Tesco Insurance (aka Direct Line) tried to charge me £75 cancellation fee + 1 month's premium when I moved to Northern Ireland, where they do not provide cover. My position was that they terminated the contract by being unable to provide cover. Had this failed I intended to go down the unlawful penalty charge route. Their position was not to respond to letters, and then to start debt collection action. After a particularly shrill and ignorant member of their staff phoned me and demanded that I call them back to pay, and we had a discussion about the OFT Guidelines on debt collection (0870 numbers, tut tut), they immediately passed it to Moorcroft (DCA). They sent the usual threats, and I responded with a CCA request which they have defaulted on. Tesco sent me two different copies of their standard agreement, with the dates they were printed on them, and the wrong address (neither the one where I was originally insured or my new one). These don't meet the CCA requirements, so thanks to the incompetence of both Moorcroft and Tesco, I now need no longer worry as the alleged debt is now unenforceable.

HSBC use Metropolitan Collection Services of Birmingham, which is wholly-owned by HSBC. MCS in turn own a grubby little outfit called The Central Debt Enforcement Agency, whose speciality is sending out letters that look like court forms. If you ask MCS if CDEA is anything to do with them, they'll deny it; however, if you ask if they have a phone number for CDEA they'll put you through (probably to the next desk), and you can also have fun pointing out to them that CDEA's letters show them to be owned by MCS...

Here are a few from some of my clients: Metropolitan Collection Services, the in-house DCA for HSBC: - telephone harassment even when asked to correspond only in writing - using a second DCA (CDEA) concurrently - lying by claiming no connection to CDEA (which is wholly owned by MCS) Central Debt Enforcement Agency (CDEA) (acting for HSBC) - sending letters deliberately designed to look like court papers - implying, through their company name, that they are an official agency Moorcroft (acting for Tesco Insurance) - failing to respond satisfactorily to CCA request Central Collections (acting for VW Finance) - telephone harassment - refusing to freeze action on a disputed debt - claiming the OFT guidelines don't apply to them ECI (acting for Cabot) - instructing debtors to contact them on a premium rate number Global Vantedge (acting for MBNA) - contacting debtors directly and bypassing appointed third party - refusing to deal with an appointed third party - telephone harassment in spite of requests to correspond only in writing - refusing to freeze action when debt is disputed - risibly claiming that the OFT Guidelines and the Administration of Justice Act don't apply to them because they are a US-owned company calling from India!

My OH had an MBNA credit card which was defaulted some just over 2 years ago; since then she has been in a debt management plan arranged by CCCS. Recently PPI premiums had started to appear on statements. With CCCS' agreement, I drafted a letter stating that my OH had no knowledge of asking for PPI, did not want it and asking for a refund of all premiums. We asked that MBNA produce proof that she had asked for PPI if they thought she had. MBNA replied stating that she had requested PPI from the outset, that the premium had been shown on every statement (this is simply incorrect as to fact), but that they had now cancelled the PPI. They refuse to refund anything, and failed to provide proof that PPI had been asked for, though they did send a copy of the standard policy! From this, it seems that the policy is void if an account is in default for more than 90 days. My question is this: Should MBNA have continued to charge premiums, and interest thereon, when the policy was void? Secondly, can a CCA request be used in respect of PPI policies?