Jump to content

Lima Bean

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

    14
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Lima Bean

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. That's interesting and helpful. Thanks. I'll run all this by my friend and post an update soon as I can.
  2. That's useful. If the points raised are naïve, it's because it's new territory and why I came on here. For advice. At least your replies are clear and concise and you appear to have read the initial post. Thanks
  3. Thanks. That sounds like good advice. It's just very inconvenient to the person being hounded. If TalkTalk played fair from the start we wouldn't even be having this conversation and my friend wouldn't be angry about a debt she doesn't owe and having to deal with letters and demands from companies she has no business with. I do believe the laws and regulations will change for the better, eventually. Andyorch - she will not enter into a dialogue with the debt collectors. Will a court claim come via the courts and require a postal signature ? What I mean is, will it
  4. Truth is, whilst everybody acknowledges the case looks suspect, we first need to establish a little proof. TalkTalk are holding back copies of letters and communications and sent an incomplete SAR. The ICO are now on that. Ofcom are asking if TalkTalk has acted Fairly, Accurately and Professionally, so I guess they're in trouble there too, because they haven't. Plus a few other people seem to be saying what we have said all along - that the debt sounds both unlawful and unreasonable. I wonder how many times TalkTalk does this to people. I'm finding more
  5. I'm not sure who owns it. Apparently the debt has now changed hands 3 times. It's almost as though even the debt collectors realise they're on dodgy ground and cannot prove the debt and so are selling it on. TalkTalk has been rude and useless throughout the entire dispute. Passed from one employee to another. None of whom appear to understand English or the basic principles involved. Hit them with an SAR and ask a direct question and they 'Deadlock' the case. Hope if Corbyn does get in the laws will change and these companies are hit with fi
  6. From the T & C's that TalkTalk issued. The Right To Refuse the service if it or the equipment is not up to standard. My friend's service was not even connected. I repeat, It Did Not Go Live. According to TalkTalk's own current T & C's, a service only comes into effect when it goes live. In that case there is no bill to pay. My friend cancelled, in writing, within the 30 Days before she was even connected. The 30 Days shouldn't even really matter here as they only count once the service has gone live. TalkTalk has acted unlawfully. As for GDPR b
  7. That's right, I don't understand. Which is why I am on here appealing for advice and information. What I do know is that there is NO debt. The service did not go live. The only thing which is flawed is TalkTalk's existence as a provider and it's unexplained motives for creating a debt, sending it to a derelict property and then selling it on to a debt collector. Sounds like a big con to me. As for your advice dx100uk, whilst your efforts are appreciated, your interpretation of my original post is indeed flawed. Please read it again and then if
  8. As I mentioned in my original post, TalkTalk are the company at fault. It is TalkTalk which sent letters and bills to a derelict property. A property which at the time was apparently frequented by construction workers by day and drug users and vandals at night. They then created a debt and sold it to a company. Apparently the debt collector needs to prove that the debt is legal. As for the DCA's, she isn't even entering into discussion with them. She's not afraid of them. She just believes it is outrageous that her personal details are being shared and sold between
  9. Thanks dx100uk Would you happen to know what the law is regarding the debt itself ? It's for a service which was never connected. Never went live. TalkTalk confirmed the Direct Debit had been cancelled, with no argument and with the account £21 in credit. They then created a cancellation debt and sent the bills for this to a derelict property. My friend had no knowledge of these bills or rising debt until she served TalkTalk with an SAR recently. How can she be expected to pay for a service which never went live ? She claims she can
  10. She has received a letter demanding payment. Is this a letter of claim ? She will not enter into any discussion with a third party to whom she has no business or obligation. Apologies if my perception of DCA procedure is flawed. She has never been pursued for debts in the past so it's new territory. I think my friend takes exception to receiving demands for a service she never received, 3 years later, after initially being £21 in credit, from a company she has no business with. As I understand it, TalkTalk even stored and shared her friend's telephone num
  11. Can anybody please help ? My friend left TalkTalk in good faith because they could not connect her service at her new address. She cancelled with them, £21 in credit. Three years later she receievd a demand out of the blue for £336. The service never went live. All bills were sent to her old address. TalkTalk allowed this bill to accumulate, unbeknown to my friend, and then sold it to a debt collection agency. Only, this time, they supplied the debt collector with the new address. My friend's personal data has now been s
×
×
  • Create New...