Problem with Ultimate Credit Services Ltd

[ukbloke]

Hi All,

 

I'm looking for a little bit of advice. Today, I've recieved a letter, out of the blue, at my new address. It relates to a debt from maybe 4 or 5 years ago, I can't quite remember. Basically, I went through a very rough patch in 2005-2006, where I owed quite a lot of money out and was being chased by quite a few debt collectors. I went through quite severe mental problems, and after much hard work, and with the help of doctors, the Department of Work and Pensions, I was able to prove my inability to clear my debts, as a result of which, I have never heard from any debt collector since. Since that period, I've turned my life around, have a good stable job, have just moved into my new home, and am at the beginnings of getting my battered credit back into shape.

 

Now, at my new address, which I have lived at for just over two months, I'm not on the electoral roll yet, the only things registered here are my bank account, council tax, utilities, mobile phone and BT landline.

 

I have today recieved a letter from Ultimate Credit Services Ltd for a debt to MEM Consumer Finance Limited for £187.50

 

This is the first time I've ever heard from this company. I vaguely remember this debt (one of very many), and it certainly wasn't this company who recieved all the medical documents etc etc several years ago. The letter reads;

 

We have recieved instructions from our above named clients to initiate formal debt collection proceedings for the unpaid debt as detailed above.

 

Please contact this office immediately in order that we can discuss a satisfactory settlement to this matter.

 

Unless you make arrangements to settle the account within 72 hours our agent may be instructed to attend your premises to establish your residency and reason for non-payment.

 

You must take this opportunity to settle the matter amicably in order to avoid possible legal action being instigated.

 

Please do not underestimate the seriousness of this matter and attend to this notice immediately as this will be your final opportunity.

 

If you are experiencing financial difficulties, or you wish to make a proposal please call us today.

 

Yours Faithfully,

Recoveries Department

Telephone on 0870 112 5810

 

 

Now, my concerns are, it states 72 hours... don't they have to give 7 days? and also, the date on the letter states "Date As Postmark". The letter also looks so poor that I reckon my 9 year old neice could have knocked something better up in word!

 

So what can I do about this, and is this outfit full of hot air or are they known for sending people round? My concern is that this episode may disrupt the stability I've found in my life recently, and I don't want to end up taking a step backwards over these people.

 

Thanks in advance!

[mr.ton]

Dont worry about anyone turning up, its highly unlikey & if so, then just politely ask them to leave - if they refuse then contact the police (999) to report a breach of the peace.

They will have less rights than the local milkman.

They also have no legal powers over you whatsoever, only the county courts do - so tell em to get lost & report them to the OFT/trading standards & the police (not 999) if they dont.

[Nottsdave]

Key words used are

we may

possible legal action

 

Usual crap, file the letter.... do not ring under any circumstances

 

Notts

[ukbloke]

So, would the consensus be to just ignore this or request the CCA from them and see if they can come up with the goods? Am I right in saying that if they can't produce it or don't produce it, the debt becomes unenforceable?

 

Thanks

[ukbloke]

Hi All,

 

Just an update on my original post...

 

This company now rings me several times a week and have sent another letter identical to the one they sent when I first posted.

 

Now the problem is, when they call, they immediately demand to know who I am (they get my name by saying "is that ......." to which I reply yes as umpteen companies ring me), and try to get me to confirm my address to which I refuse.

 

At this point, with a snotty attitude, they tend to say "well I can't continue with this call" and hang up. Now the problem is, I'm getting to the point where I'm getting anxious about answering the phone at all incase its these bunch.

 

Is there anything at all I can do to get them to bugger off now, as its starting to become quite detrimental.

 

Thanks in advance!

[postggj]

Have You Sent The Telephone Harrasment Letter Yet

[ukbloke]

Have You Sent The Telephone Harrasment Letter Yet

 

Hi,

 

Thanks for your quick reply. I didn't realise there was one?

