Yes I am fully aware of the reasons

Yes that's what I thought, although glad to hear others agree. I have seen a judge express anger in a large courtroom for being brought to hear a case for £30,000 so I am sure £50 would raise a few eyebrows! The truth is she would welcome such an event in this case, as she would then a right to state her case, and if she can obtain the evidence admitting the mistakes as the fault on Virgin's part, I am sure she would have a strong chance of seeing it thrown out purely on grounds of "reasonableness" which I know judges take strongly into account in smaller claims. Of course it wont get that far, so the only concern she has is bad entries on her credit file. I suppose her only avenue is either to pay it, or face that risk and consider suing for its removal if they did do something like that.

Oh I see, thanks. Yes it says that, after the threat after threat, 'we will have to advise our client to take the matter to court' or words close to those. My reply would be, and might be in this case: "Lovely, that's precisely what I hope you will do, as I would enjoy the opportunity to have this case heard in court but I couldn't afford the costs myself, so I hope Virgin will foot the bill to give me my say infront of a judge."

What do you mean by sufficient notice?

Sorry, one thing I meant to ask is whether you can ask for some sort of deed of assignment when DCAs contact you like this? The letter from Moorcroft begins "we have been instructed by Virgin Mobile Telecoms" Does that mean they now own this debt, i.e. have bought it?

thx Scarlet

Thanks, yes I agree. They can deny of course, but I tend to find it helps to mention that all calls are recorded this end, usually helps them "find" it

Hi no she hasn't checked yet. Going back your earlier longer message..... When she closed the contract, she was explicit and clear on the phone, asking several times for a FULL settlement figure to cancel the contract. She was told equally explicitly that the amount she owed was xxx, and she paid it all there and then on the phone. When she got the bill for another £50, it did not say what it is for, it just says outstanding charges on the account. She spoke to them and they fully accepted it was their staff's error. This ends there in my view. They made a mistake, had they not done so, she may have not been able to afford the payment and may have stayed in the contract, who is to know, it is THEIR error which they admit to. I don't care what the charges are for, if it were me my approach would be, hey I asked you for a total and I paid what you asked for. End of story. You can't come to me later asking for more, admitting your mistake previously, and demanding it then. It is not reasonable, and their own mistake should cost them that £50 or they should train their staff better. The call will have been recorded, and I am in no doubt that she will have a good defence in court if she can obtain the tapes of that call, where she clearly explained she wanted to pay everything owing, and at the end of the call she actually said "so that is it, I don't owe you any more money?" To which the reply was "No, you don't owe any more, that's your account settled and closed."

Fair points, and to be honest if it was me I would do exactly that. However she is new to this stuff, and is worried despite me trying to tell her otherwise. She works for the Police and has wrong ideas that her job could be affected if they mess with her CRA file. I can't see them doing that for such a silly amount, but they could, and if they did it would help if she had already placed it into formal dispute with recorded signed for letters.

Someone told me that a DCA (Moorcroft in this instance) are not supposed to send threats and letters from a PO Box address, due to trading standards guidelines on debt collection practices. Is this true? A friend of mine who I am helping, has a dispute with a previous mobile phone provider (Virgin). She rang to close contract. They gave her a total owed, she paid it and was told on the phone that she had paid ALL that was owed and was now free of the contract. A few days (maybe weeks) later she got a bill for £50. She rang Virgin and recounted the conversation (with name of who she spoke to). they apologised and said it was a mistake by the person she spoke to, and there was still £50 more to pay. She told them she can't afford it and paid what she was told was all owed, but the reply was "well we will take it as a 'training need' for the employee who you spoke to, but you still must pay the money". She didn't pay, on my advice, its ridiculous. She now has DCA letters from Moorcroft with all the usual threats and BS. I am preparing a letter for her, and firing everything I can remember from when I went through this with 10-15 DCAs a few years ago. I am trying to remember what points to mention, any help would be greatly appreciated So far, I am thinking of writing to say the debt is formally in dispute, so they must cease all contact to attempt collection immediately. Also intend to inform them that since they have no legal grounds to communicate with her, any further letters will be charged a "handling fee" of £50 per letter, and if they send any further letters having received this one, they are accepting these terms. She will also write to Virgin to open a formal dispute and insist they do not instruct any further DCAs to collect on a disputed debt, and that she will go to court if necessary as the £50 fee was not explained previously and she asked them to tell her the total owed and she paid it, so job done as far as she is concerned. Any further arguments can go to court. I am wondering maybe whether a SAR would be good to, to get recordings of the phone calls where the staff made the error on the phone to her. Any advice appreciated, especially on whether or not PO Boxes are allowed for DCAs Thanks as ever to all you Caggers

thank you very much for your help Michael, very kind of you

Thanks Mariner, I assume thats only something you would do after you ask for it and they won't give it back? I am not at that stage, I am still renting but planning on moving in next few months. I am just concerned as to whether it should be protected due to landlord change

Well I have a feeling it has been renewed along the way, but coiuld be wrong. One thing I do know for sure is that it has just changed. My landlord handed the tenancy to HIS landlord (he sublets), so in effect we now have a new landlord who we have never dealt with before, although in context of the law and the contract, I think they will claim it is the "Superior Landlord" that has taken over. Would this constitute enough of a change to warrant a protection of my deposit do you think?

oh right, thanks. Well my tenancy has just changed significantly although they have issued no new contracts. The landlord who sublet to me has buggered off and the "superior landlord" has taken over. still no mention of deposit being protected

But from what I have been told on CAG, someone in my position has no avenues at all to go down. My deposit is not in a scheme, my tenancy was taken out in 2006 or 2007 and has been ongoing since