Link Financial have done a mass mailing of Default Notices re: assigned accounts.

[MAGDA]

what did your freedom of info request ask?

 

why were you asking?

 

If you read AC's post, she has already answered that question

And I am not saying you are a nutter, just that if you act in a certain way the authorities will think you are a nutter and will bin your complaint.

 

I honestly believe that the way in which a complaint in made can hinder the greater cause and can even damage it. I think that the criticism of some ts here falls into that category.

 

 

 

I think this comment is potentially libellous, and I hope that you have the evidence to back it up. If you do have the evidence I think it is very very serious and something should be done about it. Apply for Judicial Review, for example.

 

Kraken, why are you so bothered whether the comment is libellous or not? Why should it concern you, unless of course, you work for either TS or a DCA - back to our original question again???

[angry cat]

by kraken:

 

And I am not saying you are a nutter, just that if you act in a certain way the authorities will think you are a nutter and will bin your complaint."

 

It is the right of every British Subject to make a Freedom of Information Act Request, the making of one does not make the applicant a 'Nutter'. Furthermore, it would be an outrage if such a request was binned by the authority concerned, because of what personal belief they held/hold about the applicant...that would be discrimination.

 

Personally speaking, I have taken a case to court, the DJ most certainly did not consider me to be a 'Nutter', nor did he consider that I acted like a 'Nutter', as he made the Order and my case was won.

 

I have also had the experience of instructing two solicitors, been provided two separate counsels opinions, one of which is now a QC.

None, of the above professional parties deemed me to be a 'Nutter'.

 

I spend a lot of my valuable time on two consumer forums, attempting to assist people!

 

Why on earth are you so concerned?

If you are so concerned, I suggest you apply for a position with the Trading Standards Service.

 

AC

[Kraken1]

Kraken, why are you so bothered whether the comment is libellous or not?

 

Because this forum would pay the price. Think of the group, not yourself.

 

you work for either TS or a DCA - back to our original question again???

 

If my job is really that important to you, I'm a american car importer.

[MAGDA]

Because this forum would pay the price. Think of the group, not yourself.

 

Have you actually seen how many negative comments there actually are about MBNA etc and TS on this forum, therefore they must all be potentially libellous. I think the only person bothered by my comment is you.

 

If my job is really that important to you, I'm a american car importer.

 

 

No, your job isn't important, it's the fact that you have attempted to undermine this thread for no good reason, and therefore, it would appear that you are in the employ of one of these organisations, or perhaps you would like to be.....

 

I think we should now agree to disagree Kraken as this whole thing is not achieving anything positive for the thread.

 

Magda

[Kraken1]

turning to the point about the freedom of info request, my nutter comment was not addressed to that alone. It is everyone's right to make one. I think it is worth researching the issue first, so that you don't waste your time and others, but that is another debate. the whatdotheyknow site is useful. most requests appear to have been made before and I've never needed to because of there.

 

It would seem that my point about being a nutter has not been understood, so I'll try and clarify. I also think it is worth noting these points if you are serious about making complaints and want them taking seriously.

 

make a complaint. Grand. No problem. Make a second. Make a third providing an update. No problems.

 

But.

 

Make a freedom of info request as well, as a way of supporting your complaint or to find out what they have done about it

SAR them, for similar reasons to the above

complain about them

criticise them, in writing or here

complain about their decision making processes

 

and then you will become an irritant (or nutter) and the value of your actual complaint will become diminished. The issue will be what do they do about you, not what should they do about your complaint. Further, they will spend time and effort giving you information (or not) rather than investigating businesses; not a good use of my taxes and not what you really want when you think about it.

 

the comments made here about ts are not, in my opinion, helpful. We want these folk on our side, we want them to empathise with us, to understand us and to help us. If there really is a problem, and some hidden conspiracy, have a judicial review and sort it out for all of us. Don't just whine from the sidelines.

[MARTIN3030]

Original comments edited.

I have heard similar things said,although we have no proof that can substantiate this.

As a matter of caution therefore,I have replaced the word with something more acceptable.

[Kraken1]

The only comment I have seen is the one about ts having an ^^^^^^^ relationship with mbna. I doubt this is true and I think the criminally negligent or complicit implications are very unpleasant.

