DCA taking money from my account without my permission

[babybear39]

looks like we will have to agree to disagree!

 

Pistols at dawn gentlemen ?

[diddydicky]

im already in the pistol club........

 

 

drink all night

 

pistol dawn!

[Stressed150]

Ok guys, have CCA'd this DCA as well as requesting them to pay back the money thy took out of my account without permisssion.....now they have acknoweldge reciept of my CCA request, I also sent a letter requestig my money bck on the same day which they have not at all acknowledged..... is it worth me giving them a call, or should I write to them? In my original letter I stated that I would be making complaints to all relevant bodies.....shall I jus go ahead and do this?

[twobeercans]

i have a slightly different view of this use of your card details to remove mnies from your bank.

As far as i am aware once you have notified your bank this has happened, you have operated diligently and as such would not or shouldn't be liable to 1 single penny more or should i say anymore transaction by that same institution using your card number. Once you have informed your bank, it is for them to say if they think you should have a new card!! If they don't and monies are removed again in the same way using the same details then i would definately argue they are liable in FULL.

You can bet your ass if they went looking for their own money it wouldn't take too long for it to be refunded. Write your bank manager a stiff strongly worded letter making it quite plain that since they are responsible for processing your data and your money and you have acting in accordance with thier terms and conditions you expect them to act in a very much more acceptable manner. If they fail to do this you will have no option but to consider a court action against them in order to recover the monies. Believe me one call from your bank manager to that DCA and your cash will be back in less time than it takes to drink a cup of coffee if they choose to act. That would be the exchange i would be having with my bank on that subject!

 

 

re: post dated cheques,

 

i would suggest it would be an offence for a limited cmopany to issue a post dated cheque for obvious reason, but as far as i am aware it has never been illegal to confer a promise to pay in the form of a post dated cheque. There was a time 25+ years ago when all cheques were manually inspected, this i think was the reason they claimed funds tok so long to clear (post to issuing bank ect for inspection) In this day and age it may be that a bank says it may or may not honour a cheque post dated if presented early (reason is obvious the receiving teller is the only one who actually see's the cheque and if she/he misses the date it slips through) bank covers ass in their terms as mention above. However the person presenting the cheque has no such cover, an action by an individual presenting a cheque early that bounces could neither claim they had been financially offended or make any other such complaint.

It is accepted practice to issue post dated cheques, when issuing such a cheque one should use a red marker and write post dated across the front. "this forces the teller at the recieving bank to check the date is acceptable".You have a right to mark the cheque in this way so as to make guidance on its intended use its YOUR cheque!!

This is my take on post dating of cheques, if a post dated cheque bounces then obviously that is another matter, since we then fall into the things mentioned by the kind policeman above. my opinion is no cheque should ever bounce, "i am a right scoundrel lol (according to the missus) but i have never in my 43 years bounced a cheque on anyone". the bloody bank charges are too high lmao:D

Edited May 7, 2009 by twobeercans

[Stressed150]

Thank you very much for that advice twobeercans..... I have however, received a new card since posting this letter, and my bank have informed me that the DCA should not be taking any further payments from my account, however, I have written to the DCA seperately and requested they pay me back asap! I'm hoping to hear something tmrw from them by post, if not Im gna be reporting to OFT, TS etc etc....

[twobeercans]

Thank you very much for that advice twobeercans..... I have however, received a new card since posting this letter, and my bank have informed me that the DCA should not be taking any further payments from my account, however, I have written to the DCA seperately and requested they pay me back asap! I'm hoping to hear something tmrw from them by post, if not Im gna be reporting to OFT, TS etc etc....

 

TBH i really would continue down the bank route, in the end this is card fraud plain and simple. The DCA should be able to proove a ligitimate transaction by virtue of recording calls.

There is no error here whatsoever my friend, the bank can investigate if they wish and refund this money - they won't want to of course lol.

It is an act of fraud to store and use without consent any persons payment card details. They put there consumer credit licence on the stove by perpetrating this kind of act, a company found guilty of a deliberate fraud shuold not hold a consumer credit licence end of story.

Issue court proceedings, lay the burden of strict proof they had the right to operate the transactions on your card, you have to proove nothing since you hold details of the transaction out of your account. The only defence against that would be the call record, i suggest they would fold immediately to court proceedings - pay costs and refund the monies taken with 8% interest and any charges you incurred from your bank as a result of the theft of yuor money. Me personally i would tell the bank my plan and suggest they might like to be co-defendants since they refuse to be of asistance when one of thier customers is defrauded using a system they operate and assert is safe to use:D

 

good luck in your efforts my friend and don't let em fob you off with nonsense - the DCA know full well how this is likely to play out if it gets that far.

[twobeercans]

 

 

that is an entirely different matter in which the INTENT is one of several point that AL must exist to prove theft or fraud

 

the points to prove being_

 

that the person acted dishonestly

 

That it was property (and with a value) which was involved ( a dog is property a cat is not)

 

that it BELONGED to the injured party

 

that the other INTENDED to deprive him of the property

 

PERMANENTLY that the deprivation was intended to be permanent

 

Thus if you climbed over your neighbours fence whilst he was on holiday, borrowed and used his lawn mower intending to put it back before he returned, and he came home early and found you had it in your shed- this would NOT constitute theft because there was no INTENT to permanently deprive the owner of the lawn mower

 

interesting point here

 

what you forget in this scenario is that the law is more cleverly constructed than that. The act of climbing over the fence is criminal tresspass (the action of the tresspass was to take without consent therefore criminal tresspass), and of course there is the TWOC of the aforementioned lawnmower (wether intent to return or not) and finally we come to wether it was intended to permanently deprive (but by this time the lawn mower thief is doing no more time when sentenced cos he is bang to rights lol:D)

It would not be possible to corrolate this scenario in anyway to cheque postdating, a cheque is a promise to pay a sum. There are doubtless some arcaic laws that could get a prosecution going for bouncing a cheque but not likely the CPS would look at that unless the stakes were very much higher.