[maroondevo52]

Hi,

 

There is a 'prove it' letter you could send, also a Harrasment letter.

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Account no:

 

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

 

I/we would point out that I/we have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to (insert company name).

 

I am/we are familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

 

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

 

I/we would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my/our liability for the debt in question.

 

I/we await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

 

I/we look forward to your reply.

 

**Edit to suit**

 

Remember, don’t sign the letter.

 

.....................................................................................................

 

- HARASSMENT WARNING -

 

WARNING: PROTECTION FROM HARASSMENT ACT 1997

 

 

 

Telephone Number:

 

Re: Harassment by Telephone

 

 

 

** *** 2009

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

 

I am writing in relation to telephone calls that I have received from your organisation, which I deem to be personally harassing. I have requested that these calls stop, but I am still receiving calls. I now require the telephone number listed above to be completely removed from your systems.

 

I am in the view that your continued calling puts you in breach of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

 

This is a private telephone line, operated on a contract with the intention of receiving and making personal phone calls, I have not authorised any other member of my family to receive calls from your organisation using this PRIVATE TELEPHONE LINE.

 

By using this telephone number without my permission you are interfering with my ability to use my own private property for the duration of any call.

 

It is my right to require that this telephone line, which is licensed solely to myself, is kept clear for my own personal calls.

 

It is consequently my view that you are committing the tort of interference with contract insofar as for the duration of each call you make to me without my permission, you are interfering with my contractual right to receive and make personal calls on my private telephone line.

 

Continued interference with my contractual rights in this manner will result in legal action.

 

If you continue to harass me by telephone, you will also be in breach of the Communications Act (2003) s.127 and I will report you to the Office of Communications, Trading Standards and the Office of Fair Trading, meaning that you will be liable for a substantial fine.

 

Be advised that all telephone calls from your company will be recorded.

 

 

Regards.

 

Scott.

[buzby]

What makes this all the more unfortunate, is that you cannot take a high moral stance, debt collectors are allowed to chase debts. The days of them 'sending the boys round' may be over for this type of commercial activity, but the next best thing is harassment (small 'h') abd t ultimately be downright annoting so that if you are going to give anyone money, it will be to them - solely to stop them calling you or sending snotty letters and the like.

 

Now, debt chasing for legitimate debts is NOT haeassment as defined by law, you've probably heard of all these computerised calling systems used by the banks and their agencies to get money in. The trouble is whilst you or I may understandably refer to this as harassment, therer is a long, long way to go before this becomes a matter for the police. We can quote all the regulations we like, and guidelines and the rest but the usual answer from the courts when complaints like these turn up is 'pay them what you owe'. If there is no debt, it is a different ballgame and you need a different tactic. One consumer took Aktive Capital to the High Court and got a few thousand pounds in damages because of their unreasonable behaviour and (b) they had accessed his credit file and defauted him. The only trouble was, HE wasn't the debtor - it was someone with a similar name.

 

For instant peace - you need to change your phone number and be ex-directory for the replacement. THEN get a 'virtual' number at low or no cost to give to those firms that wonlt give you peace unless they have a number of some sort. If a DCA get's your number, they upload it to their affilliated CRA so anyone esle looking for you will get the inside track and they'll all be chasing you.

 

Back to the letter - you can certainly bluster on about harassment, but don't fool yourself - they'll probably ignore it and there's really nothing you can do. Unfortunately, the last 7 paragraphs although I appreciate why they were compused, come across as nonsensical. The claims made cannot be substantiated in Law, and at no time does anyone 'authorise' anyone to call them. Just in the same way having a front doorbell does not preclude it being rung by people wanting to sell you things.

 

There is no 'tort' or interference - they will contact you to discover your plans for repayment and will continue to do so until you stump up, or the phone line doesn't connect. The latter is the easiest option to arrange. As a phone is connected to the public telephone system, the customer has no say on who calls them and when, in much the same whay you cannot stop DCA's sending you emails asking you to pay up.

