Help ! A new problem - different DCA !

[Guest Battleaxe]

Got me flumoxed with this one. To me if debt is written off, that is it, so why are they doing a chase for a property charge. we established Glonal is A & L.

 

I would react by getting the FSA involved as well as the OFT.

 

Others might have knowledge of what this means. I would be interested to find out about this as would others.

 

Does anyone know a forensic accountant or just an accountant who might be able to explain this?

[PriorityOne]

Hi Battleaxe,

 

I am going to challenge A & L over this and have drafted a letter up which will hopefully back them into a very tight corner. I have yet to finalise it, but it should be ready to go on Monday.

 

The "Balance Write-Off" entry to one side for a moment... they have not fully complied with my SAR anyway and only have 11 days left within the 40 day time frame. In my letter I will be asking for full details of when my account was passsed/transferred to Global and all letters/memos, etc. relating to this. I would be very surprised if they acknowledge that anything has gone to Global... since the statement of account showed payments going directly to A & L, even though they were paid through Global by telephone (debit card). If they try and back me into a corner again, I will SAR Global for all telephone transcripts on top of the usual gumph.

 

My bank statements stopped mentioning Global by name around 2005, but all payments were collected and processed by Global before then, as well as afterwards. I am reasonably certain that they won't want this to come out in court...

 

Also, no-one has supplied me with a CCA anyway... not Global or A & L, so for the time being, all payments will be stopped. Maybe they have archived it.... in which case, the ball is well and truly in their court and if they take me to court... then it will all come out.

 

Wish me luck

 

I also e-mailed the OFT yesterday, but haven't checked my inbox yet.... probably too early for a reply though...

[PriorityOne]

Just checked the inbox.... similar useless load of bowlarks from the OFT as well !!... they are unable to investigate individual cases!! Have these people got shares in the debt collecting industry or something ?!

 

[Guest Battleaxe]

I would not be surprsied if they did. It certainly has me thinking now Priority One.

[InKogneeToh]

Hi

 

Have just found this on non-trading companies:

 

What is the difference between a non-trading company and a dormant company?

A company can be non-trading in the sense that it isn't doing business. But it may still have other accounting transactions going through its books, which means that it is not dormant in a legal sense. A dormant company must not have any accounting transactions except specific allowable transactions that can be disregarded.

BACK TO COMPANY REGISTRATION GUIDANCE

Source:

About Us - Guidance

 

Since GDM appear to be an in-house collection agency for A&L it is possible that they are registered correctly at Companies House as non-trading because they are not actually trading in anything (doing business), just collecting debt on behalf of A&L.

 

Also if the debt has not been assigned (sold) to GDM then they have no obligation to comply with the s77/78 requests. The creditor has to do this which is still A&L.

 

It also might be possible that A&L are the Data Controllers for GDM as they are in-house and if that is the case then GDM would not have to be registered for DPA purposes.

 

All this needs thoroughly investigating if you are contemplating any court proceedings as you can bet your bottom dollar that even though they appear incompetent at the moment they will certainly have their top lawyers snapping at your ankles in court!

 

This is not the same as a claim for bank charges which we appear to have got right. You need to be certain of your facts!

 

Regards, Pam

[PriorityOne]

Hi

 

Have just found this on non-trading companies:

 

What is the difference between a non-trading company and a dormant company?

A company can be non-trading in the sense that it isn't doing business. But it may still have other accounting transactions going through its books, which means that it is not dormant in a legal sense. A dormant company must not have any accounting transactions except specific allowable transactions that can be disregarded.

BACK TO COMPANY REGISTRATION GUIDANCE

Source:

About Us - Guidance

 

Since GDM appear to be an in-house collection agency for A&L it is possible that they are registered correctly at Companies House as non-trading because they are not actually trading in anything (doing business), just collecting debt on behalf of A&L.

