Cheeky bumb, in the hope of some advice :-|

Hi all, I'm back looking for some advice again . For a bit of background, I was using the creditor to supply me with materials. Upon receiving statements that contained material I had not been supplied with, I queried the creditor. After failing to adjust the statement figure for three months, I refused payment for the balance of my account until the matter was sorted out. I have proof, in the form of delivery tickets with amounts of material showing a delivery quantity of zero but statements showing the material as having been delivered. To add to this, I have proof of other items being wrongly charged to another account with a similar name to mine, and then subsequently re-charged to mine. The account was transferred to a DCA, who used the wrong creditor name on their communication with me. The creditor/DCA took me to court, and the claim was struck out after the creditor failed to comply with an order made by the court. 27 Jan 2009 - Claim started by creditor. 10 Feb 2009 - I filed an acknowledgment of service. 20 Feb 2009 - I filed a part defence, admitting around 20% of the claim. 01 Apr 2009 - I filed my AQ. 24 Apr 2009 - The court orders that unless by 4th May 2009 the claimant files a completed allocation questionnaire and pays the allocation fee where appropriate the claim shall be struck out without further order. 18 May 2009 - The court orders that the claim be stayed as it makes no serious attempt to comply with CPR 16.4(1) by setting out a concise statement of the facts. The claimant must amend or substitute its particulars of claim by 4.00pm 03 June 2009 or the claim be struck out without further order. 16 Jun 2009 - Upon the Claimants failing to comply with the order of 18 May 2009 it is ordered that the claim be struck out. 19 Dec 2009 - I receive a letter from the court to inform me that: It is ordered that - The claimants without notice application dated 02 Dec 2009 attached is refused, Claimant not having produced any re-amended Particulars of Claim to show compliance with the order dated 12 May 2009. Dated 14 December 2009. I refused to settle the account originally because the creditor was incompetent, they sent the account to a DCA that was incompetent (couldn't even put the correct creditor name on the documents) and they used a solicitor that was incompetent (could not comply with the orders made by the court). Surely there must be a way to prevent these fools from harassing me further? I have been googling and lots of documents refer to the term 'Abuse of process' with regard to the CPR and some mention a Limited Civil Restraint Order - could anyone advise if any would be appropriate in this instance?

I figure it's just more ammunition for me in court - if they can't even respond to a letter properly and at least attempt to address some of the points raised in it, how are they fit to run a debt collection business? I couldn't decide if they'd replied to the wrong person when I first read it - I almost want to write them a letter thanking them for dealing with my complaint quickly and effectively!

Ok thankyou. I'll post up the letter of complaint I sent to Power 2 Contact firstly, informing them I intend to take them to court. It's a bit heavy reading im sorry but I spent a while trying to ensure it was clear and concise. http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/4774/p2c.jpg http://img29.imageshack.us/img29/8108/p2ca.jpg http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/7940/p2cb.jpg And below is Power2Contact's rather amusing and utter nonsense reply: http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/2796/p2cc.jpg I think the part I find hilarious is where they have the cheek to refer to the OFT - Guidance on Debt Collection! And that's up to date, I'll post any correspondance to do with the official complaints as soon as I receive it. Thanks, Billy.

Thanks for the replies everyone, much appreciated. I was under the impression complaints to the FOS and ICO were next to pointless - thankyou for pointing out a court would be looking for this. I'll get on with making the relevant complaints, if anyone is interested in the progress I can upload a scan of the relevant correspondance thus far? Thanks, Billy.

I think I have a good case against a debt collector who has breached the OFT - Guidance on Debt Collection and the DPA and would really appreciate someone casting their legal eye over it. I'm debating instructing a solicitor to act for me, but would like an unbiased opinion as to whether court action is feasible. Cutting a very long story short, I alledge that a DC used an outdated telephone directory to gain a telephone number for my address and proceeded to phone this number without taking any reasonable precautions to ensure it belonged to me. It did in fact belong to the person who I purchased my current house from (Mrs J) as they tranferred their number to their new address. The DCA repeatedly called this number, was rude, aggressive and refused to remove it from their systems when asked by Mrs J. I was made aware of this when Mrs J recognised my name and called to my house in an effort to stop the phone calls and brought with her a piece of paper containing my name, a unique reference number, the name of the DCA and the fact they were calling about a debt. I feel the DCA has broken the DPA in giving these details out and have been reckless with regard to the phone number (bearing in mind I have been living at my current house for over 5 years). It has been very embarrassing - Mrs J and myself still live in the same locality and I would be quite sure my financial standing has been broadcast far and wide. Please note this is only one of the issues I have with this company - but the one I feel is most serious and will base my case upon if anyone thinks I have a reasonable chance of bringing a successful action against the DCA? Many thanks in advance if anyone has read this far! Billy.

Hi Melbel, I'm following your thread with interest as I will also be filing a complaint with the relevant authorities about Moorcroft - an absolute bunch of cretins. I wish you the best of luck!

