To give debt collectors my relatives address?

[Famproblems1]

NC, I'll try to keep it short.

5 years ago I let a younger relative come and stay with me temporarily when she was leaving domestic violence in another part of the country, she stayed with me for approx 12 months before moving on into a place of her own with her small children.

During the course of that relationship alot of debt was accumulated before she left age 20..she says the majority of this was due to the partner taking out contract phones and payday loans using her details and that she had no control of her finances.

Despite the fact she doesn't live here anymore and hasn't for almost 4 years I'm still getting letters here addressed to her from debt collectors asking for money and to be honest I'm tired of it and want no part of it.

Obviously I've mentioned this to her a number of times and she claims she has contacted the companies and told them not to send anything else to my address as she doesn't live here. If that's true, which is debatable, then they clearly haven't listened.

I'm aware that she's paying a token sum to a couple of different companies on a monthly basis so she she says she's doing what she can but claims to be out of her depth and can only work part time. She has refused to give her address to these people citing that she's vulnerable with MH problems and has her disabled child there.

I received another letter through the door for her this morning after a peaceful couple of months, low and behold a debt collection company demanding £300 odd and I've reached the end of my rope.

We spoke over the phone which ended in something of a heated discussion because I said I'm going to give them her new address as I'm sick of the letters coming here and don't want debt collectors turning up here trying to take control of my property.

She then spoke to her mother who called me and implied I was being cruel.

So WIBU to do exactly that?

@Ebonix

She clearly didn't mean 'goes missing' in the way it has been interpreted.

To me that translates to the neice going off the debt collectors radar / they can't find her.

That is what I meant. It can be done.

Anyway the debts are more than five years old. After six years they can't touch her (though they might try).

@jessstan2

so why is the originator still receiving all this Mail ?

The mail has slowed down over the past couple of years but does still come occasionally, if the debts were now expired that wouldn't happen would it? Genuine question, I'm not being sarcastic.

@Famproblems1

The mail has slowed down over the past couple of years but does still come occasionally, if the debts were now expired that wouldn't happen would it? Genuine question, I'm not being sarcastic.

You've solved your issue OP, credit to you.

@Famproblems1

The mail has slowed down over the past couple of years but does still come occasionally, if the debts were now expired that wouldn't happen would it? Genuine question, I'm not being sarcastic.

They don't expire until six years have passed and even after that, the collection agencies still try though they have no legal leg to stand on.

BlueDahlias (love your name!), my reply to Famproblems is the same for you. Six years.

The op could easily have ignored or returned to sender but so many of us have already said that.

@Famproblems1

The mail has slowed down over the past couple of years but does still come occasionally, if the debts were now expired that wouldn't happen would it? Genuine question, I'm not being sarcastic.

Yes it would, debt collectors and bailiffs still try it on as they know not everyone is aware of the six year statue bar.

The collection agencies can still chase and send letters after 6 years, they just can't take it to court if it is statute barred, however that's likely irrelevant here as I'm sure they would have taken it to court by now if they thought it was worth it

@Famproblems1

The mail has slowed down over the past couple of years but does still come occasionally, if the debts were now expired that wouldn't happen would it? Genuine question, I'm not being sarcastic.

The trouble here is that there are layers of dodginess when it comes to DCAs.

The top layer buy up & pursue debts within the 6 year statute barring limit, once the original creditor has decided they'd rather sell the debt on (for a small percentage of the amount owed) than pursue it in house. DCAs buy up 1000s of these debts cheaply & hope to get enough people to cough up (whether it's actually their debt or not, frankly) to recover their overall costs - buying the debt, sending out 1000s of letters, occasionally sending out a goon in a hi-vis.

Then there's a lower tier who buy up the statute barred debts from them.

All you need to do with these guys is point out that the debt not only isn't yours, it's now statute barred.

But they rely on people being scared or not knowing this 🤷🏻‍♀️.

So yeah, if you aren't prepared to call them & tell them to do one, the letters will keep coming until they give up - the number of letters they'll send depends on the amount & the likelihood of getting a response (eg. they'll give up sooner when it's a houseful of short let cheap bedsits & the new tenant has denied all knowledge, than they will when it's a family member house owner living there who has entered into a dialogue with them...).

