Past Due Credit chasing old sky debt

[inacorner]

As if I didnt have enough to cope with (HFO Services threatening further action see other thread re charging order) I've now had a formal demand from these guys relating to what is quite a small debt of about £100.

 

I've have a debt management plan in place with other creditors (apart from HFO) and not sure if I should ring and offer token payments or agree somthing.

 

I wasn't even aware of this one it totally out of the blue I havent had sky for over 3 years and dont recall any notices at that time the Sky service was removed by them from what I recall. The service was for a different property so if they've chased over last 3 years guess they've sent to that address (guess my ever freindly ex has pointed them to my new abode)

 

Do I call them, write or what in the first instance, I have made so many mistakes in the past and want to deal with this one in the best way

 

Letter received today wanting response by 27th to avoid a home visit.

 

Cheers folks

[Pinky69]

Send them the "Prove It" letter. You don't know if this is your debt or not and it is up to them to prove that it is, not up to you to prove that it isn't.

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

 

I/we would point out that I/we have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to (insert company name).

 

I am/we are familiar with the Office of Fair Trading debt collection Guidance which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

 

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

 

I/we would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my/our liability for the debt in question.

 

I/we await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

 

I/we look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

[inacorner]

Thanks for the reply - should I sign it ?

 

I assume I add my address and ref number they quoted in their letter is that correct

[Pinky69]

Print your name. You can use your address and the ref.

[inacorner]

Cheers and finally (for now) should it be recorded delivery or just first class

[Guest Cartaphilus]

Always recorded with these people.

[Bazooka Boo]

And as a side issue, I would be contacting Sky also, and asking them what this debt is in relation to, and how it transpired.

A copy of their complaints procedure would help also.

[inacorner]

cheers guys

[inacorner]

letter sent to past due earlier this week - no reply as yet - should I hold my breath?

[Bazooka Boo]

No wouldn't worry too much, there called past due for a reason,.

 

Have you ckecked on the RM website to see if it has been delivered yet?

http://www.royalmail.com/portal/rm/personal?pageId=tab_track_rm&catId=500185&mediaId=83900761

 

You could also print off the following should they be foolish enough to send anyone round to darken your doorstep, unlikely, but the following link is all you need to thrust in their face.

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/590-letter-used-when-a-dca-threatens-a-doorstep-visit-

[inacorner]

I've had no response to my letter sent as per above post (I sent a second as I'd had another letter from them - just sent a copy of my first letter).

 

However I've now had a letter from a local debt collection and bailiff firm demanding full payment within 7 days to prevent further recovery procedures commencing and for me to phone to arrange an instalment plan that may be accepted. I dont intend to phone them.

 

Past due received there last letter signed for on 22 June 2010. What should I do now

[Pinky69]

If anyone does come to the door, tell them you don't know anything about his debt and have asked for proof.

[inacorner]

should I reply in any way to this new company or ignore their letter

[Guest Cartaphilus]

Would it be from a company called: P B Collection Services?

 

local debt collection and bailiff

Edited June 28, 2010 by Cartaphilus

[inacorner]

sorry maybe I've confused the issue the letter is from a company name of Phillips and the strapline is specialist bailiff and debt recovery agents

 

the letter itself doesnt mention bailiffs but that theyve been instructed to commence recovery procedures against me for arrears due to past due - it then demands full payment within 7 days to prevent further recovery action being taken or for me to ring their customer service reps to arrange payment plan

[Guest Cartaphilus]

Well, that's what I thought you meant and why I was asking you directly about it.

 

Looked them up and it says:

 

Philips is the only Bailiff Company with an approved City & Guilds Training Academy.

Think it's meant to sound impressive.

 

It can go with the other one to Pastit Clot/Dueless and Carboard Solutions for Ignoring Letters for Proving Debt Academy for which I am sure full training isn't required.

[inacorner]

so should I reply, sending copies of what I sent to Past due or ignore it completely - shall I report past due for not answering and contimuing to chase debt

[Bazooka Boo]

Always make a formal complaint about these corrupt and rotten to the core companies feeding on peoples misery to the OFT/TS via Consumer Direct

 

As for Pielips, how do they think they are going to be any different in forcing you to pay them? Just because their bailiffs??

Don't think so, they can only act as a DCA as you have not been to court nor have you had a CCJ awarded against you, so they cannot enter your premises or do diddly squat, tell them to sling their hook!

[inacorner]

Another lettter from Phillips now threatening legal action or one of their debt recovery agents to call to execture furtehr recovery procedures if I dont contact them in 7 days

 

 

I've had nothing else from either phillips or Past due as to what the debt is or proof that I owe it.

 

do I ignore or wrtite back again?

[inacorner]

Just realised that their letter was dated 12 July so 7 days up on Monday - I've been away all week so only just got it what should I do - as it will be after the deadline before I can get anything to them.

 

cheers

[sillygirl1]

Contact Sky about this lot, they are causing a lot of pproblems, it is almost certain the two comanies have a joint interest in escalating things between them....

