NO notice of DC instruction - do I need to respond?

[Hungryforinfo]

Could someone help please? A DC has contacted me claiming they are representing a creditor. The account in question is in dispute and the creditor is in default of my request for a copy of the agreement. Aside of this, I am trying to find out if I can ask for proof of the instruction before responding. No defaults were issued prior to the account going into dispute so I do not believe the DC can use the default notice as the justification for their contact and payment demand. I will respond to the account being in dispute but want to beef up the response with a request for proof of instruction as the trail would go back to the credit company who as I understand it should not be asking for payment directly or via a DC when the account is in default.

[maroondevo52]

Thread moved.

[creditcardmug]

Hi send them this, You could also add that you have had no information from the OC, as to their involvement, should send them scuttling away under their stone.

 

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY OR ANY COMPANY YOU CLAIM TO REPRESENT

 

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

Dear Sir or Madam,

Account number: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

 

I must admit that I am rather bemused as to why this account has been passed to yourselves, as it is in dispute with the **original creditor/DCA** and has been since DATE 2007.

Not only is this a breach of OFT collection guidelines, but also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998

 

My last letter from **original creditor/DCA** was DATE and intimated that my complaint would be

resolved on **DATE**, this obviously hasn’t happened.

As **original creditor/DCA** are now in default of my Consumer Credit Act request, OFT Collection Guidelines, *Subject Access request and have also breached *s10 Data Protection Act request , I consider this account to be in SERIOUS DISPUTE.

 

As you are aware while my Consumer Credit Act request remains in default enforcement action is NOT permitted, under s127 this constitutes a complete defence at law.

 

Now I would respectfully suggest that this account is returned to the **original creditor/DCA** for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as **New DCA** cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities.

 

If **New DCA** chooses to ignore my dispute and attempt enforcement, I will initiate legal action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office, Financial Ombudsman Service and possible court action.

 

After taking advice, I am of the opinion that any continued pursuit is in violation of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well as breaching a number of the OFT Collection Guidelines

 

I hope that this will not be necessary and an acceptable solution can be accomplished.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

I look forward to hearing from you in writing.

 

Yours faithfully

[Hungryforinfo]

Just had a letter from anotehr DC claiming that the Admin of Justice ACt section40 wasd replaced and doesn't therefore apply in my case. However, they will temporariliy not call me but reserve the right to if I don't pay.

 

My letter also referred to Portection From Harrassment ACt 1999 (I think) which they didn't mention in the reply. Does anyone know if the Admin of Justice Act section 40 has been replaced and idoes teh repalcement still protect me from being harrased/ i have said they should only write, no doorstep visits or telephone calls or emails.

[ODC]

The offence in S 40 of the Administration of Justice Act has been replaced by the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008.

 

Obviously the DCA involved is CABOT as this is a bog standard reponse of theirs