[brokebutnotbeatn]

Hi, I'm afraid, and it's just my opinion, that I don't agree with Buzby. There are lots of useful letters on this site re harrassment. I quoted harrassment verbally to Barclaycard then wrote a letter using the wealth of info you'll find on this site and sent an e-mail to the CEO's office (John Varley). I got a written and verbal apology, some compensation (not sought I just wanted the damed calls to stop) and all the interest and charges removed from the card since I advised them of financial difficulties. OK, I am paying under a DMP too so that probably helped. But knowing your rights and being afraid to quote them succinctly is a weapon and I'm pleased to say I haven't had a phone call since. OK, this is stressful and may not always work, but its worth a try and may mean you don't have to change your phone number and hide like the criminal they're trying to make you feel like. Again, just IMHO.

[ukbloke]

The problem is, with all the problems I mentioned in the first post, I do feel like a criminal, and all this now, after many years is making me feel even worse....

[brokebutnotbeatn]

Hi ukbloke. Of course you feel like a criminal - that's exactly how the blood suckers want you to feel because it makes you more vulnerable and ready to part with what you can't aford. I don't believe there is ANY genuine CAGGER that doesn't empathise. This forum can empower you to take control and it will stop eventually but it is one day at a time. If it helps, I wrote out a script for the next time I got a human on the phone that I simply read through - a shortened version of the telephone harrassment letter. I was shaking after I used it, but the feeling of turning round and saying things like "I need to advise you that this conversation is being recorded..." and "can I confirm that you are..." and "can I confirm that you refuse to..." etc calmly and after having refused to answer their security questions was great. Everytime they said they couldn't answer because I hadn't been through security I just asked another question. I couldn't have done it without scouring this site and not only listing my rights but also seeing how other people had taken control. I think you should do this, send the telephone harrassment letter (that you can then refer to if anyone else rings) and starting the process of finding out if this debt is yours and is enforceable or not. A day at a time; baby steps. The fact that you are trying to sort it out is something to be proud about. And don't do anything in haste. Each time you get a letter, research a response on this forum then leave it 24-hours before sending it; gives you time to reflect objectively without that horrible 'blood boiling in your ears' type feeling! So - 1) telephone script. 2) Harrassment letter. 3) Prove it letter for starters. It's really just bulleying and the victim who stands up for themselves and demonstrably knows their rights is less of an attractive target to go after. Good luck!

[brokebutnotbeatn]

I should also add that it's all about degrees. I don't have the courage (not yet, anyway) not to be paying a percentage of what I owe, but I'm in the fortunate position that I can pay something. And as things improve, I will offer full and finals. It's really doing what you feel comfortable about whilst knowing what can happen and what is unlikely to happen. But in your case you haven't been chased for a number of years so this debt might not be yours or might not be valid! I would definately not be paying towards something I genuinely didn't know anything about - even if I thought it could be mine! Could does not mean is!

[buzby]

What you need to remember is there are degrees of severity - what is harassment to you, is standard commercial activity to another. Whilst your opinion of what constitutes 'harassment' is personal to you - it is quite a different matter from the legal standpoint, and it is to this that I'm addressing.

 

It's also like the word 'abuse' in some instances you can be readily abused by another, and have no fear of criminal repercussions. Whilst in others, you can be locked up and have the key thrown away. In harassment issues, what it constitutes is fairly narrow - and what we are discussing is not enough to warrant a formal criminal charge.

 

It would be reasonable to assume that all DCAs use 'harassment' as part of their toolbox of recovery antics. Yes you can could the number of successful prosecutions for harassment on the fingers of one hand - and the firms carry on much as before, so with this in mind, it is important to show that in itself, harassment must be pretty serious before it ban be used as a valid threat. Getting phone calls and visits at the door for a valid debt cannot be harassment in the truest sense, and it is important to note this.

