CCA, DCAs and the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive

[foolishgirl]

Thanks for filling in the details Sosumi - now I understand. Guess you've now learnt the hard way never to disturb a sleeping lion?

I am assuming that you've seen that MS did actually have an enforceable agreement before entering Payment Plan? Now, just a suggestion but have you SAR'd Goldfish recently to get up to date statements (as all you have is a payment book) & also demand copies of default notice (as per PF's post) & NOA. You might be able to cut a deal with Cabot/Goldfish based on '£200 is all I have in the world guv & I can afford nothing more than the monthly payments' line or if you think the £80.00 the total balance, can you afford to pay this off? At least it would get rid them even if it doesn''t seem fair but then who said life is ever fair? However I would ensure you get written confirmation that this is definitely a F&F deal before paying anything over.

[foolishgirl]

Sosumi, think you may be hijacking this thread - just noticed you've got a Cabot thread going, will track you there...

[sosumi]

Thanks for your replies ( Ren).

I'll link to my new Cabot thread and post up there what I wrote here last night -

Sosumi vs Cabot

[Strand08]

[quote=babybear39;15654

 

What the new directive means is that any DCA chasing an alledged debt got lumbered with the rights of the original creditor, whether they own the debt or not, with regard to compliance with CCA requests from 26th May 2008

 

The OFT can now give guidance to enforcement officers (TS) with the backing of legal opinion that DCAs DO have the SAME responsibilities as the OC

 

Basically, if they don't comply with the timescales, they can and SHOULD be prosecuted

 

Lets get this important thread back on track. So after 12 +2 working days and then 30 calendar days and no CCA from the DCA (if requested after 26th May) we should report the DCA to Trading Standards. The TS should prosecute the DCA with the new directive as quoted by BB (above). What about the OFT. Do we inform them as well? Is there a template letter for this? I feel this thread is very important going forward with the fight against non compliant DCA's. Hope you can clarify these points for me and future CAG's. Keep up the good work BB and many thanks.

[creditcardmug]

subbing

[Strand08]

bump

[Strand08]

bump.

[Hopeful1]

Lets get this important thread back on track. So after 12 +2 working days and then 30 calendar days and no CCA from the DCA (if requested after 26th May) we should report the DCA to Trading Standards. The TS should prosecute the DCA with the new directive as quoted by BB (above). What about the OFT. Do we inform them as well? Is there a template letter for this? I feel this thread is very important going forward with the fight against non compliant DCA's. Hope you can clarify these points for me and future CAG's. Keep up the good work BB and many thanks.

 

Hi Strand

 

Whenever i make complaints i clearly state what my complaint is.

I bullet point the dates of letters sent / received. I then attach copies of all relevant info.

 

I then quote any relevant legislation or guidance eg the info BB has provided, OFT debt collection guidelines etc.

 

When making complaints, TS for example, like you to have exhausted the companies internal complaints procedure.

[stripper]

I'm with you on this.They act like a dog with no teeth.No bite,jus suck you to death!

[Strand08]

Hi Hopeful1, would you advise going through the complaint procedure of the DCA before getting in touch with the TS. If the DCA is not compliant with the CCA and they admit this, they would have to close the account. Would many people still take up their case with TS after the DCA has failed to comply. We should fight the cause so the DCA have to be in possesion of a CCA agreement before they hound people for a debt. DCA's should as a matter of fact have all the legal necessaries before they contact people and be able to provide as such when challenged. What are the views of other CAG's. What are we looking to achieve here. Yes, in the short term we want the DCA;s to suffer. What are the long term implications. I would like as I have said that DCA's be accountable with all the legal necessaries before approaching people.

[foolishgirl]

I'm with you on that one Strand. After all would an individual commence the prelims to legal action without adequate proof?

I also think it would be a good idea if a law could be introduced prohibiting the application of further interest & charges (unless occurred as a result of court action) after the OC has passed it to a DCA & also selling/passing on for collection of debts to others more than a designated number of times eg. 3 . This would prevent OCs & DCAs shuffling the pack, cherry picking the ones they fancied & as a result continually hounding the alleged debtor.

