Jump to content


A second opinion? Buchanan Clark & Wells woes!


Savant
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6015 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I was looking for a second opinion when it came to dealing with some friendly letters I received from Buchanan Clark + Wells. It seems they think I owe Npower 100 quid, which I thought was odd because I've never had an account with Npower that I was aware of. But I was willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, absent minded as I am when it comes to my debts, and sent them a letter asking why I owe Npower any money.

 

They ignored the question, and sent another standard letter saying they would proceed with filing a court case against me if I didn't pay. A little annoyed, I sent an email, again asking for where the debt originated and telling them I wouldn't pay until they could tell me. There was no response to that...

 

And then yesterday they sent a letter saying that they were sending a Debt Investigation Officer for a 'personal visitation'. The wording they used was particularily sneaky...

 

'You were informed in our last correspondence of impending court action. Due to the lack of resolution, we must advise you that authority has been granted to proceed with a personal visitation by a Debt Investigation Officer.'

 

 

Which at first glance appeared to say that they had been granted authority from my local court to send a bailiff. I'm not quite sure that's what it does mean though... what they've essentially said is that they've just gotten their own authority to send their own employees to harrass me in person.

 

But I wanted a second opinion on whether my interpretation was indeed correct before I send them a final letter telling them their Debt Investigation Officer is not welcome and that I will persecute them for harrassment if they communicate with me again without first explaining where this debt originated. Also, would that be the best course of action assuming I don't have to worry about bailiffs knocking my door down? Can I persecute them for harrassment if they keep sending me letters like this (it isn't an idle threat!)?

 

Cheers for any help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh dear nice people BCW.

Seem to be barking up the wrong tree as ever.

 

try this:

 

Dear xxxxx

 

Ref xxxxxx

 

Thank you for your letter of xx/xx/2007, the contents of which are noted.

 

To date however, your company has ignored my requests for information that substantiates this alledged debt.

 

I would point out that I have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to NPower.

 

I am familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

 

I would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

 

I would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my/our liability for the debt in question.

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

 

With reference to your comments about someone visiting me at my home to collect payments, please be advised that I will only communicate with you in writing. Should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call” anyway, 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 an appointment with you.

 

There is only an implied license under 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 and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. 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, then you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance.

 

I trust this clarifies your position and mine.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

 

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

Yours faithfully,

Be VERY careful whose advice you listen too

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...