Telephone Harassment Letters Respected.

[JOSH_IOU]

pmsl at good will gesture there covering there asses

[JOSH_IOU]

Sounds like there actually inviting you to send them a harassment letter lol

[JOSH_IOU]

Office of Fair Trading debt collection guidance

 

 

Creditors are warned by the Office of Fair Trading under the Debt Collection Guidance that the following practices are "considered unfair":

 

IT IS UNFAIR TO COMMUNICATE, IN WHATEVER FORM, WITH CONSUMERS IN AN UNCLEAR, INACCURATE OR MISLEADING MANNER.

 

This includes:

 

Letters that look like court claims Not making it clear who the company is or what their role is Unhelpful legal language Not giving balance statements about the debt when asked Contacting you at unreasonable times even when asked not to Asking you to contact them on premium rate phone numbers.

 

THOSE CONTACTING DEBTORS MUST NOT BE DECEITFUL BY MISREPRESENTING THEIR AUTHORITY AND/OR THE CORRECT LEGAL POSITION.

 

This includes:

 

Claiming to work for the court or be a bailiff Implying action can be taken that is not legally possible such as implying they could take your property Using a business name or logo that implies they are a government body Implying that court action has been taken against you when it hasn’t Implying not paying your debt is a criminal offence Threatening to take court action in England if you live in Scotland or the other way round.

 

PUTTING PRESSURE ON DEBTORS OR THIRD PARTIES IS CONSIDERED TO BE OPPRESSIVE

 

This includes:

 

 

Contacting you too frequently

Pressurising you to sell property or take out more debt

Using more than one collection company at the same time or not telling you when your debt has been passed to another company

Pressurizing you to pay in full or in large installments you cannot afford Making threatening gestures or statements

Ignoring disputes about whether you owe the money

Trying to embarrass you in public or threatening to tell a third party about your debts such as a neighbour or your family.

 

DEALINGS WITH DEBTORS ARE NOT TO BE DECEITFUL AND/OR UNFAIR

 

Examples include:

 

Sending letters addressed to “the occupier” or discussing the debt with someone without knowing if they are you

Refusing to deal with an adviser acting on your behalf

Not accepting reasonable offers or passing on payments you make

Refusing to freeze action if you dispute the debt.

 

CHARGES SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED UNFAIRLY

 

Examples include:

 

 

Claiming collection costs when the original credit agreement didn’t allow this to happen and making you think you are legally liable for the costs

Not putting the specific amounts that can be added for collection costs in the original credit agreement

Adding unreasonable charges.

 

THOSE VISITING DEBTORS MUST NOT ACT IN AN UNCLEAR OR THREATENING MANNER

 

Collectors should explain the reason for any visit and give you notice of the time and date they will call

They shouldn’t visit if they know you are ill or vulnerable and if they find you are unwell or distressed they should leave

They should not come in if you do not want them to and should leave when you ask them to

They shouldn’t visit you at work or somewhere like a hospital.

[JOSH_IOU]

lol thanks Josh, my bedtime reading is the OFT's guidance on debt collection !!

 

Hey 42 man.

 

Thats just a start ( a summary) if you want some bedtime reading here goes.

 

But unless the account is in default they don't apply.

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

[JOSH_IOU]

this may interest you

 

Bank customer wins 'harassment' fight | This is Money

[JOSH_IOU]

Tell them in writing you will only communicate in writing and only on the subject of the penalty charges I assume have been added to your account.

[JOSH_IOU]

lol wha?

[JOSH_IOU]

;)wait till they send letters then move onto the adminstration of justice act 1970 section 40

[JOSH_IOU]

Remind them of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 Section 40.

 

Due to the nature of the calls and the frequency of the calls they would apear to be in breach of this section of the act.

 

An argument could be made in the banks favour that they were saving money phoneing you. Which they were but because of the frequency of the calls they are in breach of this section of the act.

 

Have they sent you any letters yet?

[JOSH_IOU]

big deal or no deal if they are calling you and acting unlawfull you have the right to complain.

 

If they phone once and dont return the calls then this isnt effectively harrasment as the matter must have existsed twice. (ie you must have been called more than twice.)

 

One thing to look at is If the manner of the call was the same as the previous call you may have grounds to launch harrasment proceedings. Normally police will only intervene if you are being harrased on the door step or there is an immediate danger to life. In which case the dca will be long gone b4 he gets here.

 

You have to talk to the police like banks to be honest You have to quote the law. But you may be better aproaching Trading Standards than the police. unless they threten you at the door of course because trading standards will laugh and say this is a criminal matter. (ie they want ya to go to the police.)

 

Like i said if they called just the once then stopped. Bibs ya uncle cus that all you want them to do.