Threat Of Court Action Over Alleged Overpayment

[Bilgeman]

I've mentioned this in a reply to another thread but I don't want to hijack that thread so I'm opening a new one here.

MY son's girlfriend worked for a supermarket for a few weeks and, some months down the line, received a letter out of the blue demanding repayment of 87 quid they allege they have overpaid her. She told them she would rather like some proof of this and disputed the claim. Despite this a bunch of scavenging weevils calling themselves CCC Debt Management have written to her demanding payment.

We composed a (we consider) perfectly reasonable letter in reply, as follows:

I refer to your company’s unpleasant and intimidating letter of 15 May 2008. There are a couple of points I wish to raise regarding this

• Your client may claim to have written to me on several occasions but I have never received any such correspondence so do not accuse me of ignoring something of which I have no knowledge.
• I am not in the habit of paying money to anybody who writes to me out of the blue demanding it. I put you to strict proof that;

a) The debt, which I do not acknowledge, exists as I feel that a company that is so inefficient as to overpay as you claim might also be quite capable of imagining that it has done so when in fact it hasn’t, and
b) That you have authority to pursue me for such a debt in the event that it can be proven to exist.

Please advise your ‘client’ that I dispute this claim and as such no payment will be forthcoming. I require complete details of how they come to this assumption and why they believe that an error on their part some time ago becomes my responsibility at a later date.

Despite the above (and note that she is disputing the claim) they have again written on the 9 June 2008 demanding payment (by 3 April 2008!!!!!!!??????? - perhaps it's in a cupboard in their Tardis). I believe this behaviour to be, if not illegal, then at least in breach of something but would really like a proper opinion before I take it further. To add insult, they are accusing her of choosing to ignore them.

Can't we do something about these people? Isn't there a spare pit in Hell going begging where to whole vile, evil, stinking lot of them could be dumped and concreted over??

Failing that, can I report them to someone?


Arrrgh!!!!

[Conniff]

Don't let her take in as personal Bilgeman, all the letters from DCAs are the same, it was not written to her, it was just a standard letter from their cache.

They will continue to ignore anything you say and continue sending their demands and then advise you that someone will visit to collect.

Ignore them and write to the employer again and ask them for the details useing a letter (recorded delivery) on the same lines as the super one you did for the DCA.

Please keep up informed of how it goes.

[prushton]

If your sons girlfriends company have overpaid her then if this is in fact the case then she must repay the overpayment, but she deos not have to pay the full amount all at once, she may opt to repay the amount over an extended period of time and if she was still employed by the company then they could not take the overpayment from her wages without her consent .

[Bilgeman]

Thanks to both of you for those replies. I realised that she would probably have to pay it back, despite it not being her fault, but I just want to make them wait because of the arrogant and unpleasant tone of their correspondance. I think we might offer 50p a week as she isn't working at the moment (not her fault) and my son's having to support them both and they have about 100 quid a month to live on after rent and council tax are taken out.

[Zamzara]

If that's genuinely what she can afford, then that's fair enough. Has she looked whether there are any benefits she can claim?

[Conniff]

Originally Posted by Bilgeman

Thanks to both of you for those replies. I realised that she would probably have to pay it back, despite it not being her fault, but I just want to make them wait because of the arrogant and unpleasant tone of their correspondance. I think we might offer 50p a week as she isn't working at the moment (not her fault) and my son's having to support them both and they have about 100 quid a month to live on after rent and council tax are taken out.

Don't jump in too quickly, you haven't any proof yet that they have overpaid her (unless you know of course).

[Bilgeman]

How's this:-

I refer to your company’s unpleasant and intimidating letter of ** ** 2008 - equally unpleasant and intimidating as was that of ** ** 2008 to which I did reply contrary to your untrue and insulting statement that I have ‘failed to respond’ which I can prove is a lie as I have a receipt from the Post Office (reference ************* delivered from ******** Delivery Office on **/**/**).

Now let’s get round to what you have chosen to ignore. Perhaps, as time in your company appears to run backwards as evidenced by the fact that despite dating your letter 9 June 2008, you give me until 3 April 2008 to make payment, you might like to look in your Tardis where you may find the original letter I sent to you, then you will see that I have asked you for strict proof;

a) That the debt, which I do not acknowledge, exists, as I feel that a company that is so inefficient as to overpay as you claim might also be quite capable of imagining that it has done so when in fact it hasn’t, and

b) That you have authority to pursue me for such a debt in the event that it can be proven to exist.

Please advise your ‘client’ that I dispute this claim and as such no payment will be forthcoming. I have already advised you that the matter is in dispute and therefore your threat of Court Action is blatantly unlawful and seems contemptuous of the British Legal System. I have copies of my correspondence to you and Post Office receipts for letters sent. I require complete details of how they come to this assumption and why they believe that an error on their part some time ago becomes my responsibility at a later date.

I am not saying that I refuse to pay back, to the best of my ability, any sum which it can be proven that I genuinely owe.

If, rather than simply ignoring my responses and requests for information, you will prove to me that I owe this money in law then I will pay it back, within the restraints of my somewhat reduced resources and at a rate which I can reasonably afford, despite the fact that, if this ‘debt’ exists at all, it appears to be the result of an error on the part of your client. I will not, however, comply with your baseless threats and intimidation on the mere say so of somebody in an office who doesn’t appear capable of interpreting a calendar.

[Zamzara]

IMHO, it comes across as though they've got you rattled. Nor is court action over a disputed debt "blatantly unlawful": it is one of the proper ways to settle the dispute.

Keep it simple and ask for evidence that the overpayment happened.

[Bilgeman]

Yes, and I've had time to think about it too. Rattled, no - angry, yes. But you're right and thanks for the timely 'calm down' note

[ScarletPimpernel]

The letter is too long. Remember that DCA staff are often dullards, and it is likely that only a few lines will be read before the next template response is sent out.

Can I suggest:

Dear Curs

I do not acknowledge any debt to you or any company you claim to represent.

In my letter of (date) I made clear that I dispute this alleged debt on the grounds that no evidence has been produced the prove that any money is owed.

It should not be necessary to remind you that the Office of Fair Trading Guidance on Debt Collection requires you to suspend collection activity whilst a dispute is unresolved.

Unless and until you provide a proper response to my letter of (date), no further correspondence will be entered into. Take notice that any further breaches of the OFT Guidance will result in a formal complaint, and reports to the appropriate enforcement authorities.

Yours etc.

It's worth remembering that DCAs have no legal power; only their client can bring legal action. I think it unlikely they would do so for £87, especially if they think it will be defended. Small amounts like this are often given to DCAs on the basis that they have a fixed period to collect (and get their fee); the last thing they want is to have a lengthy correspondence eating into their fee, which is why they don't rely on template demands and ignore corrrespondence.