First Debt Recovery - Help please!

[ScarletPimpernel]

Donald Kirkpatrick again.

 

 

Our website clearly states: "...Lacap was formed in September 2000 as a not-for-profit org. under a written constitution...That formation was disbanded in 2002, and Lacap has since been run by Donald & Yoko in partnership...Lacap became a limited company in spring 2009...."

 

On the GP referral page of your website, you also clearly state:

 

Lacap was formed in September 2000 as a Charitable Unincorporated Organisation

 

There is no further information as to the current status of the organisation, and this could be seen as misleading and contrary to CPUTR.

 

 

The issue of confidentiality: I would ask any contributor so far, how they think a company can go about recovering due debts from people who are refusing to pay, without passing on contact details? Or, is it the opinion here that any bad debt is - in principle - never to be collected?

 

People not turning up and then not paying is, unfortunately, a problem which is bound to happen. My counselling supervisor gets around it by taking payment in advance, by card, for the first appointment (and for others if the client fails to appear). This obviates the need to breach confidentiality, and I think it would be a very naive counsellor who did not think that the fact that someone has sought help from a counsellor is confidential. Further, your own terms and conditions do not mention that you will use a debt collector should the client not pay; this is information that potential clients need if they are to make an informed decision about whether to use your service.

 

However, all this is somewhat insignificant compared to the fact that LACAP appears to be operating unlawfully by not being registered with the Data Commissioner. Perhaps you would be kind enough to clarify the position regarding your ICO registration, and your overdue accounts; these matters are not misinformation, but matters of fact, unless you can confirm that both the ICO and Companies House have it wrong.

[Bazooka Boo]

But this is where the criticism is posted...

Where else do you expect me to reply too?

 

Depends on your level of professionalism I guess? It's your company that will lose out..

[inkslinger]

Subbing with extreme interest.

[Jev]

I am having similar problems with LACAP and First Debt Recovery. My problem stems from having cancelled an appointment at LACAP. I acknowledge the amount of the original debt, however I am querying the amount of the fees from First Debt Recovery. First Debt Recovery have threatened me with court action. I have followed up with the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

I have been dealing with the Financial Ombudsman Service.

 

 

Consumer Consultant

Financial Ombudsman Service

South Quay Plaza

183 Marsh Wall

London E14 9SR

 

 

RE: Complaint about First Debt Recovery, Ltd / LACAP

 

 

Dear Financial Ombudsman Service:

 

 

I am writing in response to your letter dated 06 October 2010.

 

Since I received your letter, I have had no response to address my complaint from First Debt Recovery Ltd. Instead I have received a Final Demand for Payment (enclosed) dated 02 November 2010. The letter demanded 7 days notice of “intention to commence County Court action to recover the debt” despite me only receiving it on 11 November 2010.

 

The paperwork enclosed provides the full correspondence, however I will provide you with a short re-cap of the situation.

 

On 07 September 2010, I received a Third party collection notice from First Debt Recovery, Ltd for the amount of £112.70. The actual amount of the debt was £57 which was owed to Kirkpatrick / LACAP. First Debt Recovery charged an additional £55.70 in fees. I do not dispute the original debt of £57. On 11 September 2010 I paid the £57 via cheque. Additionally, I sent a letter disputing the interest and costs. I asked for an itemized list of the costs. I stated that the Bank of England interest rate was .5% and that the interest charges were exorbitant. I stated that the amount of the “costs” were not in proportion to the amount of the debt and not in line with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance Review of 2006.

 

On 14 September 2010 after sending the cheque and the letter I received a harassing / abusive voicemail left by someone at First Debt Recovery who identified himself as [Name withheld]. In his message to me [Name withheld] acknowledged that First Debt Recovery are not allowed to charge 10% interest. He stated that First Debt Recovery can charge 8.0% above the Bank of England base rate which brings the interest up to 8.5%.

 

[Name withheld] also stated that I was correct that First Debt Recovery are not allowed to charge me £50 in fees.

 

He then stated that he was returning my cheque and that he would see me in court. He then abruptly hung up. I consider this sort of behaviour harassing and abusive. My cheque was never returned. It was deposited / cashed within a fortnight.

 

On 14 September 2010 I sent a letter of complaint to First Debt Recovery (enclosed) regarding the phone call I received. I have not yet received a response to that complaint. Additionally, on 17 September 2010 I sent a complaint form to you, the Financial Ombudsman Service. The form (enclosed) detailed the harassing voicemail as well as the exorbitant charges from First Debt Recovery.

