Turning the tables on DCA Bullies

[RoyalIrish]

Could any interested party have a gander at my attempt and PLEASE feel free to advise or amend accordingly.

 

I'm deadly serious about getting this approach underway!

 

Thanks all!

 

RI

 

PS To any DCA reading, you better make sure you are following the OFT Guidelines fellas, illegal processing of personal data now carries HUGE fines.

 

Enough to close your grubby little offices down it would seem!

 

VERY EASY to prove as well, no CCA = no processing of personal data

Edited May 4, 2010 by RoyalIrish

[pompeyfaith]

RI

nice letter to the point be sure to post their reply as i will be interested to hear what they say PF

[citizenB]

I'm sorry, I couldn't get the letter to copy/paste correctly.

 

In answer to your question, no!

 

Both accounts are stat barred and were re-entered on my credit file by Cabot.

 

RI

 

You could if you wish remind Cabot of the Censure from the OFT in cases such as these. You will a copy of the censure in the first post of the following link.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/195647-oft-imposes-s33a-requirements.html

 

HTH

[RoyalIrish]

As I said chaps!

 

Please feel add/adjust as you see fit.

 

My template is for Stat Barred debts.

 

I would like to put that in but have no idea how to make it fit appropriately!

 

RI

[citizenB]

Cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd,

PO Box 241,

West Malling,

Kent,

England.

ME19 4NA

 

4th May 2010

 

 

 

Dear ******,

 

 

 

I ACKNOWLEDGE NO DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY

 

Re: − Ref Number: *******

 

Account Number: ****************

 

You have been requested by me on numerous occasions to provide evidence as to my financial liability to Cabot Financial Europe Ltd.

 

I have been more than reasonable and I have given you enough time to substantiate your claims and to date you have provided absolutely nothing.

 

Under the Data Protection Act you have no permission to be processing my personal information regardless of what you might think.

 

This includes adding default markers to my credit file via the Credit Reference Agencies.

 

Cabot Financial (Europe) Ltd. have added 2 entries for 2 different alleged accounts on my credit report, both of which are unjustified and unlawful.

 

This can affect me financially and my ability to get credit, employment, renting or buying a house.

 

You have deliberately harassed me and caused me considerable distress.

 

I would remind you that this account is statute barred and for your information enclose a copy of the OFT censure of another DCA, MacKenzie Hall for your information.

 

Therefore, other than a summons, or your appropriate response to this complaint indicating the immediate closure and removal of any/all inappropriate entries on my credit report, if you contact me again on this matter then I will invoice you £35.00 administration fee for every letter for my time consuming response.

 

I will also be contacting the Information Commissioner regarding your illegal processing of my personal data and your unlawful and unjustified entries on my credit report.

 

Should you fall outside of my fourteen day terms of settlement of such an invoice then I will seek remedy in the small claims court against you, without further notice.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

 

 

Print out the following and enclose with your letter - the original can be found in the link I provided earlier.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY THE OFFICE OF FAIR TRADING ('OFT')

PURSUANT TO SECTION 33A AND SECTION 33D(4) OF THE CONSUMER

CREDIT ACT 1974 ('the Act')

 

REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO:

 

MACKENZIE HALL LIMITED (Consumer Credit Licence Number

5444071, registered office address: 58 Portland Street, Kilmarnock,

East Ayrshire, KAI I JG

 

THE OFT REQUIRES AS FOLLOWS:

1. That as of 15 April 2009

1 .1 Mackenzie Hall Limited will not carry out debt collection Activity where it has been informed, in writing, that there is reasonable cause to believe that the debt is in dispute.

1.2 Mackenzie Hall Limited will not carry out Debt Collection Activity where it has been informed, in writing, that the account is statute barred.

 

Debt Collection Activity is defined as:

a) sending debt collection letters;

b) making of debt collection calls;

c) the use of any other medium for the purpose of collecting an outstanding debt; or

d) the acceptance of payments offered against a debt.

 

A debt is considered as in dispute where:

a ) it has been reasonably demonstrated that the debt has been previously paid;

b) a request under section 77 or 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 has not been complied with, and this prevents the agreement being enforced without the permission of the court;

c ) it is reasonably believed that the debt may have been incurred as a result of identity theft or fraud; or

d ) it is reasonably doubted that the person being pursued for the debt is the actual debtor.