 

I can give you an email addy for somebody at Sky who will get things sorted out for you... I can post it on the thread once I find it again!

[Bazooka Boo]

Is it this one?

jeremy.darroch@bskyb.com

[The GodMother]

If you want you can send the letter to the OFT directly about them I always do.

 

I would inform Phillips if they do turn up that if they dont remove themselves from your property that you will remove them yourself with the aid of the local police force.

[segnog]

Hi all - I'm also new to this forum and have just responded to a formal demand made by PDCS to my partner. As with all of you, this is nothing to do with him and it appears that they have simply found him on the electoral register (although he was resident at that property some years ago).

 

I am a lawyer, so thankfully I have no store with this kind of unsupported bullying. IF they have anything, remember THEY have to prove it.

 

Re our letter, it is just the first letter. In response I have sent them a strongly worded letter based on the template put on here.

 

Much of the advice on here is bang on the money. Firstly, they have to prove that you owe the debt. IF they have this information, there is no "data protection" that I can think of, that stops them from sending you the bill / data they have in relation to potential enforcement.

 

IMHO, the data protection rubbish that they quote is utter nonsense. IF they have proper information pertaining to you, that shows you owe a debt, then as the subject of that data you are entitled to see the information (many places will charge an admin fee, but that's a gripe of mine for another post). I will try to get some data protection info, as many companies seem to cite this as a way of getting out of proving a claim. Sometimes the DPA does apply, but more often than not, idiots who have no concept of the law spout it without any understanding of its provisions.

 

And (apologies for the rant, but I am so angry about this) I wholeheartedly agree that you should NOT give them any personal details. It is clearly a fishing exercise to try to establish who the debt belongs to. Any reputable company will prove to you if you have any concerns.

 

I know how awful the threat of court proceedings can be. But they know this and this is what they rely on. Most people will panic and simply pay.

 

However, if court proceedings are issued and it turns out that they did not allow you information to clarify that it was your debt, you are entitled to raise this conduct. In addition, if litigation is pursued by them (highly unlikely I would think for the majority of you) then they must found their claim on evidence, and you are entitled to "put them to proof" of this.

 

Obviously, this is not meant to be legal advice as I speak from the POV of layman with (unfortunately) experience of this, but I will see if I can post on here some more information about the data protection act that hopefully you can all use.

 

PS - Re my partner's letter, I basically have told them that if they are able to enforce the debt, then they will have a Court Order. This is a matter of public record and therefore is NOT covered by the Data Protection Act. I've also asked them to clarify the exact provision under the DPA that they rely upon for refusing to provide information and I will let you all know how that goes!!!

 

Good luck and really hope this helps someone.

[Agent3244]

Some thoughts on Ducks, donkeys, tails, and scams....

 

I am aware of someone who received a letter from Past Due Credit Solutions Limited (Registered in Scotland No. 287794) and it reads thus;

 

"I would be grateful if you could conatact me on 0844 559 8349 regarding an important matter.

The office hours are ..{blah blah}

Your Assistance is appreciated."

 

It caused the recipient some anxiety and it does me too, not for what it says, but for the irrational reason of what it does not say.

 

First thing, I advised the recipient resist the temptation to contact Past Due Credit Solutions Limited. (PDCS)

Via the letterhead and the PDCS web homepage I had the impression that PDCS were a debt collection company pursuing a debt but the nature of the letter made me suspicious.The recipient and I still had anxieties though. This was plain silly.

 

If I were to walk by a pond, hear a "quack" and see something that looks like a duck would I get stressed wondering what I had just seen? Of course not, I would accept I had just seen a duck.

 

I figured the most likely explanation was that PDCS, whether bona fide or not, were fishing.

 

If you get a letter like this alert yourself to the likelihood that you have seen something that looks like a [problem], and reads like a [problem], so it could well be a [problem]. Proceed with great caution on the basis that the approach could be genuine, but because it falls well sort of genuine, satisfactory, and professional practice and therefore gives excellent reason to be sceptical. Print this thread, take it and your letter, then seek advice from the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB) or call at the constituency office of your MP. You could even call at your local County Court and they will clarify watt law may apply and advise you on your rights. Do not telephone PDCS. If you cannot ignore the letter simply reply by letter that you have no idea what they are talking about. Reveal nothing that they don't already know about you. That's what I advised my friend to do, but before we got around to that, ...

 

A couple of days later my friend received another envelope also bearing a Clydebank frank-stamp. There were two letters in the envelope. One had the look of being from an energy supplier and the other from a third party with a box number adresss in Nottingham and no registered address or company number declared on the letterhead. My friend now has three letters.

 

Between the letters is an attempt to get my friend to pay off an alleged debt arising form (it appears) energy supply to an address from where she has twice removed and last lived at seven years ago. All final accounts were settled and mail was diverted for twelve months. Yet out of the blue (seemingly) she has a letter from an energy company which says they have been trying to get in contact to "settle a final balance of £XX.pp." The hell they have!