Thank you all for your replies - they are very much appreciated. I have drafted a letter ready to send to Moorcroft, please find it below. I apolgise for the heavy reading, I have commented out the standard 'account in dispute' part so anyone following this thread can skip through it more easily. Ok, here goes: Mr B Bob 23rd October 2009 Moorcroft Debt Recovery Limited PO Box 17 2 Spring Gardens Stockport SK1 4AJ Dear Sir or Madam, Account Ref: ******************** Your Client: ******************** I wrote to you on the 28th September 2009 to address a number of issues. On the 21st October 2009 I received a letter from you that failed to answer any of the issues raised in my letter. For reference, please find attached a copy of my original letter. In my original letter, I requested that you send me a true copy of the original credit card agreement pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974. You failed to send a true copy of the credit agreement to me in the timeframe set out in the Consumer Credit Act. You claim it is my responsibility to write to the original creditor to request this document when this is not the case. As agents for the original creditor, it is your responsibility to send me a true copy of the original credit agreement when requested. As you have claimed otherwise, you have deliberately made a statement that is untrue. This is irresponsible and will not be tolerated. If it is your view that you are not the creditor, Section 175 of the CCA 1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor. As such, you have breached Section 175 of the CCA 1974. ######################################### Standard 'account in dispute' bit ######################################### Furthermore, you are aware that the Consumer Credit Act allows 12 working days for a request for a true copy of a credit agreement to be carried out before your client enters into a default situation. This limit has expired. As you are no doubt aware section 78(6) states: If the creditor fails to comply with Subsection (1) (a) He is not entitled , while the default continues, to enforce the agreement. Therefore this account has become unenforceable at law. As you have failed to comply with a lawful request for a true, signed copy of the said agreement and other relevant documents mentioned in it, failed to send a full statement of the account and Failed to provide any of the documentation requested. You will also be aware of the CPUTR 2008 and the OFT's guidelines on debt collection which state under the title Deceptive and/or unfair methods - Examples of unfair practices are as follows - 2.8 (i) - 'Failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued'. (k) - 'Not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonable queried or disputed debt'. Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both UNLAWFUL and VEXATIOUS. Furthermore I shall counterclaim that any such action constitutes unlawful harassment. Please note you may also consider this letter as a statutory notice under section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any data in relation to this account with immediate effect. This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and from my records with any credit reference agencies. Should you refuse to comply, you must within 21 days provide me with a detailed breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data. It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’; You must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends. Should you not respond within 14 days I expect that this means you agree to remove all such data. Furthermore you should be aware that a creditor is not permitted to take ANY Action against an account whilst it remains in dispute. The lack of a credit agreement is a very clear dispute and as such the following applies. You may not demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you. You may not add further interest or any charges to the account. You may not pass the account to a third party. You may not register any information in respect of the account with any credit reference agency. You may not issue a default notice related to the account. ######################################### End of standard 'account in dispute' bit ######################################### In your letter dated 25th September 2009 you claimed to have confirmed my occupancy with a major public utility. I asked that you justify this statement with evidence of such or admit to me in writing that you included a statement in your letter that you know to be untrue. You have failed to do this, in fact you completely ignored my request and made no mention of it in your most recent reply. This is utterly irresponsible and evidence that you are clearly unwilling to answer my legitimate requests will be presented to a court of law when required. Section 2.1 of the Office of Fair Trading – Debt Collection Guidance states: 2 UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES Communication 2.1 It is unfair to communicate, in whatever form, with consumers in an unclear, inaccurate or misleading manner. By using the statement, ‘We have confirmed your occupancy with a major public utility’ you have clearly communicated with me in a misleading manner and as such have breached the guidance referred to above. In August I wrote to all of my creditors and their appointed representatives to inform them that they should direct all correspondence directly to the Insolvency Practitioner working to assist me with my financial affairs. You ignored this request and continued to harass me with your repeated requested for payment in full of the alleged debt. Because of this you are also in breach of Section 2.8© and 2.8(d) of the Office of Fair Trading – Debt Collection Guidance. The relevant sections are detailed below. Deceptive and/or unfair methods 2.8 Examples of unfair practices are as follows: c. Refusing to deal with appointed or authorised third parties, such as Citizens Advice Bureaux, independent advice centres or money advisers. d. Contacting debtors directly and bypassing their appointed representatives. I request you clarify your position on the breaches of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and OFT Guidance directly to me within seven days. The harassment suffered as a result of your companies incompetence and failure to adhere to the guidance set out in the OFT Debt Collection Guidance has caused my partner and myself great distress. I hope you feel that you are able to address and avoid ignoring the issues contained in this letter. The fact that you ignored the issues in your reply to my last letter proved beyond doubt that you are acting improperly. I wish to avoid commencing legal action but feel that should you fail to address the issues contained in this letter to my satisfaction I will have no choice but to instruct my solicitors to commence legal proceedings. I very much look forward to receiving your reply, Yours Faithfully, Gentleman that does no longer sign his name.