 

For the avoidance of doubt, where only part of a debt is disputed Mackenzie Hall Limited may seek to recover any other part of the debt that is not disputed.

 

ANY FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE ABOVE REQUIREMENTS WILL RENDER MACKENZIE HALL LIMITED LIABLE TO FURTHER FORMAL ACTION BY THE OFT. THIS COULD INCLUDE THE IMPOSITION OF FINANCIAL PENALTIES PURSUANT TO SECTION 39A OF THE ACT AND/OR THE REVOCATION OF MACKENZIE HALL LIMITED'S CONSUMER CREDIT LICENCE PURSUANT TO SECTION 32 OF THE ACT.

 

Signed:

Ray Watson, Director, Consumer Credit Group

Authorised signatory on behalf of the OFT

 

I have added a paragraph to your letter, highlighted in blue. Print off the OFT censure and enclose it with your letter . With the relevant section highlighted as I have done.

 

HTH.

 

[letsgetitsorted]

this is my attempt, and will be sending this to Imapct today.

especially as i have had 2 calls from them today. aslo told them that i will be charging for my time.

 

I write with regards to the constant telephone calls I am receiving from your company, with regards to the alleged debt with Vanquis.

I have previously written to your company about this of which you failed to acknowledge.

The alleged debt with Vanquis is in dispute for failing to supply the signed credit agreement as requested on more than three occasions and even in a DSAR, therefore the ACCOUNT REMAINS IN DISPUTE.

With this, I therefore will not tolerate any further telephone calls or letters from Impact with regards to this account, therefore any further telephone calls or letters that take up my time in responding too will result in me charging Impact an administration fee for the time, This fee will be charged at £15 per telephone call and £35 per letter that I have to deal with.

Further to this any invoices that I send to Impact will also be charged for at the rate of £5 per invoice, all invoices will need to be paid within 14days, and failing to do so will result in a claim being issued.

To save yourselves incurring any charges from me at the rates specified above, I strongly urge Impact to cease calling or writing to me with regards to an alleged debt that is in dispute.

[RoyalIrish]

Brilliant!

 

THANKS!

 

Just a quickie, does 'collection activity' as referred to in the censure include/emcompass credit reporting and/or default marking & imaginary account opening with the credit reference agencies?

 

Cheers!

[citizenB]

Brilliant!

 

THANKS!

 

Just a quickie, does 'collection activity' as referred to in the censure include/emcompass credit reporting and/or default marking & imaginary account opening with the credit reference agencies?

 

Cheers!

 

This is what the Censure states as collection activity.

 

Debt Collection Activity is defined as:

a) sending debt collection letters;

b) making of debt collection calls;

c) the use of any other medium for the purpose of collecting an outstanding debt; or

d) the acceptance of payments offered against a debt.

 

I would imagine that point c) would cover your question as the reporting to credit reference agencies is a kind of pressure in order to make you pay.

 

As you will see from the beginning of the censure primarily this was to stop them bullying and pursuing statute barred debts.

 

[Fred Bassett]

I'm sorry, I couldn't get the letter to copy/paste correctly.

 

In answer to your question, no!

 

Both accounts are stat barred and were re-entered on my credit file by Cabot.

 

RI

 

Little tip here: post it into notepad first and it will remove all of the coding - then you can post into the forum.

 

Regards.

 

Fred

[Guest]

A debt is considered as in dispute where:

a ) it has been reasonably demonstrated that the debt has been previously paid;

b) a request under section 77 or 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 has not been complied with, and this prevents the agreement being enforced without the permission of the court;

c ) it is reasonably believed that the debt may have been incurred as a result of identity theft or fraud; or

d ) it is reasonably doubted that the person being pursued for the debt is the actual debtor.

 

hi all, do you think there would be/is a 'dispute' where there is a non compliant dn?

[citizenB]

 

hi all, do you think there would be/is a 'dispute' where there is a non compliant dn?

 

Ford, have you got a thread on this ? You may well find that accepting unlawful recission is another way to go if your Default notice is not valid. Has the account been terminated on the back of that DN ?.

[Guest]

Ford, have you got a thread on this ? You may well find that accepting unlawful recission is another way to go if your Default notice is not valid. Has the account been terminated on the back of that DN ?.

 

thanks citizenB for reply.

 

yes, it's in progress

 

was just wondering whether other matters, such as a cca breach eg invalid dn, would also be 'classified' as a 'dispute'.

