Catalogue Company Ignoring Me - Defaults Registered

[biggeorge]

Been having loads of trouble with a catalogue company,JD Williams, Any advice will be grafefully received.

 

Long Story,Sorry

 

Opened an account in August 06 and purchased a few items, Paid the bills

as they came in, minimum payment or a bit extra if I had it.

Then wife ordered a corner unit for bathroom, Delivery came while we were out and suprised to see a nice new rug when I got home.

 

Phoned company up told em, They said I had to return and would send return slip, Never came, Phoned again 7 days later, Will send slip for return.

Never received the slip to return rug but I had been charged for my bathroom corner unit.

 

Since then I have written asking for the rug to be picked up and my corner unit delivered or the charge taken off my account.

 

Never got anywhere, Never repied to my letters and then started with a debt collector sending me letters with stupid amounts I owed.

 

My first letter in November 06 stated, and all letters I have sent since then

(14 in total) that I would pay the balance I owe in full once the mistake had been rectified and my account adjusted.

Just had the same rubbish off the debt collector and nothing from the catalogue company, Each time both charging me £12 for administration.

 

I have wrote to:

 

Catalogue: 14 times (Have copies all showing my offer to pay in full)

Debt Collecter: 10 times

 

My original debt for goods,not including my bathroom unit was £119, Both companies now claim I owe £450+

 

Each letter I received from either company with an adminstration charge

applied was replied to with the same £12 administration charge I occurred.

 

I have now finally started to get back on my feet and checked my credit file, since Nov 06 to the present I have defaults from the catalogue company.

 

Is there anything I do about the defaults?

 

What can I do about the Catalogue Company?

Who do I complain to about them?

 

Any advice gratefully received..

 

George

[Mariner]

Hi BigGeorge,

 

I,m sure some body who knows what they are talking about will be along to advise you in the morning but I am fairly new to this forum and as such could'nt possibly advise you. However I am certain you have nothing to worry about! There are people on this forum who will tell you exactly what to do about this idiocy you are getting.

 

All the best

[jpf104]

BigGeorge

 

1. Which DCA is chasing you - is it Reliable Collections?
   
2. Did you sign an agreement?
   
3. Did you ever receive a 'Default' notice?
   

If the answer to 2 and 3 is no (which it probably is) then you'll want to send a CCA request to them. Once we have the full picture there are many good people here who can help you.

Edited May 30, 2008 by jpf104

[gni03349]

If you receive unsolicited goods, you can demand that the sender pick them up otherwise after a period of time they become yours. I'm not sure what happens after such a long period of time, but you have tried to return them.

 

You have great grounds to take THEM to court... you have all the letters... the judge would see you tried to return the unwanted item(s), and he would most likely rescind the default. Now, if you can prove that you have been invonvenienced by the default, you can also claim damages.

 

Just something to think about.

[biggeorge]

Hi Guys, Thanks for the replies,

 

1. Which DCA is chasing you - is it Reliable Collections?
   
2. Did you sign an agreement?
   
3. Did you ever receive a 'Default' notice?
   

1: YES Reliable Collections

2: No opened account online

3: No never received any default notice

 

I did issue a Cease & Desist letter to them in April and that actual seems to have done the trick, Only had 1 more letter off them since.

Reliable Collections that is.

 

Will look into sending a cca request as soon as I finish typing.

 

Many thanks, Any further wizdom gratefully received

 

George

[jpf104]

Once you CCA them this is what will probably happen (if my dealings with them are anything to go by):

They'll say they send all 'customers' a copy of the agreement when they open an account.

They'll try to stall you or send you worthless documents purporting to be agreements.

When eventually they see the light they usually come up with this cracker - Even though they can't produce a valid CCA agreement a 'debt is still a debt and it will remain on your credit file for six years'. Heaven help us!!!

 

 

You'll then have to go through round two to get removal of unlawful CRA defaults and deal with Data Protection Act issues i.e.

Ramifications of no agreement therefore no permission to process data, no legal basis to enforce by way of CRA entries, threaten court action.

