TO PHONE OR NOT TO PHONE.. THE QUESTION - Off topic posts from LyndseyB's HSBC thread

[InformedSearcher]

Well with respect that might be fine doing a letter about receiving calls. However in this instance it's stated that all calls are going to an answerphone so no one will uphold that as the bank will merely reply that no calls were answered. I bet there are no messages left?

Personally I believe you need to answer some calls. You have to have some conversation or the belief is that you are evading them of any basic communication. Take down notes and dates and times then build your case. If you take this view with any utility company they'll eventually disconnect services.

Michael

[johnnymitch]

Point taken IS, but if you read the letter in #2 it states :

 

Be advised that any further telephone calls from your company will be recorded. (**Even if you don‘t yet have recording equipment!!**)

Yours faithfully,

So as you say , you can't record them if you don't answer them , so there can be no chance of them hanging their hat on that old peg (that no -one answered ) ...............

[InformedSearcher]

Point taken IS, but if you read the letter in #2 it states :

 

Be advised that any further telephone calls from your company will be recorded. (**Even if you don‘t yet have recording equipment!!**)

Yours faithfully,

 

So as you say , you can't record them if you don't answer them , so there can be no chance of them hanging their hat on that old peg (that no -one answered ) ...............

 

I'm sorry but what you are saying is 'denial' of basic communication with the said company. If you never answer the phone or speak to them you lose. This is simply because you fail to 'hear them' and no one will back that up. Once you make your point clear verbally then trying to avoid accepting a single call is not positive at all. We should understand that probably only one out of four calls is viable anyhow because the other on the dialler system is answered by others.

Personally I believe in making a valid argument and case rather than saying 'they called me 100 times but I never answwered the phone'. Any County Court would ask, 'why did you never answer' and follow it by throwing the case out. I'm sure you see my point on this. I can assure I'm the last person to comment normally because I've endured 'harrowinng' calls that would make the most placid person scream!

Michael

[johnnymitch]

I think we'll have to agree to differ on this one Michael .... one doesn't have to communicate by phone to stay within the spirit of 'contact'. IMHO if you notify a company in writing that you only require them to communicate with you 'In Writing' , then that is your right .

 

Telehone conversations can be distorted, denied and downright rude - with no hard copy record for a court .......

The object of 'In Writing ' communication only is to have hard evidence of the perfidy of these companies - in case of court action ..........

[citizenB]

IS, I think you will find the OP was in contact by phone in the early stages and felt they were getting nowhere, with then no record of the calls to back up.

 

It is therefore in their interests now to keep everything in writing. Having dealt with HSBC on similar issues, I feel comfortable advising this method of communication. Especially for if and when the Financial Ombudsman become involved.

[InformedSearcher]

Well I would say that I'd rather have a definate case built up for harassement rather than start claiming they were calling you but you never answered. I don't doubt what telephone can entail and consist of and if you get them there's a reason.

Writing to a bank saying 'in writing only' kind of closes the door on what could be conclusive discussion. Yes, do that when you've had enough but certainly not from day one. Mind you being unemployed (as no one seems to want me - I wonder why?) in my case I have a liking to challenging chat with most who I am shocked are even employed in the first place.

Michael

[InformedSearcher]

I have answered some of the calls but there isn't anyone there so I just put the phone down, I have also written to hsbc and also spoken to them and explained the situation numerous times and have got no-where.

 

It was hsbc who have stopped the reduced payment plan for the flexiloan and gone back on it, as i had in writing that it should have been for 6 months in favour of a dca because i want them to pay back the charges. They have ignored my claim for hardship saying they class me not to be in hardship as i've paid my mortgage and council tax althoug i still can't afford to live!!!!!

 

It was HSBC who practically told me to wait till it goes to dca then they will stop the interest! So I would prefer everything in writing as then I have a copy so I can forward it on to the financail ombudsman for there investigation.

 

 

Almost parrellel to me but for both current account and (especially) the Loan account. I should have mentioned earlier - NEVER believe anything they tell you.

Here's a good example; Early May - I speak at length with a lady from the Loans Collection department. I do not have the funds to make the payments, simple as that and it's agreed after an income/expenditure scenario that they will NOT attempt to call for payments for May or June. They will however call me on 1st June for an update. Sounded fair however in so doing our current account is reduced to a basic account (which is standard). In the 7 days prior to the end of May I get 4 calls, 3 close (because someone else answered theirs before me) and speak to someone on the remaining one. I explain what has been agreed, making it plain for them to read their notes before saying anything else and finally in the (normally) heated discussion they say goodbye. On 4th June I decide to pay all the bills I can including rent and utilities. To my disbelief they have extracted 2(!) months payments on 2nd June. Shall we say the internet message service and the phone the next day was 'hot'! I get the monies paid (reversed) back into the current account. However you all want to know how amazing these calls can be? - The man told me they were 'trying to help me out'.