Seriously, I know you've given them your DN's address, but if they get no response from her & come back to you, you need to be crystal clear that you aren't in contact with her & for all you know she's moved on...currently I don't doubt you're on the file as a 'contact', because you told them you knew where to find her.

@prediction500

The collection agencies can still chase and send letters after 6 years, they just can't take it to court if it is statute barred, however that's likely irrelevant here as I'm sure they would have taken it to court by now if they thought it was worth it

Exactly.

You claimed that the debt collectors know she used to live with you because she claimed income support while staying with you. Bollocks. The DWP don't share people's addresses with private debt collection agencies, nor phone companies, nor payday lenders. The only exception would be if the police asked which is not going to happen with normally accrued debts as that is all a civil, not criminal, matter.

You also claim she can't change the address on her bank account because of no passport etc. but she somehow managed to change it to your address without same. Again, load of crap.

I hope you have had your amusement at getting the gullible frothing.

@AriseMyPretties

You claimed that the debt collectors know she used to live with you because she claimed income support while staying with you. Bollocks. The DWP don't share people's addresses with private debt collection agencies, nor phone companies, nor payday lenders. The only exception would be if the police asked which is not going to happen with normally accrued debts as that is all a civil, not criminal, matter.

You also claim she can't change the address on her bank account because of no passport etc. but she somehow managed to change it to your address without same. Again, load of crap.

I hope you have had your amusement at getting the gullible frothing.

I took OP's statement that the address came from the DWP with a pinch of salt as she couldn't possibly know where it came from. The niece could have registered the address with anyone. The rest of the posts aren't exactly unlikely though so not sure why you think only the gullible would think it might be true.

@Cavagirl

*I rang the places up..

Some companies then accused me of being the debtors wife/girlfriend...

They found my name online and then attached my name to the account...*

Yes the trouble is, you engaged with them. Once they've got a whiff of a real person they will start chasing you as well. I'm not saying that's right or your fault, the industry on average is dreadful. But getting yourself involved in someone else's debt is rarely a trouble-free course of action.

Still on this thread no one has really answered me why people find receiving debt collection letters addressed to someone else so stressful. I don't see people having the same response to clothing catalogues or any other mail. It's 5 minutes of your day to chuck in the bin or repost. Given the judgement on this thread towards the niece I suspect there's something to do with the idea of debt being associated with an address of yours being shameful etc. But if it's not your debt, why do you care?

As PP said it would indeed by ironic if OP has now attached herself as a contact person for the debt and receives even more correspondence, now addressed to her, as a result of frankly sticking her oar in.

When I moved into one place I rented, very quickly I got red envelope letters which were clearly debt letters. Six months later I got an letter which stated on the envelope that bailiffs were going to turn up and if I wasn’t the person addresses to called up x number. I don’t want thugs turning up to my doorstep for anyone’s debt thank you and there was no guarantee that calling the number would have resulted in bailiffs not coming. It was a stressful few months as I was convinced every knock was going to be the bailiffs.

Would you want to live with that threat constantly? It’s not the letters but the possible consequences of the letters.

Boring bit of fact.

If somebody in receipt of benefit moved in with somebody but isn't a partner, there is an expectation to notify the local council. As it was, the DWP/JCP notified the council as well generally in under 28 days (just as they did when notifying councils of a cessation of benefit so that Housing/Council Tax Benefit could be stopped).

If the non dependant adult was in receipt of income support (as was the case five years ago), their assessed income and the assumed contribution/additional council tax liability would also be zero.

As such, having a person with legally assessed zero income/council tax liability staying with a person who is not their partner made no difference to the householder's liability and therefore, they were not committing any fraud whatsoever.

And now you can all go back to arguing about whether it's better for the OP to never be able to leave a window open downstairs in case an overenthusiastic bailiff uses it to gain entrance or for the debt recovery companies to track the debtor down through the electoral roll, bank account details or keep harassing the family member for their current address.

@NeverDropYourMoonCup

Boring bit of fact.

If somebody in receipt of benefit moved in with somebody but isn't a partner, there is an expectation to notify the local council. As it was, the DWP/JCP notified the council as well generally in under 28 days (just as they did when notifying councils of a cessation of benefit so that Housing/Council Tax Benefit could be stopped).