I'm currently in the latter part of this stage so keep in touch.

Good luck.. well luck plays no part in this as I'm sure you're aware!

[biggeorge]

Hi Guys, Finally got a letter back from Reliable Collections Ltd after I CCA them.

 

Looks like I have them from the main letter, The agreement they have sent does not comply, Will post some images up later, No scanner.

 

Bottom of letter it says:

 

The absence of an executed agreement will effect our ability to pursue this matter through the courts, But not our right to seek payment through our normal collections methods, Short of court proceedings.

 

If, however, It is your decision not to make further payments to the account on the basis that the signed credit agreement has not been provided, Collections activity will cease, Though we would like to make it absolutely clear to you that should you take the decision not to make any further payments to the account, Your non-payment will be reported to the relevant credit reference agencies, Which will remain for a period of 6 years.

 

We await hearing from you.

 

------------------------END------------

 

What now, These gits have been putting defaults each month on my credit file, Any template letters I can grab.

 

Regards

 

George

[jpf104]

Result! Its the standard BS Unreliable send. The upshot is - they cannot default you if no agreement exists or ever existed. They will default your credit file and will not remove anything unless you take them to court. I am just about to start proceedings against them myself. I'll post you my POC so you might consider the same action. in the meantime I'll dig out the letter I sent them after I had the same response you did. will post later.

[biggeorge]

Cheers jpf104, Need to get these defaults removed.

 

George

[jpf104]

I will furnish you with what i have submitted (birthday celebs tonight hangover AM:eek:) Will post around 3pm tomorrow. Watch this sapce

[Dipply75]

Subbing ; )

[biggeorge]

Have no scanner so had to take some pics.

 

The letter I received when I sent my CCA off to:

JD Williams & Reliable Collections:

 

Reply is from Reliable Collections.

 

Very large images or use web page which includes some smaller images

 

Direct Links:

 

Letter Page 1:

http://www.marshall-hosting.co.uk/cag/reliablecollections1.JPG

 

Letter Page 2:

http://www.marshall-hosting.co.uk/cag/reliablecollections2.JPG

 

Agreement 1:

http://www.marshall-hosting.co.uk/cag/agreement1.JPG

 

Agreement 2:

http://www.marshall-hosting.co.uk/cag/agreement2.JPG

 

 

Web Page with thumbs

Untitled Document

 

 

George

[biggeorge]

Hi guys, small update.

 

I wrote to JD Williams with a letter I got from here regarding removal of the defaults they have put on my credit file.

Just got this reply back from them through Equifax:

 

Reply:

 

We do not agree to the removal of the information which we have recorded in relation to this customer.

 

The customer claims not to have signed the credit agreement which was sent to him at the time he opened his account. We are unable at this time to locate a signed copy of his credit agreement and can therefore, neither prove or disprove this claim. However, the customer is making a connection between the existence of a credit agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the requirement for this company to obtain consent to process its customers data under the Data Protection Act 1998. There is no such connection and the customer's allegation that no signed credit agreement exists, which is denied, is irrelevant in establishing whether consent to process data exists under the Data Protection Act 1998 as we obtain our consent process independently and separately from any decision to offer credit. We obtain our consent to process personal data at the time a customer applies for one of our catalogues or opens an account. There is no Data Protection rubric concerning processing of your data in our Consumer Credit Agreement. The application that the customer completed at the time he requested one of our catalogues or opened his account would have contained a very comprehensive notification of the obvious and non-obvious uses to which we would put any personal data. This notice, inter-alia, will have notified the customer that, as part of our commitment to the responsible lending, we would record details of the manner which he conducted his account with a Licensed Credit Reference Agency.

 

Any and all information recorded by use in relation to this customer accurately reflects the operation of this customer's account.Our view remains that even if an agreement had not been signed (which is not admitted) there is still an agreement concerning the sale of goods. Goods have been purchased and delivered pursuant to the agreement and this information is contained in the customer's records. We believe that not to record the existence of this account would give potential lenders an inaccurate impression when lending decisions are being made and would not be conducive to responsible lending.

