11:48 am

jasonessex wrote:buzard it's all to do with contracts! Now when you agreed to pay moorcrap money the chances are a court would enforce as a contract because there is a history of you making payments.

Hey man,, thx for the reply,,, and thx because this has opened my eyes a little more,,, yes i wasn't sure about my contracts and current obligations and i think they are the important factor here.

I have no idea how much weight a verbal phone agreement holds,,, until now i thought i held none,, but if what your saying is true then that's some valuable info right there and id need to be careful how i proceed..

Ill get in touch with the bank and see where my contract lies and what the terms are.

Questions:

1 - Because i have been paying Moorcrap regularly for a few years would this void an attempt by me to try the '3 letters' approach?

2 - If and when Moorcrap actually do send your case back to the client,, is that really a victory?

3 - Can the '3 Letter' approach actually help me out here?

I'm struggling to establish the direction to take,, if Moorcrap did send my case back to the client 'Natwest',,, surely id still have the original agreement with them to honour?