[questioner]

As CB suggests - if they have gone on to terminate after issuing a dodgy DN then they may have problems.

[Guest]

As CB suggests - if they have gone on to terminate after issuing a dodgy DN then they may have problems.

 

yes they have

[babybear39]

Oh dear

[questioner]

Phone calls off DCA bullies?

 

 

Yes, I handle them appropriately - via my friend TRUCALL which zaps them all including the ones who fail to leave call back numbers..

[Jameson78]

Just sent mine to Moorcrap

[citizenB]

Let us know how you get on:)

[pompeyfaith]

sent mine to carters and not heard a thing so i guess they have given up and dont want to pay my charges lol

[RoyalIrish]

I advise everyone to do this asap!

 

I sent Hillesden an invoice on 9th June and was just about to set a County Court Claim rolling when this dropped through the door.

 

 

Just do it!

 

You'll see from the dates on the letter that they are still playing silly buggers!

 

(like, as if the last letter I sent them was in March, you gotta laugh really!)

 

(Ssshhhh, don't tell them but I have about 10 Recorded Delivery stubs for letters sent to Hillesden and DLC since 11th March).

 

The letter I sent on 11th of March, and to which they are referring to in the work of genius above was the original Statute Barred template letter!

 

Now, either I've been in stasis and maybe dreamed it all or naughty Tony and the crew at Hillesden and DLC are doing some serious 'back scuttling' and trying to cover their tracks in case someone asks some embarrassing questions about their recent dodgy behaviour!

 

'Honestly, your worship! as you can see, we acknowledged his letter telling us the account was Statute Barred! Look here is the proof.

He's telling lies your worship, he's a naughty boy and he hasn't been harrassed at all, we haven't been sending him threats etc. after he told us it was Statute Barred.

We would never do such a thing 'cos we are licensed and we are a reputable company.

It's been an admin error your worship, all our threats were sent to him by mistake.

The person responsible has been sacked.'

 

As you can plainly see, this is the kind of liars, cheats, bullies, criminals, degenerates and idiots that Hillesden and DLC truly are!

 

I have about 20 threatograms from them ALL post 11th March!

 

(or maybe they are set to self destruct, I'd better check?)

 

Be fully prepared to go the 'whole hog' and get them into County Court.

 

Cabot weren't so obliging and basically told me that they were not paying!

 

As soon as I can afford the court fee I shall be taking them to County Court.

 

I'm gonna get another few invoices to them in due course to bump the claim up a bit and to let them know I ain't pi55ing around.

 

I've had enough of their illegal, immoral actions and bull5hite.

 

Go for it!

 

RI

Edited June 18, 2010 by RoyalIrish

[jocko]

Subbing.

 

I admit I'm more interested in vengeance against these parasites these days than the usual fight to stalemate.

[RoyalIrish]

Vengence is good enough!

 

If you have good reason then get your invoices sent!

[questioner]

Banks and DCA's wish to get this matter hushed up 'very' fast.

 

Sadly for them they are losing this vital battle.

 

I recently had a significant victory against one of the largest lenders (no names mentioned just yet) that had sent in a defence against my fair admin claim and later met me in court.

 

They lost and it is now hurting their pockets.

 

The main thing is to keep it all simple, logical and to be prepared to meet them in court if they will not back down. Most cases will be settled by them before it gets that far though.

 

It is usually a cheaper option for the sharks to pay up on your fee than risk losing at court.

 

Rest assured though; they all seem to 'advise' you that your fee is unacceptable in the first instance.

 

The ramifications of all this is utterly immense for the banks that rely of the **** DCAs to hunt their victims to despair. Without the threat of unfair collection activities to enforce their iron will the banks are totally screwed. DCAs will not want to risk admin fees and costly court cases and will be forced into checking if agreements are in fact properly executed and enforceable BEFORE taking them on.

If the OFT guidelines and regulations on unfair collection activity worked as they should to protect the Consumer then we would NOT have to be forced into this action.

Edited June 23, 2010 by questioner

[pompeyfaith]

The letter I sent to brian carter sols 4 weeks I have had no responce so it looks like they have taken notice and gone elsewhere.

 

So thanks questioner.

 

PF

[DDWales]

Just read through this thread. Excellent stuff Questioner. I will be keeping this info in mind in case any nonsense should come my way in the future.