I've never heard of this bunch - have you?

[Bigdebtor]

DonkeyB

 

I saw that. I also saw Visa, Mastercard, Maestro etc. at thh bottom - so do they own Debt Help Services jointly too?

 

I think they SHOULD say "1st Credit Limited t/a Debt help Services" - but maybe they are just letting the charity Debt Help Services use their offices FOC?????

 

BD

[sillygirl1]

Debt Help Services are Ist Credit's in house 'debt counsellors' set up to make sure THEIR debt gets precedence over all other debts, regardless of law.

 

I think a complaint to East Surrey Trading Standards about 1st Credit is in order here - they cover Reigate as far as I know....

[Bigdebtor]

SG1

 

I am not surprised by what you say and don't believe they are being fully transparent with this type of letterhead . I recollect from BBC Watchdog (I think?) that 1st credit have been singled out by the appropriate Minister for being struck off if they step out of line again - the worst of a bad bunch?

 

Incidentally I see their other cronies Connaught don't put THEIR Registered Office address on their letterheads - another breach of company law?

 

Maybe they need to get some good lawyers to help them sort themselves out?

 

BD

[DonkeyB]

Again, the letter clearly identifies who they are. No leeway there! It's just a crap tactic.

[JonCris]

Unlawful or not any default in any name will be registered at the OP's address thereby affecting him/her from obtaining credit. The names will be thought to be linked

 

If they do the OP can hardly complain if he'she doesn't tell them they've got the wrong person ........ whereas if they do they cause them some grief

[angrydebtor]

they wish to create a relationship? well tell them that the relationship is over and that you dont want to see them anymore lol

[Bigdebtor]

Thought you might find this interesting - be sure to tell Uncle Ray at the OFT if 1st credit are still being naughty;) :

 

OFT imposes requirements on 1st Credit over debt collection practices

 

20/09 25 February 2009

The OFT has taken action against 1st Credit Ltd requiring the company to improve its debt collection practices.

 

The OFT has imposed 'requirements' on 1st Credit using consumer credit powers, after an investigation found that some of its business processes and procedures failed to meet satisfactory standards. As a result, 1st Credit Ltd and its associated companies must:

• refrain from issuing statutory demands warning of bankruptcy where it is unlikely that proceedings will be initiated
  
• not discuss legal action with consumers unless it is likely that such action will be taken
  
• ensure that sensitive cases involving vulnerable individuals, for example those with mental health or medical problems, are dealt with appropriately, and
  
• ensure that all matters of concern raised with them by the free advice sector and other third parties are dealt with appropriately.
  

1st Credit must also report back to the OFT every six months providing statistics regarding the number of enforcement actions it has taken against debtors.

Failure to comply with the requirements could lead to a fine of up to £50,000 for each occurance and/or possible revocation of 1st Credit's consumer credit licence.

In 2008, following receipt of an application to vary an associated company's licence, the OFT carried out an in-depth investigation into the business practices and procedures employed by companies operating under the 1st Credit banner. In assessing the companies' competence to carry out consumer credit activities, the OFT conducted on-site visits and reviewed complaints received about 1st Credit Ltd's debt collection practices via consumers, Citizens Advice, CCCS and Consumer Direct.

The OFT raised concerns about its dissatisfaction with 1st Credit's behaviour and confirmed that it was looking to impose requirements to improve some of the company's business practices. 1st Credit acknowledged the problems and, as allowed under the Consumer Credit Act, proposed necessary changes to address the OFT's concerns.

 

Ray Watson, OFT Director for Consumer Credit, said:

'The OFT welcomes the constructive approach that 1st Credit has taken in responding to the OFT's concerns about its activities.

'Debt collection firms have a clear legal obligation to deal fairly and proportionately with consumers. This is more important than ever given the current economic climate, when people may already be suffering as a consequence of debt problems. We will continue to use our licensing powers to take firm action to protect consumers where debt collectors engage in oppressive behaviour or practices that fail to comply with our guidance.'

Perhaps Uncle Bryan Carter will be next in the spotlight?

BD

[cerberusalert]

Unlawful or not any default in any name will be registered at the OP's address thereby affecting him/her from obtaining credit. The names will be thought to be linked

 

If they do the OP can hardly complain if he'she doesn't tell them they've got the wrong person ........ whereas if they do they cause them some grief

 

If they did that they would in effect be 'black listing' an address and that is illegal.

[JonCris]

If they did that they would in effect be 'black listing' an address and that is illegal.

 

Of course they would but what don't people understand

THEY DON'T CARE THEY DON'T GIVE a TOSS they'll do it anyway cos the OFT are useless AND the DCA's are a mean bunch of barstewards