If the non dependant adult was in receipt of income support (as was the case five years ago), their assessed income and the assumed contribution/additional council tax liability would also be zero.

As such, having a person with legally assessed zero income/council tax liability staying with a person who is not their partner made no difference to the householder's liability and therefore, they were not committing any fraud whatsoever.

And now you can all go back to arguing about whether it's better for the OP to never be able to leave a window open downstairs in case an overenthusiastic bailiff uses it to gain entrance or for the debt recovery companies to track the debtor down through the electoral roll, bank account details or keep harassing the family member for their current address.

Having worked for my LA in this department I can tell you that this is incorrect. They are not 'not liable for council tax' They are liable for council tax but are in receipt of a benefit (housing benefit and council tax support) that pays for their liability. If the OP had her staying there then she would have been liable for having a second adult in the home as she is the person with liability at that address and in receipt of the 25% discount. She has committed fraud by not declaring that another adult resides in the house when she is in receipt of the single occupancy discount. The onus would then have been on the OP to encourage her niece to claim housing benefit and council tax support to make up the 25% shortfall. This however can only be backdated within a certain timeframe.

@Whiskyinajar

write "no longer at this address return to sender" and pop them back in a postbox. They will eventually stop coming,

Cliche alert, but this is going to be the new 'cancel the cheque' isn't it. (It may already be.)

This is a good one though, because it has 'no longer at this address' and 'return to sender' AND pop it back in the postbox. Covers all bases don't you think. I mean, putting all three together - in the 513th (I counted) post - genius!

I wish if people can't be arsed to read all the comments, they at least read the OP's. She went through all her niece's post, including bank statements. She insinuated the niece was lying about the abuse she suffered. She committed council tax fraud. She never returned any of the post to the senders. And she contacted the debt collection agencies and provided them with the niece's current address. It's done.

@Jumpers268

I wish if people can't be arsed to read all the comments, they at least read the OP's. She went through all her niece's post, including bank statements. She insinuated the niece was lying about the abuse she suffered. She committed council tax fraud. She never returned any of the post to the senders. And she contacted the debt collection agencies and provided them with the niece's current address. It's done.

I read all the op's posts.

I just hope she can sleep at night.

@jessstan2 unfortunately, considering her thoughts on her niece, I think she's sleeping beautifully.

[quote Jumpers268]@jessstan2 unfortunately, considering her thoughts on her niece, I think she's sleeping beautifully.[/quote]
Quite.

[quote Jumpers268]@jessstan2 unfortunately, considering her thoughts on her niece, I think she's sleeping beautifully.[/quote]

after 4 years of nonsense she deserves a good nights sleep.

What nonsense? A few letters that could easily have been returned to sender?

The language used here to describe what is essentially irrelevant junk mail given that it's not addressed to OP and nothing to do with her at all is hilarious. "4 years of nonsense" "4 years of hassle" "stress". You lot must be of very sensitive dispositions if post addressed to someone else enters your letterbox and causes you that much distress! How do you manage other mundane everyday aspects of life (I mean who HASN'T received post addressed to people who don't live there anymore?!)?

@MeadowHay

The language used here to describe what is essentially irrelevant junk mail given that it's not addressed to OP and nothing to do with her at all is hilarious. "4 years of nonsense" "4 years of hassle" "stress". You lot must be of very sensitive dispositions if post addressed to someone else enters your letterbox and causes you that much distress! How do you manage other mundane everyday aspects of life (I mean who HASN'T received post addressed to people who don't live there anymore?!)?

Your summary is woefully inaccurate.

Hahaha but then you thought by @jessstan2 meant she actually hopes the niece 'goes missing' (she actually wrote it like that), rather than the really quite obvious that she isn't found by the debt collection agencies (for mobile phone companies and pay day loans before anyone harps on about small businesses).

The irony is, like previously said, all the OP has done now has proven she has a connection to the niece by knowing her current address.

The irony is, like previously said, all the OP has done now has proven she has a connection to the niece by knowing her current address.

which still doesn't make her responsible for her Nieces debt