 

Otherwise we'll be in the situation that folk will believe that if they are harassed to any degree, they somehow have a legitimate rejection of it - when they don't!

Edited July 28, 2009 by buzby

[ukbloke]

An update to what has happened over the past few weeks.

 

I posted two letters CCA letters, which also included the info not to call me and to deal by post. They claim they never recieved the letters. So I emailed (using a throwaway googlemail account) the letter to them including yet another request to deal by post and not call me, and recieved a swift reply saying that the account was closed, and that they were no longer dealing.

 

Super I thought.

 

This was on the 10th July. A week later, I got another phone call asking where the email was. I explained that I had recieved a response and that the account was closed and they were no longer dealing. The lady appologised, and that I thought was the end of it.

 

Today, I recieved a telephone call from the same lady asking me to confirm my details (which I didn't) to discuss the account. I said I had a response from them by email stating that the accound was closed and that they were no longer dealing. I was told that this response wasn't from them, until I quoted the name of the person that sent the reply, at which point I was promptly appologised to again and the call ended.

 

A few hours later, around 17:00 I think, whilst I was in bed, the bloke who sent the email reply phoned. My other half answered, and I've been asked to call him at 08:00 on an 0870 number.

 

So, even though I requested no calls, why am I still getting calls, and why do I now need to call back?? Is the email he sent a binding document now, and is it now not enforceable as he stated the account was closed and they are no longer dealing?

 

What should I do at 8am in the morning?

[brokebutnotbeatn]

Write out a script based on harrassement - there's plenty to use on this forum- and the next timesomeone phones refuse to answer their security questions, advise them you are taping the call pause then launch into your script. Then send your script and a copy of the e-mail received saying 'closed'. This did it for me with Barclay card and they're persistant suckers....I know people will advise you to ignore the calls but I also know how stressful that can be! If you're really stuck I can probably find the letter I wrote to BC based on my script.

[mr.ton]

Blow a whistle down the phone

[brokebutnotbeatn]

Hi Mr Ton, I love your responses but for us Newbies it takes a lot to get the confidence to do this. Having found this forum and taken what I consider to be "sensible" and "reasonable" action, were I still having calls from creditors I would indeed do this or, as other people have suggested, put the phone down next to the music channel until they give up an go away. I fully expect my debts to be sold on and after repeating my 'sensible' and 'reasonable' action once more I will do this!

[izzitme101]

anyone asks for me on the phone, i ask em who it is before i confirm anything, if they wont tell i hang up, if its a dca, tell em writing only and hang up.

[ukbloke]

Well, I tried calling them this morning. I asked to speak to the chap that called yesterday, and the person I spoke to refused to put me through until I confirmed my address. I refused to do this, reminded him that I had put in writing not to call and only to communicate in writing. I asked him to pass a message to the chap to write to me, to which he said; "he might do". He then abruptly hung up.

 

So, whats the betting they'll go back to daily phone calls to me then?? I'm doubting that they actually will write to me other than sending me generic letters from the scare-trometer.

 

Whats really annoying me now is that everytime they call, its the same thing. They ask what my address is and everytime I refuse they hang up. I just fear they will keep on ringing now even though I have requested categorically that they don't.

[brokebutnotbeatn]

Sorry ukbloke but I don't understand? Why are you calling them? Next time they call you have your chosen response ready... Here is how my conversation went with BCard went: of course you'd have to edit to suit and only the beginning bit may be relevant to you. Then I sent a letter to Barclay's chairman and the situation was resolved.

BC: can I speak to xxxx

BBNB: Speaking

BC: this is Jean from BC, can I confirm your DOB

BBNB: No, but I do have something to say to you, hang on. [slight pause]:

Can I just confirm that you are calling from BC?