 

My friend did once reside at the address in question. For all we know there may well be an outstanding balance or a CCJ pertaining to that address. However, my friend is certain that no bad debt is attributable to her because all acounts at that address were legitimately held in a completely different name. The once fashionable childrens party game of game of pin the tail on the donkey springs to mind.

 

For all I know PDCS could have a legitimate business. However, if the letters are read carefully there are anomalies, errors and inconsistencies. Furthermore, it would be possible for scamsters to entirely fabricate the case that these three letters conspire to make against my friend from records and databases that are not that difficult to access.

 

But despite there being three letters and and there being an implication that my friend owed money to an energy supplier there is no explicit declaration to clarify the following;

 

1. The account number with the energy supplier
   
2. The date the account was created or opened, in whose name, and upon what authority
   
   
3. What goods or services were provided
   
4. The period, or date, of supply
   
   
5. The date the alleged final bill was issued
   
6. and the date the final bill fell due
   

My friend has written to PDCS asking for documentary evidence to answer all of the above. She has been careful to reveal nothing about herself that PDCS don't already know.

 

Something else is inferred in the letters. There is a suggestion that the alleged debt has been sold by the energy company to the third party and that the third party is "..now the data contoller of your personal data in the records of this account. We are a company which purchases debts from other organisations. [.. ..] Your peronal data will be used for the purpose of collecting the outstanding balance from you." This is nothing but twaddle intended to play on the readers' fears and fuel anxiety.

 

If details of an alleged debt have been sold then the energy supplier will, after the elapse of time have written off the debt for accounting purposes. It is not implausible that 'bundles' of cold case debt data files may have been sold by an energy supplier for a fraction of their worth to a third party. But, according to the letter(s), the energy company has "assigned all of its' respective rights, title ande interst in respect of the above referenced account (including the right to recieve paymentof the outstanding balance)"

 

So, if the above is true, and I remain open to the possibility that it is not, then even if my friend were to pay the alleged outstanding balance then the payment would not go to settle the alleged debt with the energy supplier. The sale of the data of the old debt for pence, if it actually happened, merely converts the alleged debt into a commodity which, if people are gullible enough, can be converted into an income stream for PDCS.

 

Between the three letters there are several anomalies, spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and typos that ought not appear in legitimate correspondence from suitably respectable, professional and legitimate debt recovery companies. Anomalies, spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, and typos do however appear in scams.Think back to that duck ..

 

Trust your instincts, if it looks like a [problem] and reads like a [problem] then in all probality it is a [problem].

 

My friend is clear in her mind that she will only deal with these people in writing, she will not reveal anything they do not already know, she will quote her name and address exactly as they do complete with the errors, she has said she disputes any suggestion she is responsible for the alleged debt, she wants explicit clarification upon the six points listed above, and she wants to recive documentary evidence (such as copy of the bill and agreement) to prove the alleged debt. I do not expect she will receive anything back.

 

After my friend vacated her former address people that followed could have left leaving a bill unpaid and details of that debt could be in the public domain. Via files held by consumer credit reference agencies my fireinds links with her present address and her former addresses can be linked. I have given my friend my opinion. I have said that in all probability PDCS are playing a game of pin a tail on a donkey. Remember, PDCS and the alleged third party are in this to produce an income stream. Nothing that is recovered will be passed to the creditor (the energy supplier) so it cannot be debt recovery. The incentives for PDCS or whoever would answer the telephone are not to recover debt for the energy supplier but to produce an income stream for themselves. So, will it still concern them that the payment should be received from the right person?

 

In my humble and unqaulified opinion and in all probability, "the game that PDCS is playing with you is to pin a tail on anydonkey," I told my friend.

 

My friend conducts her affairs responsibly. She has covered herself. She has stated in writing she disputes any suggestion that she is responsible for the inferred alleged debt and she has asked for documetary evidence.

 

Together we faced the anxieties that these letters produced, rationalised our concerns, then turned our fears around to make the case that PDCS have fabricated look silly.

 

Like Harry Potter we confronted a demon and cast a spell, "RIDICOROUS !!"

 

For all I know PDCS may well have a legitimate side to their business.

 

But if you receive correspondence from PDCS, or any other company for that matter, that has smiilar hallmarks as I have described above then try not to be overly worried as it has the hallmarks of a con. Dispute it, reveal nothing, do not make contact in any other way than writing, ask what was supplied and when, ask for the coressponding meter readings if applicable, ask for a copy of a bill, ask for documentary evidence, and then expect to hear nothing more.

 

Above all, conduct your affairs responsibly, if you get into arrears and difficulties seek professional and unbiased advice early, don't let overdue accounts snowball, keep records, and keep them where you can find them even seven years on.

 

If my friend could quicky restore her memeory who was her energy supplier seven years ago she could quickly put her mind at rest.

She has a temptation to telephone PDCS and ask what was supplied. She would love for PDCS to answer, "GAS". (There never was, nor is it likely now, any gas service to that property.)

 

We hope PDCS will go away, go forth, but we pray to our God that they do not multiply.

 

Hard as it is to make a living, whatever your beliefs, do only unto others as you would have others do unto you.

 

God bless.