 

the rest of the comments about companies, I don't care about. I don't want them on my side.

 

No, your job isn't important, it's the fact that you have attempted to undermine this thread for no good reason, and therefore, it would appear that you are in the employ of one of these organisations, or perhaps you would like to be.....

I think you have completely missed my point and my intention. I don't think I have attempted to undermine this thread, just you and AC and your questionable tactics which I feel are counterproductive and don't help deal with the issues.

 

To be honest, I think that maybe you and AC are in the employ of a dca or bank. It is the only explanation for your conduct - you are attempting to devalue genuine complaints and grievances*.

 

 

 

 

 

* I don't really think this. I just think that you have let your hatred cloud your judgement.

Edited April 26, 2009 by MARTIN3030
Theres no need to quote things that needed edits.

[angry cat]

There was a mass complaint made to Chester Trading Standards about MBNA; Fact.

 

Many members from 4 consumer websites, including those from CAG participated in the complaint;

google: mass complaint about chester trading standards.

 

I did not start this thread in order to have it skuppered by inconsequential argument!

 

The thread was put in place to assist members who are experiencing problems with Link Financial, that is all.

 

So, unless anyone can post anything positive, please do not post on this thread.

 

AC

[angry cat]

by kraken:

just you (MAGDA) and AC and your questionable tactics which I feel are counterproductive and don't help deal with the issues."

 

WHAT???

 

I most certainly do not use questionable tactics!

 

Dismayed:(

 

Forget it, I will not post on here again.

 

AC

[Kraken1]

googled it as suggested, saw the thread. 31 posts. How many complaints did you get? If it was less than three times the number that posted then all you did was demonstrate that there were less than a hundred people that wanted to complain about them. I bet they say this as an endorsement! Out of 200 000 users, and thousands of posts a week, less than a hundred had a problem.

 

This is what I mean by counterproductive tactics.

 

The thread was put in place to assist members who are experiencing problems with Link Financial, that is all.

 

So, unless anyone can post anything positive, please do not post on this thread

 

This is what I'm trying to do, stop folk complaining in the wrong, emphasise the point that complaints need to made and that you should not assume that someone else is going to complain for you.

[heathrow]

Come on folks, let's try and cool this down and be positive.

 

It is clear that the DCA's do not always act in an honourable way; unfortunately through my own problems I have had a pretty hefty experience with them so I speak from experience but confess I wrote to Straw about the DCAs generally rather than bother with TS. Link is one of the DCAs who have been harassing me because they have been pursuing me for MBNA accounts that I had been trying to sort out directly with MBNA but (typcically) they (MBNA) refused to acknowledge or answer any correspondence. Then, all of a sudden, I heard from Link ... no prior warning or notification that MBNA had passed the accounts to them. Link then also threatened me over an account they claim I had with HSBC. I sent an CCA request concerning this fictitiois account that I knew I did not have; they failed to respond; I sent them a letter informing them that I have never, ever had any dealings with HSBCA ... they have ignored it and then ignored my threat to instigate legal proceedings them.

 

In view of the experiences that Angry Cat, myself and others have had, I think this amounts to some pretty concrete facts that Link are not playing by the rules. Now, as I see it, even if just one person complained about Link's activities, it should be properly looked into and not ignored or dismissed by OFT or TS. The OFT/TS are meant to protect the public's interests and it is surely their job to get to the bottom of things because, as a Government agency, they have more power than we do as individuals to investigate the facts. We can only tell them what we have experienced. As far as I know there is no stipulation that says they have to receive multi-complaints about a business before they follow up a complaint. At the end of the day the Law needs changing to prevent the banks from selling their responsibilities to DCAs. This is what Andrew Mackinlay MP has also suggested so maybe there is a slight glimmer of hope that somebody in the Commons is starting to take an interest. I have written to him pledging support and I suggest others so the same.

