James's original thread seems to have come a long way. All he appeared to want an answer to was, "Why do the OC'c sell the block of debts (in some cases someone stated as little as 6% ) to a DCA without first offering individuals the chance to clear the amount?" At least you would feel better about it, if you could you could afford to. What followed was the right or wrong of being told how much the debt was bought for. Information personal only to the debtor which would have given guidance as to how much to offer perhaps to another OC if in a postion to do so. By the act alone of accepting enough from the CRA to be satisfied the OC have received enough to cover what ever expenses they have been left. They would no doubt if treating the debtor fairly and correctly could and would accept a slighly larger amount. Unfortunately this will not happen because through their greed in the first instance they have dug a hole so large they cannot get out of it!

Why should the OC need to sell the debt on anyway. I was under the impression they got thier money back through insurance anyway, or is that more duff information from a University lecturerer at speakers corner. If this is the case how much do they need to keep taking.

Funny old thing debt isn't it. I have had to endure in excess of 5 years of unrelenting pressure from persons whom have no idea of my situation but infer they do. We have all been there to start with, the lady indoors bought to tears, the threats of what could/might happen if you don't rollover etc. Managed to get most of it sorted but health matters more in the forfront now, but guess what? Because it is now just over five years since the start, all the original creditors have started to sell their debts onto DCA's and the whole scenario is about to start again. This time though Ihave CAG and I have learnt enough with the help of the site team and others to point me in the right direction of how to deal correctly with them and ensure they do likewise. The point of this, I like many others reckon I owe a large amount to many companies and never going to be able to pay it back as much as I wish I could, due to age. That amount though has been obtained for a fraction of its value. The difference now is that a new set of creditors are once are about to treat me and her indoors as absolute lowlife and no doubt others as well. I have been paying my way to the original OC's quite happily for years (probably shouldn't have done but old school). Now I have been informed I have some strange company attempting to make a vast amount of money from me for nothing. They have been supplied with all knowledge of my private and personal affairs such as they are but they are not going to fare very well from my pocket in the future. One got it seriously wrong. They don't like court do they. So yes! I would very much like to know everything about what has been passed on and how it is held on file and the price paid for it to ensure that no one is taking adavntage again. At the moment I have seen nothing to persaude me that my own personal debt information should be kept secret especially when I am making the payments that can only be personal to me and no others.

This article is quickly turning into the 2012 Easter Debate. It is certainly keeping the brain alert. However come two days time no doubt it will all be back to normal. The fact of the matter is really hypothetical as it was on observation the way I see it. The site team Mess 36 has hit the nail on the head by stating debtors have alot of power to ensure that DCA's act in a responsible manner in all areas of their business. They can quote what they want and hide behind all manner of devious practices but usually are found to have acted incorrectly. Count to ten before acting and I am sure you'll with the help of this site come up with correct procedure to flout any of their actions.

Does this interesting dabate started by James81 mean a DCA does not have to disclose how much they bought the debt for even though it is personal information about a debtor obviously held by them? I found the Brigadiers (grand gentleman) remark interesting that he could remember only one instance it had it had been used in court and held to be commercially sensitive and only for the eyes of a senior judge. How can an individuals personal debt be classed as commercial or perhaps he is in debt to make money! How old was this apparently learned person! I can see lots of letters with awkward questions to clog up the wheels of DCA's being sent in the near future not to mention refusals to supply anymore information such as IE forms.

Quite right connif, But now it opens the big can of worms that these companies do not disclose all of personal details held about personal records. They do not use your commercial getout but would rather use the excuse that the debt was bought at the same time as many others and it would be difficult to place an amount on it. This still leaves the point that the personal debt details relate to a specific person and should be made available to them. As stated all hypothetical but logical if there is personal data held by companies.

Evening James, I don't know but hypothetically I suppose one could go a bit further and demand the exact amount the debt was bought for. I am not sure but if it is specifically your debt the DCA should allow you that information. We all know roughly how much their making out of us. You can bet your life they would not disclose the amount or you might not want to go on supporting your payments or other offers to them. Now, surely, if your personal debt is bought by a DCA it must then become further personal information to you and qualify for enforcement under the ICO rules just to see how much they did purchase it for. If the OC sold your debt for an amount it would appear they would have settled the debt for that amount. The more information that is gathered about the amount and publicised people higher up will see just how much these companies are causing so much distress to debtors and do something to make the system at least fair. Anyway all hypothetical as stated but you know your right as confirmed by the response already!

Does this mean that we can now revert to civil redress in order to recover costs. After all sureley evidence from the big house is total !!!