 

Also if the debt has not been assigned (sold) to GDM then they have no obligation to comply with the s77/78 requests. The creditor has to do this which is still A&L.

 

It also might be possible that A&L are the Data Controllers for GDM as they are in-house and if that is the case then GDM would not have to be registered for DPA purposes.

 

All this needs thoroughly investigating if you are contemplating any court proceedings as you can bet your bottom dollar that even though they appear incompetent at the moment they will certainly have their top lawyers snapping at your ankles in court!

 

This is not the same as a claim for bank charges which we appear to have got right. You need to be certain of your facts!

 

Regards, Pam

 

Hi Pam,

 

Thanks for you post.... I hear what you say, but why are they concealing the fact that anything went to Global at all ? There is no mention of Global whatsoever on my Statement of account, no letters referring to Global, no notes... nothing.

 

The other point that Sparkie raised ages ago, was that registration with the ICO cannot be used by seperate limited companies, yet this is what they appear to be doing. I have copied all correspondence and am about to send it to a company tax lawyer, who I have been in touch with on here. I think I may have to PM her for some clarity on this issue....

 

If anyone else can also shine a light on this, I would be grateful...

[InKogneeToh]

Hi

 

Yes, I am also sure that each Ltd company should be registered separately for DPA purposes but it is just possible that, because GDM are in-house, a different rule applies. You could write to ICO for clarification.

 

I'm sure I was reading a webpage a few days ago about this subject but can't now find it - not even in my 'history' ?!

 

Have you SAR'd GDM as well or just A&L? GDM must have paperwork relating to your account as you have proof of paying them, even if A&L are trying to hide their involvement.

 

Regards, Pam

[tifo]

Since GDM appear to be an in-house collection agency for A&L it is possible that they are registered correctly at Companies House as non-trading because they are not actually trading in anything (doing business), just collecting debt on behalf of A&L.

 

Companies House only registers Ltd companies.

 

GDM can be a dormant/non-trading Ltd company at Companies House, but the name GDM without the Ltd can be used as a trading name of A & L.

 

If the letters from GDM state Ltd after the name and they are down as dormant/non-trading, then they are in trouble. However, if there is no Ltd then they are 'trading as' which is fine.

[PriorityOne]

Companies House only registers Ltd companies.

 

GDM can be a dormant/non-trading Ltd company at Companies House, but the name GDM without the Ltd can be used as a trading name of A & L.

 

If the letters from GDM state Ltd after the name and they are down as dormant/non-trading, then they are in trouble. However, if there is no Ltd then they are 'trading as' which is fine.

 

They are definately Limited.... Global Debt Management Services Limited!

 

If this is the case... then A & L have also done this with another DCA some time ago (have kept all paperwork for that one too !)... but that would apply to a different thread, so I will shut up about it on here.

 

Thanks Tifo... I posted a quick thread on the Legalities forum this morning because I MUST get a letter off on Monday telling them my SAR is incomplete. I will cut and paste your comments on there and see if they argue it or not.. and if so, why.

 

[PriorityOne]

Hi

 

Yes, I am also sure that each Ltd company should be registered separately for Data Protection Act purposes but it is just possible that, because GDM are in-house, a different rule applies. You could write to Information Commissioners Office for clarification.

 

I'm sure I was reading a webpage a few days ago about this subject but can't now find it - not even in my 'history' ?!

 

Have you S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)'d GDM as well or just A&L? GDM must have paperwork relating to your account as you have proof of paying them, even if A&L are trying to hide their involvement.

 

Regards, Pam

 

I have not SAR'd GDM yet... I need to tackle A & L Finance over the BALANCE WRITE-OFF entry on my loan account statement first. If I can back them into a corner over this, coupled with their activities over the years, there may be no need to SAR GDM.

[PriorityOne]

FANTASTIC NEWS ON THE LEGALITIES FORUM !! Boy, are they gonna get the CAG treatment now....

[PriorityOne]

This is now driving me nuts !! Have had more conflicting advice !!

