It's interesting to note as well that 2009 was more or less the height of the credit crunch/the recession which happened at the end of 2008 into 2009.... Forums like this and the others that are mentioned in that article obviously would have played their part in many people knowing their rights which in turn would have played it's part in the crash at the end of 2008 (in my view anyway) So it's inevitable that the role of the internet in the crash would have been debated by the powers that be & even at government level as stated in the article. It does beg the question though how they would have taken on forums like this if they had wanted to? Short of shutting the entire internet down there is nothing they or the government could have done. If they had tried to get individual forums closed down (which i recall was mentioned in 1 of the credit industry conferences amazingly) then others would have simply sprung up in their place. Me thinks the credit industry was & still does delude itself as to what power it thinks it has has over society in general.

I don't know weather this was ever originally highlighted & debated on here back in 2009 as i wasn't a member on here back then - my apologies if it already was? But in case it wasn't..an interesting article from the Guardian back then saying how the Credit Services Association wanted to "take on" the Consumer Action Group that it saw as 1 of the main reasons why people were evading debts. Here's the story anyway & has anything else happened with it since then i wonder? http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/dec/02/credit-services-association-debt-websites

Well if you don't like it on here then you know were the log out button is............... The day the DCA's ever start treating people with a bit of decency/respect/understanding is the day you may well start reading "nice" comments on this forum. Until that day ever arrives then the DCA's deserve every negative comment that comes their way on here.

Debt avoidance which is then for the courts to decide the legalities of it all - not the DCA.As for the DCA's being "aggressive", assuming the person on the receiving end is not easy bullied and knows their rights, the DCA will just get aload of aggression back at them = simples!

Yes it's called ignoring the DCA's - it's the easiest and most effective thing to do in order not to pay & even better given that the vast majority don't go anywhere near courts like i said earlier.

I did not say that none of them go to court - i said most of them don't for the reasons i stated. I've have owed DCA's off & on since around the late 90s now and not one has ever taken me anywhere near a court despite their threats. That's because they soon know that i am not easy to bully and know my rights too much.

You (and the DCA industry overall) need to realize that it has absolutely no legal power over an individual whatsoever. Yes they can ASK a person to repay a debt. But once the person has said no & go away then that is what it must do weather it likes it or not. It is then up to a county court to decide the right and wrongs of the situation. Not the DCA industry. DCA's mostly don't go anywhere near courts because of the cost involved and the debtor having loads of legal rights and protections. So they rely on harassment instead in the hope that the debtor pays up. It simply must leave a person alone when told to. If it doesn't then the protection from harassment act 1997 is there to protect them and that's were the likes of the OFT,trading standards and even the police can step in to make it do so.

Further to my response earlier - i said that whilst banks are stealing billions of tax payers money and not repaying then no one will accept any lectures on the wrong's of debt avoidance. To add to that, we have our MP's fiddling the system and trying to squirm out of repaying any of that. We also have multi nationals evading billions in tax & so on. Public are then told they have to suffer austerity = dont think so! So whilst i agree that in principle any form of borrowing/obtaining money and not repaying it is wrong. whilst the bankers & mp's and the muti nationals are doing what they do then no-one in this country will be lectured to and told that trying to avoid repaying their debts is wrong. Once those at the top and the powers that be start leading the way by example then the rest of the population may follow.

JP Morgan & Goldman Sachs rule the world...or so i've heard?

When the banks are being bailed out with taxpayers money and refusing to repay what they owe then no one will accept any lectures on debt avoidance quite frankly with due respect. Anyway another aspect of all this which i feel is over looked is that most people simply do not have the money to repay anymore. Its all fine and well saying "you shouldn't have borrowed the money if you could not repay", but those people prob did take out the credit with the best intention of repaying. The money got spent, certain repayments were made and then as time moved on and things got worse with the recession they found themselves unable to make any more repayments. It's worth noting that the overall cost of living has increased greatly in recent years which also has an effect. No amounts of saying how naughty they were for obtaining that credit in the 1st place is going to change the here and now quite frankly. I do feel that the OP could be a DCA troll. But even if they are the points raised are valid and i hope i have answered them myself as best i can.

Prob just some collector who is paid by commission, that would explain why he was being pushy. As said above they have no legal power to any money off you whatsoever only a county court does after a proper process has been gone through. These goons usually don't go anywhere near courts as it costs them too much and you would have too many legal rights & protections. That's why they just rely on the hope that you wont know your rights and will just pay up.

Next time "Gary" decides to show his ugly mug then politely order him to get off your property - if he refuses then call then police. Enter into no further discussions about income/expenditure. Report scotcall to the OFT & trading standards afterwards.

There is a wider debate in all of this in that it's typical of how the entire debt collection industry works. It's fine when people are afraid of it, yet when people show they are not afraid - it doesn't know what to do with itself!

So the conclusion of this thread is....the OP eventually stood up to Mr Hart who then decided to sell the debt on to someone else? Just goes to that he was nothing more than a cowardly bully who soon panicked when someone stood up to him.

What makes me laugh is how they think that being reported to a credit reference agency is somehow a bad thing & something to be afraid of! lol