 

On October 6, I received a response form you, [Name withheld] at the Financial Ombudsman service (enclosed) that acknowledged my complaint. You said, “On receipt of their final response, if you feel they have not put things right, or, alternatively, if you have not heard from them after those 8 weeks, please complete the enclosed complaint form and send it to us together with any supporting documentation.

 

So I waited…. And waited, and on 11 November 2010 I received a response from First Debt Recovery (dated 02 November 2010) that did not address my original complaint. Instead was a final demand for the balance of £55.70 (enclosed).

 

On 12 November 2010 I asked my partner [Name withheld] call First Debt Recovery to find out what was going on. The man who spoke to [Name withheld] was rude and abrupt. [Name withheld] calmly pointed out that by law they were not allowed to charge 10% interest. The man said he’d see us in court!

 

I would appreciate if you would please follow up with this complaint as I haven't been given a sufficient answer from First Debt Recovery.

 

Sincerely,

[Name withheld]

 

Please keep me updated with your outcome.

 

Hello everybody, I am in same situation, I have voice recordings, letters, bank statements proving their fraud. I wrote to Office of Fair trading - don't understand why this organisation exist, they can do not more than random person from the street, however sometimes random person will do much more. They regulate nothing and absolutely useless organisation. Tried local council - they said that they have several complaints on First Debt Recovery....., but did nothing. I believe the only way to sort it out is to get to their office, or someone mentioned that their employees working now in Baker and Bond, and punish them how you can no help from authorities in this country. Fraudsters know that and use this successfully. If you want to find any justice make justice yourself! Contact me if you have some ideas or you eventually got any USEFUL advice from any authorities. I'm happy to provide all information I have and participate in punishment as well however remember when you get there to find a justice, police going to protect them not helping you. I lost 2000, others lots from 300 to 6000 and more I believe, this is not a spam, direct fraud involving physical existence and known location...., no one cares. But what can you do? Pay some thugs to kick their buts? Is the only way to punish criminals leads to other criminals? Dunno....any ideas?

[Bazooka Boo]

Welcome to CAG Jev, unfortunately this is a very old thread, and will be missed less for those who subbed to it previously, you need to start your own new thread, if you can't work it out then click on the black triangle at the bottom of your post, and ask one of the site team to start one for you....I'll look in then.

[GenvievePipi]

I know this is an old thread, but I did get some resolution.

 

The financial ombudsman could not help me directly.

 

I paid First Debt Recovery the original £57 and nothing more. Those huge interest charges disappeared. I had sent them a lot of paperwork and heard nothing back. I stood my ground and won I suppose?

[renegadeimp]

I love how Donald never came back

[Who Are They?]

The former managing director of First Debt Recovery, ex-Detective Sergeant Christopher Taylor, is currently on trial at Ipswich Crown Court for money laundering and conspiracy to defraud...

 

bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-suffolk-22121034

 

In total, four debt recovery agencies in the centre of Wakefield closed in the period Nov 2012 - Jan 2013. In addition to First Debt Recovery, the other three were: Baker and Bond Ltd, Baker & Bond (UK) Ltd and Goldman Vicenti Ltd.

 

insidermedia.com/insider/yorkshire/85806-

 

Baker and Bond Ltd and Baker and Bond (UK) Ltd occupied premises that were being rented to Christopher Taylor, but Christopher Taylor was not a director of these two companies.

 

When Baker and Bond Ltd and Baker and Bond (UK) Ltd were wound up by the High Court it could not be determined who was acting as the director of these two companies. However, I have determined who was acting as director of these two companies and that same person then went on to set up his own debt collection agency - Goldman Vicenti Ltd. That person is called IAN BURROW.

 

Ian Burrow is a friend of Christopher Taylor and the two were often seen chatting at Burrow's coffee bar at 12 Cross Square, Wakefield. The same address was also used by Goldman Vicenti (Burrow's debt collection agency) When Goldman Vicenti was wound up by the High Court in January 2013 it was found that upfront fees for debt collection were charged, but recovered debts were not paid to Goldman Vicenti's clients.

 

In effect, Goldman Vicenti was involved in a type of advance fee fraud but with a double whammy as recovered debts were retained by Goldman Vicenti.

 

Interestingly, ex-Detective Sergeant Taylor's trial also centres on an advance fee fraud involving debt elimination companies run by notorious conman, Toni Muldoon, who has already pleaded guilty in the case involving Christopher Taylor. Taylor is also accused of money laundering for Muldoon in another advance fee fraud involving bogus escort agencies. Interestingly, Ian Burrow had also ran illicit escort agencies some 12-15 years ago and was fined by ICSTIS a total of £107,000 in relation to those agencies...

 

ripoffreport.com/goldman-vicenti/legal-process-services/manchester-other-35f0b.htm