Are BCW breaking the law?

[mr.ton]

They have already been ordered by myself to cease all contact & had all the usual letters sent off to them (Lord Evershed & so on.....)

Yet today, they tell me my reference to the OFT guidelines is "misconceived" & that they will continue to seek settlement.

I left my last threat to them till last, that should they persist with this course of harrassment i will have the police involved.

Looks like that option will now be used

[Huff&Puff]

I fear that the police will just tell you that it is a "civil matter" From what I can see, very few cases have been won on harassment, even where the level of phone calls has been ridiculous. Anyway, I thought you were into DCA baiting, Mr Ton? You can't bait them if they have gone away

[mr.ton]

I dont mean the police as in 999, i mean more as in contacting the none emergency numbers (Glasgow none emergency police numbers) & seeking advice that way...an experiment as such, to see how far i can push that line of things against them

I know & they know that they wont get a penny out of me without going to a county court 1st - they ve been told in no uncertain terms what is what on everything etc...

They want to engage in psychological mind games with me as such, so lets see how far i can push on that front using the system in full against them before they do snap

[angry cat]

Not sure which OC your thread relates to?

 

However, if the agreement is unenforceable or, there is no agreement then, BCW should not be pursuing you; attempting to enforce the alleged debt!

 

I actually had some dealings with BCW some years back and saw them off quite easily.

 

Some OC's will continue to pursue, even without a credit agreement or, a valid credit agreement.

 

In that scanario, one just has to beat them back by use of established legislation.

 

IMHO, the police will not be interested in civil matters that, relate to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, that is a job for the so-called Regulators;

OFT and TS.

 

At the end of the day, ones just has to fight ones corner...

 

AC

[mr.ton]

Gosh i am so cruel....ive just phoned them & went through security (quite willingly)....told the threat monkey to just hang on a sec whilst i get my bank card from the draw........then proceeded to just request a copy of their complaints proceedure once he was ready to take payment

[Uptotheneck]

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

[Bazooka Boo]

I do....and don't agree:p

 

Harassment in whatever form 'IS' a 'criminal offence'.

 

If after repeated and recorded evidence can be shown as to their constant breaches of the Protection from Harassment Act then there is absolutely no reason why the Police will not entertain the issue.

 

 

Prohibition of harassment

 

(1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct—

(a) which amounts to harassment of another, and

(b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows—

(a) that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,

(b) that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or

© that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable.

 

Then there is the Malicious Communications Act

Which clearly states:

Offence of sending letters etc. with intent to cause distress or anxiety

 

(1) Any person who sends to another person—

(a) a letter or other article which conveys—

(i) a message which is indecent or grossly offensive;

(ii) a threat; or

(iii) information which is false and known or believed to be false by the sender; or

(b) any other article which is, in whole or part, of an indecent or grossly offensive nature,

is guilty of an offence if his purpose, or one of his purposes, in sending it is that it should, so far as falling within paragraph (a) or (b) above, cause distress or anxiety to the recipient or to any other person to whom he intends that it or its contents or nature should be communicated.

 

And the final bow is the Telecommunications Act

Which again states :

(1) A person who— (a)

sends, by means of a public telecommunication system, a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or

 

(b)

sends by those means, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, a message that he knows to be false or persistently makes use for that purpose of a public telecommunication system,

 

 

shall be guilty of an offence and liable on summary conviction to [F2 imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale or both].

(2) Subsection (1) above does not apply to anything done in the course of providing a [F3 programme service (within the meaning of the Broadcasting Act 1990)] F4 .]

 

Granted there are caveats with all of those Acts in which they an try to wriggle out of, but I do strongly believe that a quiet word at your local cop shop, even as Mr.Ton says, just to get some info on what action could or should be taken, might actually have some very unexpected results and may even mean they themselves ring the DCA or harasser to say 'we know what your up to and if it doesn't stop, were going to put you on the naughty step!'

 

That is if they have a naughty step after all the DCA's appear to have collected everyone's:eek:

 

 

Boo;)

[NailPost]

You could try claiming BCW are harrassing you but a muh better complaint is to report BCW (and any other collector who chances their arm without any documentation) is to claim fraud by false representation. This is far more serious and carries a hefty prison sentence on conviction. If more CAGers were to take this route it could concentrate the minds of collecting cretins to be a bit more careful.

 

By the way don't take the "its a civil matter sir, now go away and let us finish this crossword in peace" routine from a Plod and/or civilian call taker. Insist on speaking to a senior officer if you are being given the runaround

[mr.ton]

I do not class harrassment in any form as just a civil matter whatsoever, it is illegal in the UK, therefore it must be a crime?

Regardless of weather it is an individual or a company doing the harrassment, if you insist that you are left alone, then should the person or company fail to obey that order, then it is a police matter surely?

[Huff&Puff]

Well yes, I don't disagree with any of you. Harassment is a crime, and the police should take it seriously. But the fact remains that they don't, and it's hard to see how they can be made to.

 

I might add that I don't particularly blame the police for this, they have been forced into having a "tickbox mentality" by idiotic government targets, and I don't suppose being harassed by a DCA ticks any boxes

[mr.ton]

Yes you are right about the tick box culture....

But its for the public to put the pressure on the police (not by use of 999 i hasten to add), that harrassment of any sort, even by that of the DCA's is illegal & needs to be stopped once and for all.

[Bazooka Boo]

Regardless of weather it is an individual or a company doing the harrassment, if you insist that you are left alone, then should the person or company fail to obey that order, then it is a police matter surely?

 

Yes you are correct Mr.Ton..harassment is a Police matter.

 

I would be interested to find out if you did take all the harassment evidence to your local station what their response would be?

 

They cannot simply fob you off with any excuse, as they are then answerable to the IPCC as they will be failing to investigate a criminal offence...