I read on Facebook the post of the Association Voice of Entrepreneurs by an ‘anonymous participant’ (as it is written) asking for advice due to a possible fraud against his parents. This concerns a potential practice known as ‘APP’, or ‘if it passes – it passes’, which has always existed and will always exist. Of course, no one can help him much, except with good-natured advice, so I will also join such advisors.
The anonymous participant (that’s what we will call him) did not share any paperwork, which is why no one can give him valid advice, but he did mention which companies are involved. We will not name them precisely because we do not have insight into the documentation. As our Anonymous writes, his parents had a business that they properly closed five or six years ago. While they had it, they bought a car on leasing, and it was paid off even before the business was closed. A few days ago, the parents, as well as our concerned Anonymous, were disturbed by a letter that recently arrived at their address stating that the closed business owes 320 euros in principal and even 1100 euros in interest for that car.
Asking for help
Namely, the company from which the car was purchased on leasing has since gone bankrupt and has been liquidated, and the claims were sold to another company. Allegedly, the liquidated company did not close the claim against Anonymous’s parents, so the assignee sent them a letter requesting payment of the debt. The letter also stated that certain security instruments ensuring the complete and timely fulfillment of these rights and claims were also assigned along with the claims to the assignee company. Additionally, it states that this assignment does not place the car buyers in a worse position than they would have been in had the assignment not occurred, while the sender of the letter appeals that in case of any questions, they should contact the company that took over the claims.
Anonymous is asking for help because his ‘parents are distressed a hundred an hour’ and is asking how to proceed. He believes that there is a data leak because the correct leasing contract number is mentioned, but everything else in that letter is ‘if it passes – it passes’.
One of those who joined the discussion believes that if there really is a debt, they would not wait so long, but would immediately start collecting it. Since five years have passed and no one has contacted them, even if the debt existed, it is subject to limitation. Another participant advises that they should just invoke the statute of limitations if three years have passed. He had, he writes, a similar case with a leasing company (name known to the editorial staff). Namely, although all security documents were returned and a confirmation was issued that the car was paid off, after five years he received a letter stating that he owed three hundred euros for unpaid leasing. He emphasizes that the claim was also transferred to some agency through assignment, but he simply resolved everything with a letter to the company that was claiming money, stating that if the debt exists, it is subject to limitation.
