2011 Time for PRO ACTIVE action to KILL DCA's Target nr 1 Cr@pquest

[jimbo45]

Hi all

as a regular reader of these Forums it seems to me that in spite of the REALLY DISGUSTING and EVIL nature of the whole debt collecting business some companies really DO deserve to be forced out off business.

 

Now I am in NO WAY suggesting people should avoid paying SOMETHING when they've borrowed money even though Banks etc should not have loaned it out in the first place --but what I am 1000% against is in the dishonest, ruthless and utterly despiccable manner in which the whole debt collection system is carried out.

 

Cr@pquest appear regularly on these forums so perhaps we should concentrate on getting this evil company shut down.

 

So please anybody if you've had any illegal / dubious SD's, invalid or unfulfilled CCA requests or any other sharp practices from this firm do the following:

 

1) Complain to the relevant OFT.

2) Complain to the Solicitors / Law authority if they send out Solicitors / Court notices

3) Complain to Companies House about their activities in the UK -- this is an OFF SHORE based corporation with NON RESIDENT (for tax purposes) directors

4) Complain to the Inland Revenue that you suspect the directors of this company is avoiding paying UK tax -- especially if you have actually paid anything to these people.

 

After we've seen these off we can progress down through the rest.

 

A concerted effort against one at a time will probably yield better results that trying to shut them ALL down in one go.

 

Incidentally Capquest have issued so many useless SD's at the moment you have to wonder if they even have a death wish themselves.

 

Nobody likes paying back debts - especially when times are hard - but the sheer EVIL nature of these businesses --buying debts for PENNIES in the pound and then hounding people who really ARE in difficulties when the Banks have had billions of OUR money paid back to save THEIR skins just makes the bloood boil.

 

Finally -- of course nobody should use this as an excuse for NOT paying something. All we want is an end to aggressive tactics, impossible interest charges and a realisation that errors were made on BOTH sides (both Lender and Borrower) and the best way forward is to treat the whole thing humanely and realistically.

 

 

So let's hope Capquest is our first success for 2011.

 

 

Future targets are LEWIS group, CL finance and the notorious Bryan Carter.

 

Cheers

jimbo

Edited January 11, 2011 by jimbo45

[OnMyWayOut]

Personally, I'd like to see a few things happen to improve matters for debtors:

 

1. If a lender wants to sell a debt, they must be made to offer the debtor a settlement of no more than double the amount they will be selling it for to be paid off within say 4 months, and if they do sell it, the debt buyer should not be able to claim more than three times the amount paid for the debt from the debtor. This might reduce the amount of speculative debt purchasing that goes on.

 

2. If a lender takes an unsecured debt to court they should not be allowed to get a charging order on the debtor's property as it started as an unsecured loan, therefore it should stay as an unsecured loan.

 

3. Full and Final settlements should be legally binding on the lender/debt purchaser as a settled debt and not be sold on or further pursued in any way.

 

OMWO

[inkslinger]

Well said. Theses guys have pulled so many fast ones with me its its untrue. Iv got one court case pending and Im trying to get them to mark a CCJ I paid for three years ago as satisfied. They ignore every letter now they know Im taking them to court. Ill do whatever I can in this matter.

[sillygirl1]

All you have to do is come up with a reasonably worded petition on the government website and if you get 500 people signing they will look at your petition, the more petitions on debt buying and selling the better....

 

How about

 

"Once a debt is sold no further markers can be placed on a person's credit rating by any party." That would stop a lot of abuse that takes place re statute barring,

 

another one could be

 

"A default marker can only be placed if no payment has been received for six weeks, prior to that it can be a late marker placed five days after the due date...."

 

"If a default is cleared then it can only show on a credit report for 3 months."

 

Think about what you actually want to achieve and sum it up in a way that CANNOT be 'misinterpreted' and then you may be able to stop the slave drivers.

[sillygirl1]

No 2 above is already in the process of being stopped by the government, particularly for amounts under £25,000. Many charging orders are for about £2000-£3000

[dizzyblonde1966]

No 2 above is already in the process of being stopped by the government, particularly for amounts under £25,000. Many charging orders are for about £2000-£3000

 

Is there any more info/updates on this anywhere,

I know David Cameron said it was on his agenda before he became PM,to stop charging orders for debts under 25k but is this pre election promise still being actively persued by the new goverment ?

[sillygirl1]

Yes, I think you can find it on the government website, there was a discussion on it and it is being tabled (if it hasn't been already).

[OnMyWayOut]

I don't suppose there's any chance of them making it retrospective though....

[The Debt Star]

Jim,

 

I did complain to the OFT, Trading Standards and the FOS about CrappyQuest. They had basically subjceted me to years of threats and worry. I'd had enough. So I CCA'd them after I discovered this site. They refused to send me a copy of my CCA (told me to burger off and ask the OC). On advice here I was told that DCAs were obliged to send a copy of a CCA. So....

 

The OFT said they won't investigate individual complaints. Waste of ~

 

TS said DCAs were not under any obligation to send a copy of a CCA unless they own the debt (which CrappyQuest didn't).. So that complaint got shut down too.

 

The FOS did not agree with me that CrappyQuest were acting ouit of the ordinary for their industry (ref threat-o-grams, oficial looking letters, alleged charges to my account, letters before action etc etc) and that they did not have to send me a CCA.

 

Now, although the FOS stuck up for CrappYQuest on every single point of my complaint, they did negotiate a small amount of compensation for me. No big deal and just enough to cover the stamps.