 

But, I do not doubt that lower level civil servants are failing in their duties, so too is the Minsitry of Justice for failing to even acknowledge my letters to Jack Straw and their department. I think more than four months is long enough to wait for any kind of reply so a letter is now going off to the Ombudsman responsible for monitoring Government departments (see Ombudsman.org) to try and prompt a reaction. As far as I am aware (and it might be worth checking the site) the Ombudsman is also responsible for complaints against the OFT so maybe this is the next course of action to take for those on the forum that have been poorly treated. When the general public fail to gain any response from those in public office it makes you angry and it is human nature to suspect underlying motives. If we don't keep hounding these public servants we will never be heard. It seems we are increasingly failling into a Katch 22 ... we are in a no win situation because if we hound them they are less inclined to act ... and if we don't hound them the situation remains the same. Maybe the local press should also be contacted in the areas where the TS offices are failing to act to see if they will investigate what is taking place because they are likely to have received complaints from others in their areas.

 

Angry Cat, despite the recent war of words, you have been contributing worthwhile posts to this site and hopefully you will continue to do so. If you leave now it will be a loss to the forum.

Edited April 26, 2009 by heathrow

[GamekeeperToPoacher]

I am sorry to say this as I am a true believer in free speech but I feel that this argument is going nowhere and perhaps a moderator should close the thread for the good of the site.

 

GK

[Kraken1]

but confess I wrote to Straw about the DCAs generally rather than bother with TS...

 

In view of the experiences that Angry Cat, myself and others have had, I think this amounts to some pretty concrete facts that Link are not playing by the rules.

 

This kinda proves my point. You have not complained to the right people. Nothing will happen. The MOJ do not regulate the debt industry, it is the OFT. Write to BERR, the OFT, TS, Gareth Thomas. Phone consumer direct. You might have 'concrete facts' of a problem but the people that matter do not. If they do not have concrete facts nothing will happen.

 

The message is clear - if you have a problem complain - to the right people!

 

 

 

 

Now, as I see it, even if just one person complained about Link's activities, it should be properly looked into and not ignored or dismissed by OFT or TS.

 

So if one person criticises your driving you should be fully investigated by the police? In the absence of any other evidence or complaint?

 

It is pointless. One complaint out of a million accounts or what ever. A s68 defence is almost an inevitability.

 

And again - we don't know complaints are dismissed. I imagine they are added to a file and when there are enough then action is considered.

 

We can only tell them what we have experienced. As far as I know there is no stipulation that says they have to receive multi-complaints about a business before they follow up a complaint.

 

I think it is common sense that you need more than one complaint. You need to show that it wasn't a mistake and they are deliberately playing fast and loose.

 

At the end of the day the Law needs changing to prevent the banks from selling their responsibilities to DCAs. This is what Andrew Mackinlay MP has also suggested so maybe there is a slight glimmer of hope that somebody in the Commons is starting to take an interest. I have written to him pledging support and I suggest others so the same.

 

I agree about the support. Only one other MP seemed vaguley interested. To be honest I'm not sure the debate helped. I watched it and thought that Gareth Thomas 'won'. The lack of support from the other mps shows that it is not something that they are interested in. I don't think they will be until it is a vote winner (or coster). Hence the need for a high number of complaints properly targetted. Get complaints about dcas to no 5 or so in the consumer direct top ten and then I think MPs opinions will change.

 

I personally don't think banning debt sale will help - fewer agreements will be lost, fewer debts will get written off* and collectors will get more aggressive as their margins will shrink and they will be on a percentage. All the purchasers will just turn in to subcontractors.

 

 

*I am not endorsing anyone trying to avoid debt, but I do think that hitting the pocket is a way to get them to shape up.

[angry cat]

Previously I stated that I would not post on here again.

But, because I have been asked to continue posting, I will do so for the sake of this long running thread.

 

The thread was started due to the bad business practice employed by Link Financial Limited.

Therefore, it woud be greatly appreciated if we can all get back to basics and discuss topics and issues that simply relate to Link.

 

Anyone can post but preferably ONLY members who have or, are experiencing problems with the firm...no disruptive infuences, please.

 

There are plenty of other threads running where, if so desired, members can enter into heated political arguments;

this thread is NOT one of them.

 

This thread is about Link Financial Limited!