The points system means I'm 3.9 behind in payments. Once it gets to 6.9 that'll be the default notice automatically and passed to Metropolitan (in house) collections. To be honest they could not be bothered what I say or do, live or die because it just plods on.

Regarding 'hardship' claims that happened to me back in January. They did not accept I was under hardship and I have not bothered to try again (as 3 months has expired). In the end the 'hardship' claims have guidelines but are purely voluntary. You cannot challenge their decision other than appeal directly and going to court will invariably mean the 'stay' stops anything further happening.

Michael

[johnnymitch]

Doesn't this support the argument that you don't have to put up with their harassment on the phone IS ?

[InformedSearcher]

Doesn't this support the argument that you don't have to put up with their harassment on the phone IS ?

 

It does however my point is that 'before' you can really start complaining about the calls, after all they want their money be it debt or 'unfair' charges, one needs to build up something to show. To say that you received 10 calls in the space of 2 days but when the phone was lifted the phone went 'dead' is not having harassment calls. Now getting those calls where there is someone at the other end more often than not 'is' and they if they go down the 'harsh' course more so.

It could be argued by the creditor that you evaded their right to attempt contact to resolve the matter all too easily. The art is to put them in a position where they have no defence. In my case I find it sometimes 'refreshing' for me to give them a hard time rather than them do it to me. Getting an apology from them is a challenge too but it has happened often. I normally end up saying, 'I've now answered all your questions, you have shown no understanding, interest or compassion so what are you going to do for me?' Not quite in their script reading and training and that throws them.

I do understand many dislike phone calls and dealing on them (including my wife!). I however believe that you need to show they are overstepping the mark in every respect and the calls are one aspect.

Sorry I'm rambling on here.

Michael

[citizenB]

It does however my point is that 'before' you can really start complaining about the calls, after all they want their money be it debt or 'unfair' charges, one needs to build up something to show. To say that you received 10 calls in the space of 2 days but when the phone was lifted the phone went 'dead' is not having harassment calls. Now getting those calls where there is someone at the other end more often than not 'is' and they if they go down the 'harsh' course more so.

 

It could be argued by the creditor that you evaded their right to attempt contact to resolve the matter all too easily. The art is to put them in a position where they have no defence. In my case I find it sometimes 'refreshing' for me to give them a hard time rather than them do it to me. Getting an apology from them is a challenge too but it has happened often. I normally end up saying, 'I've now answered all your questions, you have shown no understanding, interest or compassion so what are you going to do for me?' Not quite in their script reading and training and that throws them.

 

I do understand many dislike phone calls and dealing on them (including my wife!). I however believe that you need to show they are overstepping the mark in every respect and the calls are one aspect.

 

Sorry I'm rambling on here.

Michael

 

Not at all, I can understand what you are saying. However, lets take your scenario a step further.

 

Do you have a recording machine ? If not, how are you going to prove in court (should it get that far) that the bank did in fact call you. Unless you initiated the call and can prove it with phone records.

 

Having received the data via a Subject Access Request from HSBC. There were only 8 calls listed on their logs ! However, I recorded over 100 on a spread sheet. These were for my OH who was usually at work when they called. The callers would never discuss the account with me or the reason for their call. However quite a few of the callers were quite abusive when I said OH wasnt available. I answered all of them, got the number from 1471 when the callers refused to give me a number.

 

Even though the phone was answered by me every time, in some instances there was no one on the other end. Or as soon as I answered, the call was disconnected.

 

So there is only my word against HSBC that so many calls were made and where conversation took place, the content of that call.

 

There are lots of CAGers, most notably FuzzyBobble who enjoys winding these callers up. As you say, not everyone is comfortable speaking on the phone. Some people need time to consider a response to a question. Not easily done when someone is being unpleasant on the phone.

 

IMHO, if you have had just one bad experience with a DCA/creditor on a mission to extract payment.. then it best to keep everything in writing.

 

If this debate is to be carried forward, please suggest a title and I will remove the posts from this thread into an "off topic" thread of its own. As it has now gone past the stage where it is useful to the OP:D

[InformedSearcher]

CitizenB

 

Yes, sure let's move this particular subject to another thread.

I'm all in favour of that.

Michael

[citizenB]

There has been debate on whether to immediately write to a creditor to say that communication must be continued by letter or to let the harrassment build up in order for a case to be made at a later stage.

 

Only after telephone communication has broken down should a person request that communication continue in writing and to refuse calls.

 

If I have got this wrong, perhaps IS or JM would let me know and I will amend.

 

The following posts have been moved from the following thread as off topic.

[johnnymitch]

You are absolutely right CB

 

My contention is that , after a couple of calls have proved futile and the callers are being abusive , rude or downright insulting ... then one has a right to opt for written comunication only ...... and the banks have to respect that or fall foul of the Communications Act (2003) S127 and

Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

[InformedSearcher]

Okay I can see all the points and whilst I agree with the spirit of them. I have to say that personally I'd consider it a bit naieve to consider a couple of calls being non productive is an considered option to move to 'in writing only'.