 

Any advise now guys on what to send or should I start proceedings in court?

 

 

Help please

 

Regards

 

Colin

[Coasters]

unbelievable!

 

Complaint to Information Commissioners Office surely? There are a few angles you can go for, a lack of a default notice must also be taken into consideration.

 

Not sure I understand your first post but did you recieve the corner unit and the unwanted rug or just the rug?

 

Were they signed for?

 

I find it incredible that they can claim ability to destroy a persons file without proof of a CCA or even if people recieved the goods. As you have had the decision refused I would contact TS, the Information Commissioners Office and FSO as you have tried to sort this out with the company involved.

 

Someone will be around in a moment though to give you gold advice

 

Good Luck!

Edited August 12, 2008 by Coasters

[biggeorge]

Hi Coasters,

 

Wife ordered the corner unit online and we were out when delivery was made,

Actual item delivered was a rug and not the corner unit we wanted, Daughter was at home so took delivery, not sure if it was signed for.

 

When I informed them of the mistake I was told they would have to investigate and get back to me in 4 weeks time.

 

Its been a long on going battle of letters and finally a few weeks back I got them to knock off £252 for each £12 letter they sent since I had written back each time with my own administration charges of £12.

 

Just wanting to get my credit file clean but have constant defaults from these people every month.

 

May look into now taking them to court, My credit rating has been damaged and I have suffered due to the credit I have been able to obtain having a higher interest that an alternative lender.

 

Vanquis credit card for starters then capital one, legal mugging

 

Will wait for some Gold advise as you put it as I want to be sure i'm writing to the correct people.

 

 

Colin

[Coasters]

Hello Colin

 

Ahh I get the whole picture now, sorry about that I can be a little slow after a day at work

 

That is disgusting and I know how frustrating it can be when you know the truth yet nobody at the company will believe you.

 

For starters I would personally issue a subject access request (£10) and see what these muppets have on file about you. Including, perhaps, exactly what was sent to your door including any 'proof' of delivery. F or example if the rug was cheap you might find it was just 'dropped off'. No proof of delivery, no claim from them anymore. Something you can easily prove.

 

It might add a little extra to your attack if you do issue court procedings (small claims). After all, defaults will kill your credit file and if that wasnt bad enough, the company and DCA have acted way out of line.

 

Thats what I would do for starters but I would still wait for the more experienced posters. The most important thing to note is that you CAN take them to court and with small claims it will not cost the earth.

 

Edited August 12, 2008 by Coasters

[Coasters]

Oh and as I said, also complain to the Information Commissioner right away and claim damages in court for breaches of the Data Protection Acts. (The ICO is not a punishing body and boy do they need punishment)

 

Technically they cannot default you I would have thought. But DCA's use a different set of laws everyone else has to abide by.

[biggeorge]

Hi guys just got off hols and received a reply to letter I sent to them that I got off here:

Anyone any pointers on what to do now,Possible letter to reply back with.

From what they say I think I have them on the run but i'm no expert.

 

letter I sent: Rather long read

 

21st July 2008

 

JD Williams & Company Ltd

40 Lever Street

M60 6ES

 

Account in Dispute

 

Ref:

Ref:

 

Reference unlawfully supplied information to CRA’s By JD Williams

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Please see enclosed letter I sent to you dated 21/07/08 regarding defaults been passed un-lawfully onto credit reference Agencies.

 

I informed you to stop processing my data which you have not done after checking my credit files with all 3 credit reference agencies, Experian, Equifax and Callcredit.

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

I wish to inform you that having disputed an account default entry on my credit file held by Callcredit (Credit Reference Agency) applied by JD Williams and demanded they remove it from my file as it has been unlawfully supplied, Callcredit have informed me that they cannot do so because JD Williams have confirmed it is lawfully supplied.

Under the Misrepresentation Act 1967 that is a negligent misrepresentative statement. JD Williams know full well and have known for a considerable length of time that it is not been lawfully supplied as without a lawful contract cannot use the only other option available “the legitimate interest condition” no lawful agreement …no legitimacy.