 

AC

[heathrow]

Wecome back Angry Cat; you are correct in what you say. Kraken; for informaton purposes I had heard (I can't recall now from where ... but I believe it was directly from my local Conservative MP) that Jack Straw had shown an interest in restructuring the laws relating to debt collection activities, hence why I wrote to him. It might be a vote grabber or something but who knows? The whole thing is a mess at the end of the day but people's lives should not be damaged by the lack of integrity of the companies that fail to obey the rules. However K, I appreciate what you have said ... ie two swallows don't make a summer or whatever the term is, and much of it has been correct about needing evidence etc but it is just that I tend to believe the OFT has had quite a lot of evidence already but who can quanitfy this? There has also been a lot of wasted court time over these kind of issues and at the end of the day, if the DCAs can't prove their case the tax payer foots the bill for much of this.

 

What we need to do now, as AC says it get back on track and perhaps the first thing to try and so is to try and ascertain whether Link are still licensed to Act in these matters.

[Kraken1]

What we need to do now, as AC says it get back on track and perhaps the first thing to try and so is to try and ascertain whether Link are still licensed to Act in these matters.

 

they are, although the licence is up for renewal. Has been for some time.

[heathrow]

Thanks Kraken ... I wasn't sure whether this was still the current situation.

Cheers.

[angry cat]

Yes, the licence for Link Financial Limited is current but open and awaiting renewal since May 2008.

 

The licences for the three Asset Link Capital companies are all current.

However, these use Wilmington Trust Services, as do some MBNA companies.

 

AC

[AA99]

So, now we're all back again, I sent Link off to GEMoney to get all my documentation that they assured me (recorded ) that DIDN'T have since they bought my debt... gone quiet ... their last letter of 31 Mar threatened:

 

recover the vehicle and sell at auction (can't, fixed sum loan, not HP!)

get a judgement on my property (can't, tenant)

instruct bailiffs to seize goods up to value of debt (can't, haven't got any)

I feel a pass-me-on coming on

[angry cat]

Standard template letter;

a frightener;

3% of recipients will make a payment through fear, even if they are in dispute.

 

That letter is against the OFT guidelines and a breach of the CPUTR's.

 

Report LINK to the OFT.

 

AC

[angry cat]

The Minister for Trade, Development and Consumer Affairs (Mr. Gareth Thomas) states:

 

“The OFT would expect the debt collection agency concerned to have checked the accuracy of the client data details that it received from the creditor or agency, and, where possible, to have obtained a copy of the original consumer credit agreement.

 

AC

[MAGDA]

and yet, Link, when I asked for a copy of my Agreement claimed not to be the creditor for that purpose, and refused to supply the agreement. This was reported to TS and the OFT at the time.

Magda

Edited April 28, 2009 by MAGDA
re-worded

[tierisch]

Just catching up with the thread......glad the usual peeps continue to post as we all have experience of Link. I think the points about making factual complaints are correct and this is what i have done and continue to do to whoever is relevant. In the meantime they still aren't doing what i have previously asked for in letters.......but they have not been much different to other DCAs in this respect.......

 

Tierisch

[angry cat]

and yet, Link, when I asked for a copy of my Agreement claimed not to be the creditor for that purpose, and refused to supply the agreement. This was reported to TS and the OFT at the time.

Magda

 

Unfortunately, that was then but this is now.

Under the new legislation the OFT have been provided with more power...

 

Anyone who is in the situation of non-compliance re: s77/78 should make a further request and bring in the CPUTR's.

 

Personally speaking, I have made multiple CCA requests to both MBNA and Link, todate neither have fully complied. Furthermore, I have made a pre-action court protocol disclosure request to Link, ignored.

 

I have pursued Link Financial relentlessly, asking the question;

Are You the Creditor;

Link continue to ignore my question and disclosure request.

 

Link appear to be a law unto themselves???

 

AC

[angry cat]

Just catching up with the thread......glad the usual peeps continue to post as we all have experience of Link. I think the points about making factual complaints are correct and this is what i have done and continue to do to whoever is relevant. In the meantime they still aren't doing what i have previously asked for in letters.......but they have not been much different to other DCAs in this respect.......

 

Tierisch

:

"....but they have not been much different to other DCAs in this respect..."

 

The debt collection industry is, Rotten to the Core!

 

AC