I also understand that any form of communication will ineviatably not if ever be in favour of the customer. To a financial institution once you miss payments you immediately fall into the 'we want our money and you are no longer our friend' type of scenario.

The best of calls I've had have been listening and understanding. The worst, never from HSBC have been from that strange sounding DCA who was so ignorant and abusive it's only fair the man was on the phone and not facing me. The other facts are as mentioned before that many dislike speaking to people. The banks would retort by saying, pay us the payments and we'll never call you.

The more 'dark' area is that missing payments opens the door into an area most seldom experience. Those nice friendly places become your worst enemies. You (and I know myself) occasionally raise my voice, become irritated and frustrated and whatever else.

I think on the recording section really means 'answered' calls. These diallers call forever until someone actully answers a call notwithstanding those that disconnect before or on youu answering. I'd be very interested to know how many people have won phone harassement litigation in a court against a bank.

Michael

[citizenB]

 

I'd be very interested to know how many people have won phone harassement litigation in a court against a bank.

Michael

 

 

Before I reply further on this.. I will have a looksee if we have any information on the question you raise above.

 

You were up late / or early as the case may be

[johnnymitch]

Originally Posted by InformedSearcher

I'd be very interested to know how many people have won phone harassement litigation in a court against a bank.

Michael

Not many I should imagine , as complaints regarding this type of harassment are usually lodged with Trading Standards ,OFCOM and the Office of Fair Trading. One of these bodies (I think possibly OFCOM) has the power to levy hefty fines for this practice , so I shouldn't think many complaints have to go through the courts.

[citizenB]

There must have been a fair few at some time made to OFCOM because I believe it was Barclays that were fined about £50,000. Of course when you want the links.. you cant find them..

[InformedSearcher]

Oh, I seem to have found something (hope the posting of links here is correct?):

Barclaycard answers to Ofcom over silent calls

 

However CitizenB I'd suggest this one is certainly to the point (and we can all complain it would appear!):

Ofcom action on silent calls | Ofcom

 

However these are not regarding 'verbal harassment' calls but silent ones meaning 50% of the problem. Probably any of these type of complaints are in secret files held by the legal professions and not available for the public. I did notice 'one' case that seemed to get to the national papers back in May 2007 however this case shows 'extreme' problems generated by the Halifax.

It does seem that forgetting the 'silent calls' the real 'verbal communication' ones are just about unknown apart from one or two. Holding 'one' hand up (and semi blushing) I will start a spreadsheet on what I receive from everyone from now on - Thank you for that snippet of good advice.

 

Michael

[Castlebest]

If you do have grounds for harassment, and make sure that you do, then contact your local police and get a crime number, harassment is a criminal offence and should be dealt with as such.

 

Once you have a crime number all you need to do is tell the person phoning that they have been reported to the police, crime number etc and any further calls will also be reported and will result in criminal action against them.

 

pete

[InformedSearcher]

If you do have grounds for harassment, and make sure that you do, then contact your local police and get a crime number, harassment is a criminal offence and should be dealt with as such.

 

Once you have a crime number all you need to do is tell the person phoning that they have been reported to the police, crime number etc and any further calls will also be reported and will result in criminal action against them.

 

pete

 

Can/would you normally do that with a bank claiming to be calling you legitamately. As the 'silent' calls seem also to be classed as harassment I wonder why no criminal proceedings were taken, with it being left to Ofcom?

Michael

[johnnymitch]

IS , if you don't want the calls , if you've told them formally in writing that you don't want the calls - for them to keep calling you is harassment .... simple as that ........

[citizenB]

Can/would you normally do that with a bank claiming to be calling you legitamately. As the 'silent' calls seem also to be classed as harassment I wonder why no criminal proceedings were taken, with it being left to Ofcom?

Michael

 

If this is Barclaycard you are referring to.. I think they managed to get out of any serioius problems by saying that it was their Fraud department and they were making check up calls on their clients.;-)

[johnnymitch]

Hi CB - you ok?

 

Even with Fraud departments - there is no excuse for silent calls - they should say who they are ........ and why they're calling IMHO ..

[citizenB]

Totally agree with you JM.. however, they got away with it.. almost

 

Fine thank you. x

[InformedSearcher]

Well for what it's worth (and I never believe much these days) HSBC have an understanding with me as of late. I have 'no' money and their calls are quite unproductive with the best of contact a CAB and me replying 'why?'

I ask them, 'Are you saying that if I go to a CAB and they contact you then no default notice and final demand will be issued?', and that always catches them off guard. How the heck to work out a payment plan with 'zero' in the pot is that going to be resolved?

In fact I was taken aback when the Collections dpartment said they would attempt to stop dialler calls - I told the man I simply did not believe him and the call ended. Maybe, just maybe the GP sending me to a Counsellor has rattled them a little?

Michael