BC: Yes ma'am

BBNB: Just to let you know that I am taping this conversation and I intend to report you to the office of Fair Trading under Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 for harrassment. From this point on I will only communicate with you in writing and any further calls from BC will be cause to instigate criminal proceedings under Section 2 of the Protection from Harrassment Act 1997 and your consumer credit licence does not protect you from prosectution.

BC: pause

BBNB: can you confirm as per the conversation I had with you yesterday that you refuse to speak with my appointed 3rd part representatives

BC: I cannot access your file as I don't have the security confirmation

BBNB: Well I don't believe that. Can you also confirm that you will not agree to a payment plan, as I was told yesterday.

BC: I cannot discuss that as I can't open your file;

BBNB: Well I have written to you and spoken with you on numerous occasions as have my 3rd party representatives and you are infact now receiving money under this plan.

BC: I can stop these calls.

BBNB: can you repeat that please

BC: I can stop these calls, I can do that.

BBNB: What is your name, "Jean..."?

BC: Jean Xxx

BBNB: Can you spell that please?

BC: Jean Bathan

BBNB: And you will stop these calls? You are able to do that?

BC: Yes Ma'am

BBNB: Thank you and goodbye.

[babybear39]

I have to disagree with busby strongly with regard to what constitutes harassment.

[buzby]

Disagree away. What you or I think is irrelevant. What a judge believes is what REALLY constitutes harassment. Having seen claims of harassment thrown out (as part of wider ranging disputes), I believe my interpretation is by far the more in tune with what actually constitutes a 'crime' rather than an opinion.

[Joshd]

Well done brokebutnotbeatn good thread. Have to agree with Buzby though Babybear. I'm afraid he's right. In the eyes of the law it takes a lot to constitute harassment particularly if you actually are owing a debt. Continual phone calls are more a nuisance than anything else and unfortunately it's how the law views it. When contacted, make it clear that you will gladly communicate with them, but only by mail. If they do continue with calls then just remind them to write. Don't give any name or confirm address etc.

[babybear39]

The OFT guidlines state clearly:

 

2 UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES

Communication

2.1 It is unfair to communicate, in whatever form, with consumers in an unclear,

inaccurate or misleading manner.

2.2 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. use of official looking documents intended or likely to mislead

debtors as to their status, for example, documents made to resemble court

claims.

b. leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it

creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors'

lack of knowledge

c. those contacting debtors not making clear who they are, who

they work for, what their role is, what the purpose of the

contact is

d. unnecessary and unhelpful use of legal and technical language, for

example, use of Latin phrases

e. failing to provide debtors or creditors with information on status

of debts, for example, not providing requested balance statements when

reasonably requested

f. contacting debtors at unreasonable times

g. ignoring or disregarding debtors' legitimate wishes in respect

of when and where to contact them, for example, shift workers who

ask not to be telephoned during certain times of the day

h. asking or instructing debtors to make contact on premium rate

telephone numbers

 

Physical/psychological harassment

2.5 Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive.

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. contacting debtors at unreasonable times and at unreasonable intervals

b. pressurising debtors to sell property, to raise funds by further

borrowing or to extend their borrowing

c. using more than one debt collection business at the same time

resulting in repetitive and/or frequent contact by different parties

d. not ensuring that an adequate history of the debt is passed on as

appropriate resulting in repetitive and/or frequent contact by different

parties

e. not informing the debtor when their case has been passed on to a

different debt collector

f. pressurising debtors to pay in full, in unreasonably large instalments,

or to increase payments when they are unable to do so

g. making threatening statements or gestures or taking actions which

suggest harm to debtors

h. ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are

disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

i. disclosing or threatening to disclose debt details to third parties unless

legally entitled to do so

j. acting in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor either

deliberately or through lack of care, for example, by not putting

correspondence in a sealed envelope and putting it through a letterbox,

thereby running the risk that it could be read by third parties.

 

There's probably more in the CPUTR but I can't be bothered trawling trough that today...Will put it on the list for when I'm next there though.