And finally a reply from Moorcroft. http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/6334/moorcroftdr.jpg I'm absolutely furious that these people have completely ignored the content of my previous letter to them (above). I'm sure they are breaching the OFT Guidelines on debt collection by using statements that are untrue on their correspondance with me, I'm going to get stuck into some serious reading shortly. Is the conent of this letter correct - is it my responsiblity to contact the original creditor for the CCA request? I'm also wording a reply, any further input will be greatly appreciated. Thanks as always - billy.

Thanks for the prompt reply diskmandave. To be honest, my original letters contained just about that paragraph as recommended also by my IP, the rest is simply fluff to keep them busy for a couple of weeks. The trouble I found is the creditors are not legally obliged to communicate direct with my IP until the IVA is in place (afaik - please correct me), and all but one so far have ignored my requests to direct their correspondance to my IP. It really annoys me how, even after being advised that we're (my IP and myself) are trying to sort out a proposal for the creditors, I have to put up with daily 'Notice of Intended Lititgation' letters. Again, I intend to make an offer to repay the debt via an IVA - the CCA bit is pretty irrelevant but keeps em busy! The DPA bit is in there just to see what response I get back for the benefit of other people really, I noticed from a quick google it's on a lot of letters sent from Moorcroft.

And my reply: Dear Sir or Madam, Account Ref: **** **** **** **** Your Client: Royal Bank of Scotland PLC Further to your letter dated 25th September 2009, please be advised that you will not call to my home to collect any debt. Any communication regarding this debt should be sent directly to the insolvency practitioner working to assist me with my financial affairs. A proposal to repay any debt that you claim is owed will be made as soon as it is reasonably practical to do so. Your client has already been made aware of this and has continued to harass me. Please find attached a further instruction for you to deal directly with my insolvency practitioner. Furthermore, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make such an appointment with you. Should you ignore this, I assure you I will call the police and have any offending doorstep callers removed from my property. There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v Sheppard & Short Ltd [1959] 2 QB 384 per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and, if you do so, you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance. With regard to the fact that you claimed to have confirmed my occupancy with a major public utility, I note that you fail to disclose which public utility. I fail to see how this can be achieved without breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 and request that you send me the following information to allow me to consider bringing possible litigation against your company. Information I request: ·The name and position of Person from your company requesting my occupancy details from the Public Utility ·The name of the Public Utility in question ·The name and position of the person who confirmed my occupancy from the Public Utility ·The contact details of all relevant parties ·The date the confirmation of occupancy took place ·The means by which the above information was requested and received ·Copies of all communications sent and received by your company Further information may be requested from my solicitor. Reply only with the above details, do not reply with your opinion as to whether a breach of the Data Protection Act 1998 has taken place. Should you fail to respond to me with the above information, it will be assumed that the Notice of Intended Litigation received from yourselves (Dated 25/09/09 Ref: ***********************) deliberately contains statements that are untrue. This would of course be reflected in my vigorous defence of any litigation brought by your company. Also, this letter is a formal request pursuant to s.78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. I require you to provide me with a true copy of the credit agreement relating to the above account, together with any other documentation the Act requires you to provide. I expect you to comply fully and properly with this request, within the statutory time limit. You are reminded that should you fail to comply with my request, the provisions of s.77(6) will apply. If it is your view that you are not the creditor, s.175 of the CCA 1974 applies in the case of a simple assignment, and places a duty upon you to pass this request to the creditor. In the case of an absolute assignment, you are a creditor as defined by s.189. If you contend that you purchased the rights but not the duties of any agreement, you are reminded that s.189 of the Act is clear that an assignment is of both rights and duties. Your attention is drawn to ss.5(2), 3(b),6 and 7 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPUTR). I enclose a postal order in the sum of £1.00, which is the statutory fee. Note that these funds are not to be used for any other purpose. If you are unable to comply fully and properly with this request, you should confirm this in writing at the earliest opportunity, and certainly within the statutory time limit for compliance, and return the fee. The information I request in this letter should be sent directly to me at the following address: Mr Billy Bob Address: ***************** Yours faithfully, Mr B Bob

To cut a long story short, I'm in the later stages of applying for an IVA and still receiving numerous letter per day from my creditors. I was hoping I could post the latest here along with my reply for some critique? Hopefully my IVA proposal will be accepted as and when, in the meantime I'm just fending off the creditors daily 'Notice of Intended Litigation' letters and I hope me posting some examples here might help someone else doing the same. Please see the following for the latest letter from Moorcroft Debt Recovery: http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/4749/moorcroft.jpg

Just a quick question if you don't mind me asking - who was the solicitor that acted for you on a no win no fee basis and how did you approach them? I have no intention of making a complaint to the useless FOS and like the idea of the County Court route, I would just like some more information before I start proceedings. Thanks in advance and congratulations btw, billy.