Negligent Misrepresentation

For negligent misrepresentation the burden of proof rests on the representee

To show that they had reasonable grounds for believing it to be true. This can

Be a heavy burden to discharge.

Fraudulent misrepresentation was defined by Lord Herschell in Derry v Peek

(1889) as a false statement that is "made (i) knowingly, or (ii) without belief in

Its truth, or (iii) recklessly, careless as to whether it be true or false.

I am totally disgusted and angry at the arrogance of JD Williams in this matter, which has caused me severe distress, anger, damage and frustration and still is causing me.

I advise that I fully intend to take action in the County Court against both JD Williams under section 13 of the Data Protection Act 1998 for (a) the unlawful supply of this default under the First Principle of the Data Protection Act 1998, and

Callcredit for (b) the acceptance of this data and the further processing and passing of it to third parties (publishing).

Schedule 11 The First Principle of the Act states that in order to process personal data the controller must fulfill at least one of the conditions of the First Principle, furthermore in order to process sensitive and confidential data they must also fulfill one of the conditions in Schedule 111 of the Act, banking information is considered confidential information. JD Williams and Callcredit will be named as joint Defendants as they are both data controllers proving my information.

I made a request under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (amended 2006) (CCA) for the supply of a copy of the executed agreement.

JD Williams were unable to comply with that request and still have not supplied that copy, therefore not only are JD Williams in default of the CCA, but they have also stated no agreement is available.

I strongly suggest that JD Williams offer a very substantial sum, in compensation for the issues and facts I state following;

JD Williams by being unable to supply a copy of the fully executed agreement cannot ask the court to enforce it under section 65 of the CCA, they have not applied to do this for reason JD Williams are fully aware that any attempt to enforce it would not succeed, section 127 of the CCA would prevent this. I paste here the Law Lords ruling on this issue. Taken from Wilson v First Counties Trust;

Quote;

Failure to comply with the duty to supply a copy of an executed or unexecuted agreement pursuant to sections 62 and 63 sections 127(4) precludes the court from making an enforcement order.

In effect, the creditor – by failing to ensure that he obtained a document signed by the debtor which contained all the prescribed terms – must (in the light of the provisions in sections 65(1) and 127(3) of the 1974 Act) be taken to have made a voluntary disposition, or gift, of the loan monies to the debtor. The creditor had chosen to part with the monies in circumstances in which it was never entitled to have them repaid.

I will submit to the court that having been previously advised that the agreement was unenforceable and I had also informed JD Williams in July 2007 that I had withdrawn my consent for them to process data about me, as can be done under the Data Protection Act 1998.

The default entry was entered whilst the account and agreement was in serious dispute

It will be noted that the original “alleged” default debt has not increased on my credit file, which IF there was a lawful CCA agreement were in place that would allow JD Williams to increase it by way of interest and JD Williams would most certainly have done so if that was possible, of that there is no doubt.

I paste here Guidance notes issued by the Information Commissioners Office regarding default entries on credit files

39: Records

Any default record should be accurate. We normally expect a lender to keep records that are necessary to show an agreement exists and to support filing a default. We would also expect a lender to be able to produce evidence to justify a default record they had placed on a credit reference file. Not having any supporting records may indicate a breach of the data protection principle requiring personal data to be adequate, relevant and not excessive for the purpose for which it is processed.

Is the lender prepared to take court action if not why not?

JD Williams do not intend and will not take action against me, because they hold no lawful enforceable agreement.

43:

If we conclude that there is a genuine, reasonable and unresolved dispute between the borrower and lender, then we are likely to find that personal data have been processed unfairly if a default has been filed. Defaults filed in these circumstances may also be inadequate for the purpose of credit referencing in that they do not provide meaningful information about the creditworthiness of the customer.

