TOC Revenue Recovery/Rail tickets

[markmcf]

I have today received a letter dated 27 May 2007 from a company called T.O.C. Revenue Recovery. They claim to be acting on behalf of Chiltern Railways and are pursuing 4 cheques all dated Nov/Dec 2006 which were returned refer to drawer. As far as I am aware all these cheques were covered by a cheque guarantee card.

To quote the wording of their letter

"The situation is now serious and you should note the text of the provisions of the "Theft Act" reproduced below for your information. To prevent action being taken against you we have allowed 5 days for you to forward the full liability, failing which we will have no alternative but to consider proceedings against you.

You should note the following concerning such acts and the appropriate parts of the Theft Act.

"If, at the material time the cheque was issued and there were insufficient funds in the relevant account you may face prosecution. The Theft Act 4S.2(I)(b) and Section 2(3) Theft Act 1978 refers and may now be instigated to finalise this liability".

To avoid a possible appearance in a Court of Law with the obvious consequences we would request that you attend to this matter without delay.

They have then attached copies of the four cheques totalling £30.10 and stated that the costs to date on top of this are now £65.00.

Why has it suddenly come to light that these cheques were allegedly not paid. I am contacting the bank, that I no longer have an account with, so will check on the facts regarding payment of these cheques.

I thought threatening a debtor with criminal proceedings was against OFT guidance. How do they come up with £65.00 costs?

I would welcome any advice on this subject.

[diskmandave]

Originally Posted by markmcf

I thought threatening a debtor with criminal proceedings was against OFT guidance. How do they come up with £65.00 costs?

The OFT guidance only covers, "falsely implying".

As for the costs that is also covered in the guidance.

Here's the guidance:
http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/rep...dit/oft664.pdf

Regards, Dave.

[markmcf]

Thanks

Whilst admitting that they may not be "falsely" implying that criminal proceedings may be bought, the wording implies that they will be instigating such proceedings!!

Also, the charges are more than double the debt which could be construed as disproportionate; they have not provided details of how they are actual and necessary costs and there is no contractual provision for these charges, all of which seem to in contravention of S2.10 of this guidance.

Any further comments would be most welcome.

Regards

[markmcf]

The DCA concerned are currently threatening to place a default with the credit reference agencies for these cheques!!

They say they have this right.

Surely this is processing my data against the Data Protection Act as I have not given any consent to them or anyone regarding my data. There is no contact or agreement giving them any rights to hold data on me. I could find any record of them on the Information Commissioners Office site under register of data controllers.

I have asked them for further details of the cheques to prove they have not been paid whilst I am checking with the bank in question - account now closed as I am not prepared to take their word for it. I am prepared to pay them for these cheques once I have confirmed that they are correct in their allegations but have questioned their charges which they will not substantiate.

Any thoughts on my next course of action.

[ScarletPimpernel]

Originally Posted by markmcf

The DCA concerned are currently threatening to place a default with the credit reference agencies for these cheques!!

They say they have this right.

Bullsh*t. CRAs don't record such data.

If the cheques had been dishonoured, your bank would doubtless have written to you, robbed you blind in the process and the whole thing would be reflected in your statements.

Their charges are absurd. In addition to being disproportionate, they can only levy charges if there is express contractual provision. The amount of such contractual charges would have to be shown in the contract. A note of caution, however; it may be, because things to do with railways can be subject to all sorts of unique byelaws and Acts, that they are able to charge for collection - it's worth checking.

I suspect that the DCA is none other than the railway company, or acts for Chiltern and other rail operators (TOC = Train Operating Company).

Anyway, the next course of action is to write to them formally disputing the debt, and reminding them that under the OFT guidelines they must cease all collection activity until it is resolved.

[markmcf]

Thanks for the reply.

I have had nothing from the bank at all concerning these cheques and this account was subsequently closed.

I have just checked the Chiltern Railways Byelaws under Railways Act 1993 and there is no mention of anything covering this.

I will be writing to them disputing the debt and also questioning what right they have to hold or process any data about me without my consent. As far as I can see there is no registration for this oufit on the register of data controllers.

I will also draw their attention to the OFT Guidelines again.

[diskmandave]

If you haven't got original statements, Subject Access Request the bank for them. That should prove what actually happened with the cheques and may even throw up some charges to reclaim.

Regards, Dave.

[Rameses]

Did the cheques clear? Did you check your bank statements?

Just pay the bill, you clearly owe it.

[babybear39]

Awww...and here you are again TROLL :P

You want to play wiv ickle me?

BB

[lemma1968]

Originally Posted by Rameses

Did the cheques clear? Did you check your bank statements?

Just pay the bill, you clearly owe it.

What is it like up there in your Ivory Tower? Is the oxygen level depleting to such an extent that your sense of reason has left your body? People do not come onto this site to avoid their debts, they come to seek help against the actions of the unscrupulous banks and DCA's that exploit the vulnerable by levying unreasonable charges and then annually declare profits of billions (in the case of the banks). I hope that you are never in the situation that some others are in through circumstances beyond their control.

Good for you if you have never been in the same positions as others here, we just ask that you don't come on and judge when you know nothing of people's circumstances.

[Rameses]

Whilst "People do not come onto this site to avoid their debts", they ARE encouraged to do so on a regular basis by unscrupulous persons.

Appalling really, and encouraged! Debt avoidance, simple as that.

[lemma1968]

Rameses, there is a double standard operating in what you are claiming. We all must act within the law, that includes the banks and the DCA's. If they behave in an unscrupulous and frequently unlawful manner then they should not moan if their customers fight back by seeking out the loopholes.

It is just not appropriate to lure customers in and then exploit them unlawfully should their circumstances change so they struggle and continue to struggle forever. I have no sympathy at all.

Furthermore, at least we are acting within the remits of the law. There is absolutely nothing wrong with putting the banks and DCA's to strict proof of the debt. If they did not follow the law in the first place when they set up these "agreements" then they only have themselves to blame. There is a reason why the Consumer Credit Act stipulates the rules that must be followed. The banks and DCA's cannot pick and choose which rules they will accept and follow and which they will not as it suits them. If they do not follow the rules, then more fool them.

[babybear39]

Hiya rameses,

B'ave will ya

BB

[t-star]

Markmcf.
Chiltern does not operate an in house team to recover debts. When we have outstanding items like this they are usually sent to an outside specialist, who has the relevant knowledge of railway bylaws. You will not find anything within the Chiltern Bylaws as they and the conditions of carriage are just concerned with the operation of the railway. Anything related to revenue is controlled by the Rail Settlement Plan which is administered by ATOC. Unfortunately there is no facility on their website to view all of the RSP.

Scarlet Pimpernel is correct in what he says about the railways. They are covered by lots of act's, statutes and laws which are specific only to the railway industry.

If i can find out any more about TOC revenue recovery i will post in this thread.....