[diddydicky]

he might not have climbed over the fence- he might have gone through the gate!

 

TRESPASS is just that a civil offence unless it is burglary it is ONLY burglary if:

 

if a person enters property, as a trespasser, with the intention of comiting criminal damage , theft, arson or rape

 

since he climbed over the fence or otherwise entered the property only to borrow the lawnmower- no criminal offence will be commited

[Stressed150]

Recieved a response from th DCA today to say they will be investigating..... I have ent letter o my bank, and awating response...

[kurvaface]

Don't procrastinate.

 

Get the complaint off to trading standards no matter what. It's only a phone call!

[Stressed150]

Will do Kurvaface...

 

Just a quick q tho, in their letter they advise me they will update me with he outcome of their investigation in 21 days, do I give them 21 workingdays, or just 21 normal dys?

[kurvaface]

Give them as much or as little time as you like

 

You're in charge.

 

My limited wisdom/experience tells me that you will not hear what you want to hear from them anyway.

 

If on the other hand they know Trading Standards are looking at things too, they know everyone is serious and tend to be much more reasonable, friendly and helpful. The sooner Trading Standards are in the mix the sooner you'll get it sorted.

 

Oh isn't that a surprise!!

[Stressed150]

I hear what your saying, but I think I might just give them the benefit of the doubt and give them the 21 days they requested, esp since there's not much longer to go after which I will involve the police (if possible, as I see the money taken from me to be taken by fraud) the ICO, OFT and TS, basically I will go in all guns blazing!!

[babybear39]

Don't forget your MP, a nice letter from the house of commons should help

[kurvaface]

My view is life is too short.

 

I see no evidence anywhere as to why this company should be given the benefit of the doubt, but at the end of the day, it's your money and your problem so give them 21 days, working days, bank holidays etc etc.

 

I would place a bet that if they knew Trading Standards were on this case it would be sorted in about 21 minutes.

[Stressed150]

Ok guys have heard nothing from this DCA with regards to investigation and 21 days are now up.......but I have also CCA'd them and Im 99.9% sure they dnt have a CCA.....should I continue pressing them for the money they took from my account? Will they be able to use this against me in court if it gets to that stage?

[babybear39]

Did you get help from TS?

[Stressed150]

no no help from TS

[babybear39]

What about your bank, did they help?

[Stressed150]

They did nothing!! They advised em that if I have given my card details to a company they will assume they have authority to take payment.

 

Im not sure what to do as I mentioned earlier I have CCAd the DCA as well, so not sure if me requesting the money will have an affect on the enforceability of a debt whether there is a CCA or not?

[babybear39]

Kick your bank up the a*se! The DCA have stollen money from you and you want it back.

[diddydicky]

Untrue.....see; BBC NEWS | Programmes | Moneybox | Post-dated cheques: A popular myth?

 

i think you will find that the article you refer to confirms my point as correct!

 

it is illegal to issue a cheque in the knowledge ) or being reckless as to the knoweldge) that there are insufficient funds in the account upon which it is draw, to cover it

 

the article confirms:_

 

"And he confirmed that post-dated cheques are not honoured because a cheque is a bill of exchange payable on demand."

 

 

Therefore issuing a cheque which is payable on demand but postdated against funds which may(or may not) come into the account between the date it is issued and the date placed on the cheque means that the drawer cannot be confident that any expected funds into the account WILL definately materialise ,therefore he cannot be assured that there would be sufficient funds (unless of course he already has sufficient funds in the account) further since it is payable on demand irrespective of the date on the cheque he thenhere are sufficient funds in the account on the day he issues it irrespective of the date he puts on the cheque since it may be cashed immediately

[cerberusalert]

ps also never send postdated cheques (it is actually illegal to issue postdated cheques )

 

You catagorically stated that it is illegal to postdate cheques, it is not. If it were why would companies such as Payday loans require postdated cheques as a method of repayment?

 

Yes it is an offence to deliberately issue a cheque in the knowledge that you have or will have insufficient funds to honour it, but the actual act of issuing a posted dated cheque is not illegal as you have wrongly stated.

[the_shadow]

Kick your bank up the a*se! The DCA have stollen money from you and you want it back.

 

Babybear is correct, its the banks responsibility to investigate.

 

This type of transaction is called CNP (card holder not present) and is one of the biggest areas of fraud in the credit card/debit card world.

 

Was the card underwritten by Visa or Mastercard, does it have either of these logos? They have a rigid structure of handling non-authorised payments and will clamp down harder on Merchants that offend.

 

In my opinion you should chase your bank, in writing, head it as a complaint and require a response and the monies repaid in 14 days (enclose a spreadsheet showing payment dates/amounts etc). If they dont reply, then a Formal complaint requiring the same.

 

It is the banks responsibility to check the merchant (DCA) has an authorisation for the payment to be taken. If they dont then they are on dodgy ground.

 

Just my opinions as ever.

 

S.

[diddydicky]

You catagorically stated that it is illegal to postdate cheques, it is not. If it were why would companies such as Payday loans require postdated cheques as a method of repayment?

 

Yes it is an offence to deliberately issue a cheque in the knowledge that you have or will have insufficient funds to honour it, but the actual act of issuing a posted dated cheque is not illegal as you have wrongly stated.

 

well there we have to agree to disagree