In the action that I now fully intend to take as I have now saved up enough money to have Counsel and a solicitor to represent me in Court. My warnings of Court action is not the warning of a “paper tiger”. It is a well known fact that Banks and financial institutions rely on the fact that most individual will not take action against them, I can say I am not one of those individuals. I am also a trade’s person.

I have suffered far too much damage this default has caused me for over 2 years and I will ask Counsel to stress to the court that under the circumstances this entry has been made maliciously, to cause as much damage to me as possible for reason that as JD Williams cannot take court action, have entered the default, have confirmed it is lawful on many occasions to the CRA’s when they are perfectly aware it is not.

I will submit the following case laws also

Kohporar V Woolwich relevant sections

Lord Morritt

It is abundantly clear, in my judgment, (see [1920] AC 102 at 112, [1918-19] All ER Rep 1035 at 1037 per Lord Birkenhead LC). The credit rating of individuals is as important for their personal transactions, including mortgages and hire-purchase as well as banking facilities, as it is for those who are engaged in trade, and it is notorious that central registers are now kept. I would have no hesitation in holding that what is in effect a presumption of some damage arises in every case, in so far as this is a presumption of fact.

I am also a trade’s person having a Computer Repair Business; therefore I will submit that the damage is double.

I will also refer to a more recent case

Durkin v RSG and HFC Bank.

Significant sections

1. Kpohraror confirmed that such damages were available to individuals who were not traders. In that case a cheque was dishonored and then the matter put right within 24 hours. Also in that case the plaintiff claimed both special damages and the general damages of £5,500. Lord Justice Evans said at page 124 "The credit rating of individuals is as important for their personal transactions, including mortgages and hire purchase as well as banking facilities, as it is for those who are engaged in trade, and it is notorious that central registers are now kept. I would have no hesitation in holding that what is in effect a presumption of some damage arises in every case in so far as this is a presumption of fact."

2. Evans LJ went on to consider the issue of special damages separately. There is, however, nothing in the judgment of Evans LJ to indicate that had the special damages claim been made out he would not have made an award in terms of the general damage claim. Lord Justice Waite and Sir John May each agreed in all respects with the judgment of Lord Justice Evans

3. The cases of Kpohraror, King and Wilson were all based on contract but it does not seem to me that there is any difference in principle between the nature of damages to be awarded in respect of a loss of credit brought about by a breach of contract, and one brought about by negligent misrepresentation.

4. In these circumstances and standing such a recent decision where the claims appear to have been treated as being capable of existing together, I find that the pursuer is entitled to an award for the general damage to his credit in addition to an award in respect of the actual loss flowed sustained. Having regard to all the circumstances I consider that an appropriate award would be £3,000.

Mitigation of loss.

5. The only case on record for the second defenders on the question of mitigation of loss is that the pursuer did not call upon the defenders to correct the entries that related to the pursuer's account with them. I am satisfied that he did this on many occasions. In his words he "pleaded` with them". The pursuer was cross examined about his failure to utilise the somewhat tortuous statutory notification procedures which were said to be open to him to have the registers changed. There was no evidence led to indicate how these matters were dealt with in practice, how long they took to reach a final conclusion or the likelihood of the pursuer being successful in utilising them. Given the total absence of record for the point and the lack of any evidence concerning it I disregard it. I am in any event quite satisfied that the pursuer believed he had done all he could do to get the registers corrected.

------------------------------

I have a voluminous amount of detailed correspondence to and from many sections of

JD Williams about this dispute and a letter informing me you will register with credit reference agencies the disputed account defaults.

I have much more evidence to support any claim I make, and I submit again that JD Williams offer a substantial sum of compensation and immediately remove all data from all credit reference agencies.

My success in court will assist other consumers and data subjects.

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

 

This is the 3 page reply I received back:

 

 

www.marshall-hosting.co.uk/JD/JDLETTER01.JPG

 

 

www.marshall-hosting.co.uk/JD/JDLETTER02.JPG

 

 

www.marshall-hosting.co.uk/JD/JDLETTER03.JPG

 

 

Any help will be gratefully received.

 

 

Regards

 

 

Colin