 

 

Quote:

and can share a license with the Information Commissioners Office with another limited company ?

One license for group. Is this really the case ?

 

Quote:

Are you saying that separate limited companies are not required to declare their trading status

No I am not saying this they have declared it is dormant. A company is Dormant if it does not trade. In some cases, the company may appear to be doing business, but this is simply as part of a group or acting on behalf of a Holding Company. A dormant company may not trade on its own account. Sending letters is allowed, the money is then collected by it holding company and as such has not traded, all the costs can be met by it holding company directly.

 

Any more thoughts please guys and gals ? This issue is driving me NUTS !! It seems they can get away with anything !!

 

[PriorityOne]

Angry, frustrated, sad, peed off.

 

In-house DCAs collect and process payments .... but hey, that's ok because they get round it by giving those payments to a holding company.

 

In-house DCAs processs data without being reg. with the ICO... but hey, that's ok because they are all part of the same group of limited companies.

 

In-house DCAs or the banks can change the name of a payee on a chq... but hey, that's ok because they don't want to jeapardise their non-trading status for tax purposes.... and they are allowed to avoid tax by using tactics llike this.

 

In-house DCAs can file dormant co. accounts while passing these payments to a holding co... but hey, that's ok because they have covered themselves with a 7499 reg. with Companies House as being non-trading.

 

I might as well just hand them the effing keys !!

 

Rant over...

 

Any thoughts please ??

[Guest The Terminator]

Angry, frustrated, sad, peed off.

 

In-house DCAs collect and process payments .... but hey, that's ok because they get round it by giving those payments to a holding company.

 

In-house DCAs processs data without being reg. with the Information Commissioners Office... but hey, that's ok because they are all part of the same group of limited companies.

 

In-house DCAs or the banks can change the name of a payee on a chq... but hey, that's ok because they don't want to jeapardise their non-trading status for tax purposes.... and they are allowed to avoid tax by using tactics llike this.

 

In-house DCAs can file dormant co. accounts while passing these payments to a holding co... but hey, that's ok because they have covered themselves with a 7499 reg. with Companies House as being non-trading.

 

I might as well just hand them the effing keys !!

 

Rant over...

 

Any thoughts please ??

 

Perhaps the list of dormant DCA's I've got should go to HMRC and that would really stir up a hornets nest's especally when they hit you for a £100 penalty when your a day late with SA.

[PriorityOne]

Have e-mailed Companies House and the ICO for clarity....

[PriorityOne]

Just updating....

 

Investigations are going on in all directions right now. There are 2 trains of thought on this issue... but Companies House/Inland Revenue are both very interested in what's been going on and have asked for evidence.

 

[PriorityOne]

Ok... had a letter from A & L plc this morning in response to my letter stating partial compliance with my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request). I also queried payments going to Global for several years, why the statement showed nothing going to Gklobal at all and, why there was a "Balance write off" entry on the account in 2004.

 

My thoughts are in red...

 

Following our previous correspondence, blah, blah, I now write with our conclusion (suggesting closure ? I think not..).

 

I am sorry to hear of your disappointment regarding the details you received from our data subject access department; however the information you received is correct in relation to your current account details, however the information shown on your statements will only detail any transactions that have been debited in relation to your loan account. (appalling punctuation which makes it hard to understand... but total rubbish anyway. Statements for the loan account were included, but showed a "balance write-off" in 2004 and no mention of anything to Global. I queried both and also requested data going back further than 6 years on my current account & others... which they seem to be wriggling out of; also no mention of 2 other accounts held by them around the same time... different thread, that one).

 

To access details of your loan account please contact

 

(Chief Muppet...)

Alliance & Leicester Personal Finance

Heritage House, blah, blah...

 

As a goodwill gesture the £10 fee has been waived (I assume this means that it would have cost another £10 to them now... ? ) as we were unaware that originally you was requesting data on both your loan account and your current account (eh?... all data is all data...)

