car phone hohouse and their minions

[calvi36]

Wednesday, 25 April 2007

Bryan Carter and Co
De Havilland Drive
Weybridge
Surrey
KT13 0NT

REF xxxxxx

Dear Sirs,

Thank you for your letter dated 10/04/07 in which you draw my attention to the fact that a payment has to be made in full regarding the alleged outstanding bill with Carphone Warehouse. I called your offices on 10/04/07 to discuss the alleged debt and to say the least your staff are extremely abrupt. I informed them there was a dispute on the account that had been passed to yourselves and was told you had no knowledge of this. I stated that you now did have knowledge of it and as a DCA you have no further right to contact me but to pass this back to your client company.

Regarding your updated balance that you provided me with, which in fact is the first time you contacted me. It would be very interesting indeed if you did issue proceedings against me for the amount your client is seeking as this amount has been in dispute since April 2006 and your client has failed to attempt any kind of neither remedy nor solution to this dispute. I will defend any action you may bring against me and I shall pursue costs.

I also note from your letter that you have given a new balance to this account of £240.47 which includes Interest of £12.63, court fees of £20.00 and solicitor’s fees of £50.00.

I would ask that you provide me with a breakdown of interest charges of £12.63 and also of the relevant case law that is in force which would allow you to charge contractual interest on a disputed debt. I will bring your attention to the Consumer Credit Act as this is the only way you could attempt to charge me interest. The agreement I entered into with Carphone Warehouse is not covered under the Consumer Credit Act as no credit terms were in place nor were they requested nor offered.

I would ask that you provide me of evidence of court fees of £20.00 since you have not commenced any litigation against me then I would ask how these fees could be accrued. This is actually unlawful to attempt to charge some one for fees actually not incurred.

As for your fees to a solicitor, I believe that you are in fact an in house lawyer wholly owned by Fridrickson International Ltd and as a result the charge of a straight £50.00 cannot be valid unless you can prove to myself that your actual costs in dealing with this matter have in fact been £50.00 and I request a full and coherent breakdown at how you arrive at this figure. I am not liable for any solicitors costs unless costs are awarded at court. I also challenge that I am in no way liable for your client’s instruction to employ you to deal with this matter and that they are liable for your costs and not myself. This is a matter of contract law between you and your client.

To finalise, I not only now dispute the original alleged debt with Carphone Warehouse but now I dispute completely your charges that you are attempting to levy unlawfully against myself.

If you wish to pursue this matter further then I shall charge accordingly for my time , letters and telephone calls to your company’s 0870 421 1321 number which is a number charged at above standard rate. You will incur a surcharge on these telephone calls at the rate of £0.03 pence per minute as this is the same surcharge you are levying on myself by forcing me to call your number.

Please be aware that I am a lay person but that I am a full and active member of the Consumer Action Group and I have access to full advice and representation should it be required. Also be aware that the CAG is watching your company very, very closely.

We as consumers and customers will no longer lie down to Debt Collection Agencies such as yours attempting to level any kind of unlawful charge against a consumer. Your letter dated 10/04/07 is full of flaws on legalities and I dare you to take this further as I am certain that in a court of law you will have not one chance of winning nor proving your unlawful claims for money. I for one will defend this all the way and so will 130,000 members of the Community Action Group.

I will give you 14 days to reply, if you don not and if you do not address all the issues I have raised above then I shall in future treat your company with the contempt it deserves. After all this is what you do to us.

Yours Sincerely,

xxxx

COPY RETAINED

[calvi36]

Reply received today from Bryan Carter Solictors

Dear Sirs,

We refer to recent correspondence in this matter.

Please note that we have been instructed to take no further action against you and have therefore closed our file.

Yours sincerely,


Bryan Carter & Co.

[ivorbiggun]

Originally Posted by calvi36

Reply received today from Bryan Carter Solictors

Dear Sirs,

We refer to recent correspondence in this matter.

Please note that we have been instructed to take no further action against you and have therefore closed our file.

Yours sincerely,


Bryan Carter & Co.

Way to go Calvi.

And remind me never to get on the wrong side of you.

[calvi36]

Hi Ivorbigun,

they just got me so p***** that I started typing the letter. I knew some things about law of contract and CCA but the site has been a great help for me. I have also made a formal complaint to OFCOM regarding Talk Talk and the above is what this was about. They put in place denial of service on broadband and messed me about so much, then they tried to charge me 70 quid for a mac code, they were told where to go. I think as consumers we had all got into the habit of being dictated to by DCA's and now we have this site we have a better idea of where we stand legally. In my eyes they are nothing more than leeches and I for one will no longer be dictated to by them. ....£157... not a vast amount but am still satisfied with the outcome.