Are you sure about that?I realise that if I was ever taken to court,I could enter a defence of the debt being statute barred
No payment made for over 6 years,and no communication in writing ever to cabot.Are you sure about that?
On what basis?
Also from Citizens Information...No payment made for over 6 years,and no communication in writing ever to cabot.
From citizens information "If your creditor does not start the court action within 6 years of the debt being due, the action can be held to be statute-barred by the court. "
If I was you I'd probably get professional legal advice.The law in relation to time limits is complex...
You've been offered a very generous settlement on money you owe, looks like a result, I'd pay it.I have an old Mbna debt of 17.9k which is now owned by Cabot Financial.
There has been no payments ever to Cabot and the last payment to Mbna was about 2014.I have never acknowledged the debt in writing or indeed ever engaged with Cabot.
This week they wrote offering a settlement of 30%(ie 70% off) .
I realise that if I was ever taken to court,I could enter a defence of the debt being statute barred,however having the debt settled for a token amount has some value as the amount is reported to the CCR every month and stops me borrowing ever again.
Now,questions!
(1) Does phoning Cabot to discuss a settlement cause the debt to be acknowledged and reset the clock on enforcement(I have seen other threads where the acknowledgement has to be in writing)
(2) What would be a reasonable amount to offer be?
Any insight gratefully received
Why would you pay 100% when you can settle for 20%?Hi Vandriver.
Similar scenario with me. Smaller amount.
I was offered 30 day 20% settlement on numerous occasions.
In the last few years I had decided to settle for 100%, but down the line at some stage when my finances allowed.
Then I got the 30 day 20% offer again and with a little bit of juggling my budget for a few weeks I managed to pay the 20% within the time frame.
I still reserve the right to pay the remaining 80% in the future if I so desire.
I will have to see what I feel like if I have all my other debts sorted in the future.Why would you pay 100% when you can settle for 20%?
Would the former leave a clean credit record while the latter would not or something?
Or is it simply a point of principle?
Such as...?There are a few different reasons I might pay the 80% in the future.
Moral reasons perhaps?Such as...?
1. The acknowledgement has to be in writing under the Statute of Limitations Act. So it seems that chatting about it won’t reset the clock.I have an old Mbna debt of 17.9k which is now owned by Cabot Financial.
There has been no payments ever to Cabot and the last payment to Mbna was about 2014.I have never acknowledged the debt in writing or indeed ever engaged with Cabot.
This week they wrote offering a settlement of 30%(ie 70% off) .
I realise that if I was ever taken to court,I could enter a defence of the debt being statute barred,however having the debt settled for a token amount has some value as the amount is reported to the CCR every month and stops me borrowing ever again.
Now,questions!
(1) Does phoning Cabot to discuss a settlement cause the debt to be acknowledged and reset the clock on enforcement(I have seen other threads where the acknowledgement has to be in writing)
(2) What would be a reasonable amount to offer be?
Any insight gratefully received
How does making a less than 100% settlement on a debt with the agreement of the creditor make one a "deadbeat"? Maybe bankruptcy and personal insolvency practitioners should be called "deadbeat practitioners"?Moral reasons perhaps?
Being a deadbeat probably gnaws away at some people, to their credit.
A ‘deadbeat’ is simply a person who reneges on their debts and doesn’t pay them.How does making a less than 100% settlement on a debt with the agreement of the creditor make one a "deadbeat"? Maybe bankruptcy and personal insolvency practitioners should be called "deadbeat practitioners"?
I would not pay them a cent. Cabot will not issue proceedings.Do nothing and it’s correct that you can’t be sued successfully, but your credit history remains impaired.
I have seen them issue proceedings in the past. What makes you so sure they will not litigate in the OP's case or other cases?I would not pay them a cent. Cabot will not issue proceedings.
Because it's very cheap for them to start legal proceedings, and it pays off if only a small percentage of people pay up.If Cabot know that they are beyond the 6 year period why would they waste money on legal proceedings? I assume that they act commercially.
the amount is reported to the CCR every month and stops me borrowing ever again.
Are you sure about that?
On what basis?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?