[Fighting-Fit]

I'm with you Strand also "We should fight the cause so the DCA have to be in possession of a CCA agreement before they hound people for a debt. DCA's should as a matter of fact have all the legal necessaries before they contact people and be able to provide as such when challenged." Now legislation has changed (evidence provided by BB) we should use this to bring about not just fines for DCA's but more change in legislation. DCA's should not be able to hound people in the first instant without the proof from the onset. Foolishgirl makes an excellent couple of points which I strongly agree with.

"After all would an individual commence the prelims to legal action without adequate proof?"

"I also think it would be a good idea if a law could be introduced prohibiting the application of further interest & charges (unless occurred as a result of court action) after the OC has passed it to a DCA & also selling/passing on for collection of debts to others more than a designated number of times eg. 3 . This would prevent OCs & DCAs shuffling the pack, cherry picking the ones they fancied & as a result continually hounding the alleged debtor". Lets take this fight beyond name calling DCA's and make them accountable and stop this harassment of people in an unfortunate position. Great thread guys. 8-)

[Strand08]

DCA or Debt purchaser's as Lowell's moleinside calls them are people who have sold their souls. It is immoral to chase people for debts without the proof IE the CCA in the first instant. We will collectively fight you and the legislation that governs you.

[Strand08]

We have been infiltrated by an employee of Lowells on CAG this evening. Going by the name mole-inside my guess is it's Nigel Beaven. This is a quote from him.

If you don't believe you owe the debt, request original statements as per CCA, I think a lot of you actually owe the debts and just have no intention of paying it off, (time wasting tactics like talking rubbish about Jesus down the phone doesn't help either of you, DUH!)

 

 

Oh, and Nigel Beaven has been within Lowell Group (Head of their 'Special Projects' department to be precise) since day 1, knows his stuff, and if I'm honest, can be helpful to have on your side if you get the privilege of having him on the phone!

 

Oh, and in case you didn't guess, I work with one of the Lowell Group's companies...any further questions...?

Just thought I would share that with you all.

[JonCris]

Don't forget to share this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/theoneshow/article/2008/06/dld_debtletters.shtml

[Fighting-Fit]

Thank's for the link JonCris . It looks like the DCA's are running scared. There is no better time to fight these people than now. The oneshow programme could help turn the TS's plan of action against DCA's to a more proactive stance. If we can keep the ball rolling and use the new legislation on this thread (thanks BB) we can defeat the malpractice and underhand tactics by these people.

[ODC]

Obviously the MOLE has left the building. No doubt sitting in the Enterprise House Threat Centre bullying people on the phone.

[citizenB]

Don't forget to share this

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/theoneshow/article/2008/06/dld_debtletters.shtml

 

Thanks for this link JonCris:)

[babybear39]

Well, I'm back and ready to fight with you all.

 

Thanks for the link JC

[foolishgirl]

Welcome back BB. Great thread, excellent research. Thank you.

[babybear39]

Thanks FG

 

After what I put up with from DCA **** it is one of my main aims in life to see these ***** made accountable and go under

[ScarletPimpernel]

I note that the OFT now includes this:

 

When the OFT is considering a licence application, or monitoring fitness after it has issued a licence, some of the issues it takes into account are:

 

• failure to comply with any of the requirements of the Act or associated

regulations

• failure to comply with the provisions of the Consumer Protection from

Unfair Trading Regulations 2008

 

In its 'Do you need a Credit Licence' guidance for businesses.

[JonCris]

Great now all we need is someone with bottle to enforce it

[fuzzybobble]

Thanks FG

 

After what I put up with from DCA **** it is one of my main aims in life to see these ***** made accountable and go under

 

I'll go with that one too BB. I'd like nothing more for these ****** DCA's finally hauled over the coals for the misery they have caused to millions of people over the years.

 

It will be a great day when we get our first DCA shut down through the hard work of the people on here. Not to mention the shockwaves it would cause through the DCA industry that they could be next if they don't stop their constant disregard of the law and OFT guidelines.

[babybear39]

Thanks for your valued support FB.

 

Spread the word