 

Please be aware that your personal loan data is a seperate issue from your current account and therefore needed to be requested as such (well, my loan account was a seperate issue from A & L plc, but that didn't stop them sending nasty letters in December, did it ?)

 

With reference to the issue raised regarding why payments made to Global Debt Management Services (no mention of Limited) are banked by Alliance & Leicester this is due to the fact that Global Debt Management (still no mention of Limited) work on behalf of Alliance & Leicester as an inhouse debt recovery team and therefore use the same banking facilities (so, what's the advantage to you of doing that then, eh?...and, why do my statements show payments being collected by Global and not A & L PF ?)

 

Also, correspondence is issued to our customers giving notification that there account is being passed to Global Debt Management (still no mention of Limited... but yes, I do have a letter to say that they have been instructed by A & L plc ?... plc ?... hmm).

 

If you would llike to discuss any aspect.... please ring me on.... (no chance, in writing only, ta)... will keep the file open for a further 8 weeks... blah, blah...

 

Any comments on this guys and gals ? I intend to draft out a reply some time next week and also write to A & L PF to see what their version of events is now... Am I right in thinking that they are dodging full compliance with my S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) ?

 

[Guest Battleaxe]

Priority One,

 

This is so similar to a letter I got from A & L Personal Finances, except mine has not gone to Global, they are still arguing over the PLP on the account, so I am keeping it in dispute until they remove the PLP and restructure the loan, but I have fired a premetive shot across their bows, I have referred this to the Financial Ombudsman, a move they are not expecting.

 

Why don't do you do the same? Maybe you already have done this.

[PriorityOne]

Hi Battleaxe,

 

I have not yet gone to the FO.... and have been treading slowly with it, so as not to shoot myself in the foot before having all the facts. My idea was to write to A&L PF.... much the same letter as A & L plc received, so as to create a paper trail and try again to get them to answer specific questions.

 

At some stage, they will have to answer why Global picked these payments up as a Limited company and if they persist with taking me to court (as before)... they will then be aware that I will be defending my position.

 

I am not sure whether they are aware of this or not.... but their letters are far less aggressive than a few weeks ago. Interestingly, Shoosmiths have not contacted me again since I told them that I would be defending.

 

My other issue is to find out why the account shows "balance write-off" in 2004, yet Global continued to collect.... there has to be a tax dodge in there somewhere....

 

... a happyish face for today... lol

[Guest Battleaxe]

Ah, I am with you now and understand. I had laid the paper trail and they have given me enough ammunition to go to the FO.

 

It will be interesting to see why they have avted as they have in your case. it's good to know Shoosmith's have backed off for the time being.

[PriorityOne]

Priority One,

 

This is so similar to a letter I got from A & L Personal Finances, except mine has not gone to Global, they are still arguing over the PLP on the account, so I am keeping it in dispute until they remove the PLP and restructure the loan, but I have fired a premetive shot across their bows, I have referred this to the Financial Ombudsman, a move they are not expecting.

 

Why don't do you do the same? Maybe you already have done this.

 

What is a PLP ? Personal Loan Payments ? Please excuse the ignorance....

 

[Guest Battleaxe]

Personal Loan Insurance Premium..

[PriorityOne]

Please let me know how you get on Battleaxe... and thank you for all your support so far.

[Guest Battleaxe]

It is like pulling hen's teeth at the moment, they wont budge even when I proposed a compromise. With them it's all or nothing at all. We will see what ensues. I will keep you posted.

[ampersand]

Please let me know how you get on Battleaxe... and thank you for all your support so far.

Hello PriorityOne,

If you have Battleaxe on your case, you're way more than halfway there.

You are doing all the right things.

Recorded Delivery/witnessed Paper trail is your ammunition.

############################

Battleaxe - my em's to you are being returned by Daemonmailer - is all well? Sorry to do this via Public Forum.