My Debts & Various DCA's & Letters

[willtheywontthey]

well I think you both contribute to this thread and would want you both to continue.. it makes for interesting reading the arguments for / against the view that credit cards are / are not further borrowing.

 

Any idea how to actually find out - bear in mind the OFT never seem to give me guidance on anything other than refer me to an existing document which does not clarify my questions.

 

So please stick with this if you can as nobody has done anything other than provide their opinions which is great for a debate and maybe we'll find out answer soon?

[ODC]

I suppose at some stage someone will make a ruling on the legality or otherwise of credit card payments

[citizenB]

I use OFT not trading standards as we are rural so they all know somebody you know ie gossip. Same with post offices - I keep having to sue different ones for my special deliveries as I am paranoid that the new systems they have state name of company X as being X Ltd debt collectors. Added to that I am sure my postman knows more about my finances than I do because of these postcards!!

 

If I use Consumer Direct they then contact TS to contact me which i do not want as they are local! (and useless)

 

I too, live in a small village, local post office and a friendly postie. When OH was receiving postcards and letters with the the DCA's logo fairly prominent, I wrote to the OFT. I sent a copy of it to the DCA advising what I had done and that I considered their actions to be harrassment and humiliating. They stopped, whether it was my copy letter to them or the OFT contacting them, I dont know. So it is worth complaining to the OFT, even if they dont respond to you personally.

 

You are a sensitive soul. I have no desire to get into an argument with you. You have given your view. I have given mine with my reasons. I happen to think I am right and you obviously think you are correct. Who knows.

 

It seems strange though that some DCAs have actually removed Credit Cards from their lists of acceptable payments yet have left debit cards and prepaid credit cards

 

I did ask this question of Trading Standards and was told.. yes.. this does come under the heading of encouraging further borrowing. Unfortunately I dont have it in writing.

[Kraken1]

Interesting. Has made me think.

 

The OFt say that the unfair bit is:

 

pressurising debtors to sell property, to raise funds by further

borrowing or to extend their borrowing

 

So it seems that there are two elements to make the 'offence'

1. Pressure being applied.

2. Further borrowing being entered into.

 

I can see the further borrowing argument, and not sure which side I come down on. I think that using a credit card perhaps isn't further borrowing as the lender has already agreed to lend you that money. The decision to make the 'loan' was made before the funds were called on, as opposed to a loan where the funds are called on and the decision to as to whether to make the loan is then made.

 

I think the dividing line is if a further lending facility needs to be extended or a new loan or an extension on a credit limit. It is a very debatable point though and I could easily be persuaded the other way.

 

ignoring the above, it seems to me that you still need pressure though. Asking or inviting isn't applying pressure. I think you'd need other stuff as well, shouting, threats, threatened legal action etc.

 

Is pressurising actually a word?

[ODC]

They don't actually ask or invite you on most occasions. Their telephone threat monkeys demand you pay by Credit Card, Borrow Money from a friend or relative or remortgage your home.

 

Is pressurising actually a word?

 

pres·sur·ize (prsh-rz)

tr.v. pres·sur·ized, pres·sur·iz·ing, pres·sur·iz·es

1. To maintain normal air pressure in (an enclosure, as an aircraft or submarine).

2. To put (gas or liquid) under a greater than normal pressure.

3. To design to resist pressure.

4. To pressure-cook.

5. Informal To subject to excessive stress, strain, or vexation:

[Kraken1]

There you go. Learn something new every day.

 

So... in summary - it is the context the 'request' that may determine if it breaches the rules. I suspect that in this case it would be difficult to prove a case.

[ODC]

There you go. Learn something new every day.

 

 

A day that passes where we each learn nothing is a wasted day.

[Kraken1]

Although, having thought on it again, I'm still not certain you can add an 'ing' to the end. Surely the correct term would be pressured or pressuring?

[ODC]

Pedants Corner

 

 

Pressurising is the present participle of pressurise

 

Pressuring therefore would be the present participle of pressure.

[2Grumpy]

What if your bank account is an overdraft. That too is further borrowing, especially if it is that payment that makes you go into the red - possibly for the first time - or over your overdraft limit.

[angry cat]

It is against the OFT Guidelines!

 

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:

 

...b. PRESSURISING debtors to sell property, to raise funds by further borrowing, or to extend their borrowing.

 

AC

[citizenB]

It is against the OFT Guidelines!

 

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:

 

...b. PRESSURISING debtors to sell property, to raise funds by further borrowing, or to extend their borrowing.

 

AC

 

I think that is the bit that would apply to suggesting peeps pay by credit card.

[angry cat]

Definately CB!

...or to extend their borrowing.

 

AC

[Kraken1]

I think at best it could be argued that it is against guidelines, but this is not clear cut or simple.

 

Firstly you would need to resolve the 'further borrowing' question, over which there is some debate, and then you need to show that pressure was used, and that it wasn't just suggested or that the question was asked.

[NitrousOxide]

I think that is the bit that would apply to suggesting peeps pay by credit card.

Exactly. Like I mentioned a credit card is rolling credit and each time it's used you are extending your credit.

[Kraken1]

you are not extending your credit, you are using credit that has already been extended to you.

[angry cat]

you are not extending your credit, you are using credit that has already been extended to you.

 

Semantics Kraken.

 

Paying by Credit Card will inevitably cost more money, thus extending the borrowing...

 

transactions/debits are applied prior to credits, that is if the debtor can afford to credit/ make the required payment, which would be extremely unlikely!

If said debtor could indeed afford to make the required payment, they would not be in the position of being pursued by collection agents.

 

We all know now that the use of Credit Cards is not an intelligent manner is which to look after ones money, especially a general consumer who is in debt, or being pursued for an alleged debt.

 

DCA's should not be requesting payment by Credit Card(s), it is against the OFT Guidelines.

 

AC

[Kraken1]

We all know now that the use of Credit Cards is not an intelligent manner is which to look after ones money, especially a general consumer who is in debt, or being pursued for an alleged debt.

 

Agreed.

 

DCA's should not be requesting payment by Credit Card(s)

,

 

Agreed.

 

it is against the OFT Guidelines.

 

Here I don't agree with you, I don't think that it is clear cut and there is substantial scope for debate on the issue. I suspect that the OFT won't be that interested unless you can show that pressure was exerted and I further suspect that they would adopt a similar test to that used in harassment claims in deciding if a complaint was serious. It is the way I would look at it.

 

You disagree, fair enough. Personally I wouldn't waste the stamp or my time on this type of complaint unless I could show that there was real pressure.

 

I'm also not certain it is a good idea to state that something is a categoric fact when you don't know it is. Unless perhaps you have an inside line to the oft that you can fill us in on?

 

As for 'semantic's - tosh. It is a debate about what the guidance means and whether a practice is against them. Debating the meaning of the words given is important.

[diddydicky]

I think that is the bit that would apply to suggesting peeps pay by credit card.

 

whereas a letter sent through the post with no personal contact

 

saying "we accept payment by cash cheque credit or debit cards isn't (IMO) encouraging pressuring or suggestingt people take on further credit to make a payment

[angry cat]

I Quote:

 

How To Pay:

WHY NOT PAY ONLINE?

VISA;

MasterCard;

AMERICAN EXPRESS;

Diners Club International;

All major Credit Cards accepted.

 

What would you call pressure?

some brute standing on ones doorstep, threatening all sorts;

taking a granny up to the ATM;

trying to embarass one in the work place;

phoning up the neighbours.

 

PAY UP OR, ELSE!

 

No cash, so how else will they pay?

 

AC

[ODC]

You are actually extending your credit. You are using your Credit Card for cash and will be charged interest on it from the moment the DCA debits you account.

 

No matter what way you look at it you are borrowing money to pay a DCA.

[diddydicky]

You are actually extending your credit. You are using your Credit Card for cash and will be charged interest on it from the moment the DCA debits you account.

 

No matter what way you look at it you are borrowing money to pay a DCA.

 

i accept that you may well have a point and as you know full well by now i am not legally qualified

 

but i would be a s t o u n d e d if the OFT or a court were to uphold such a frivolous attempt to claim that the originally posted comments amounted to someone being pressured to take on further lending

 

i

the oft and the courts know full well a genuine complaint of this nature and a frivolous one and i have to say i think this falls into the latter catagory

[NitrousOxide]

Letters like,

"You have 7 days to pay or (insert threat here). Please phone 0890 xxxx and pay by either debit or credit card".

That's a threat. A threat of legal action.

Using a credit card is borrowing. Pay a £500 debt off and the amount you pay back will be higher.

 

EDIT: Mind if I include this thread as part of the argument to the OFT? I will remove pointless posts and concentrate on the good arguments.

Edited June 25, 2009 by NitrousOxide
EDIT:

[cerberusalert]

Let us not forget the other problem with paying DCAs with a debit card, some have a nasty habit of either taking more than agreed or making multiple debits which can make the a/c overdrawn.

[diddydicky]

I reproduce the original post here as everyone seems to be moving away from it and putting in threats and other things that were not there

 

this is what the post said

 

thought there was some guidance or regs which stated they cannot ask you to borrow more or use credit cards?

 

The DCAs letter has a logo of visa etc cards and then states below pay using debit or credit card.

 

Any further clarification or assistance on this as I am hoping to formulate a letter on this alone to them and to OFT if my assumptions are right?

 

this was a logo showing different ways to pay

 

where in this post is there the remotest suggestion that this logo was s pressurising or encouraging people to take out further borrowing

 

now of course if you want to refer to other letters or documents that say something different then fair enough lets have a look at them and decide