How can I use admin charge judgement against a DCA to good effect?

[questioner]

When it comes to issuing admin charges for being unnecessarily harassed, I find that most annoying DCAs pay up after a little initial complaining rather than taking it into litigation.

 

However, I recently sued one in court that was an in-house agent for a leading bank. They wanted to take it all the way; therefore I met them in front of the judge.

 

Thankfully, the judge came out in favour of me and said that the DCA was virtually wasting court time as the matter of a simple admin charge was disproportionate to costs. The bank later paid my admin fee, costs etc. They were decidedly unhappy about my victory.

 

Of course I now have the judgment filed away and I am wondering what good effect I can put this to now.

Can I perhaps use the judgment against the DCA/bank to report them to the CRA - issue a default against them...?

 

Or maybe use it to protest to the ICO that they are breaching the DPA?

 

There must be some way we can use the judgment to good effect?

 

Expert opinions always welcomed...

 

 

 

 

Q

[citizenB]

This is an interesting question, Q.

 

Have you contacted the Office of Fair Trading ? I am sure they would be interested in hearing that DCAs continue to breach OFT guidelines even though they have been advised of a dispute.

 

The fact that you then issued a claim against the DCA and won should put others on notice that they cant continue to make threats of court, CCJ, bailiffs etc when there are unresolved disputes with the OC.

 

I wonder if the Information Commissioner would be able to do anything. In this particular situation, if I remember correctly the OC is still in default of you s78 request and have only partially complied with your SAR DPA1998 request.

 

I know it has been discussed on the forums, that if there is no signed agreement, then the OC shoudnt be able to say that you have agreed to your data being passed on to third parties. I wonder if the ICO will see it the same way. Worth the attempt I would think.

 

Lets hope other caggers will be able to offer their comments.

[questioner]

CB - yes thanks for this.

 

The ICO may indeed be interested to hear that without any sign of an agreement this outrageous bank has set the dogs on me resulting in them being forced at court to pay my admin fee, etc.

 

I shall have to meditate on this one.

 

I intend to give them all hell and will take whatever action necessary to halt their abuse of the CCA.

[BankFodder]

Which bank and which DCA?

[citizenB]

Which bank and which DCA?

 

Barclaycard / Mercers

 

Long story short.

 

There are two accounts which have been in dispute for nigh on 12 months. BC in default of s78 request on both accounts. They are in fact accounts in his OH's name, but he has dealt with all the correspondence, etc.

 

Via a Subject Access request questioner realised that something called payment break plan was in fact a payment protection insurance. It was not requested and due to a medical condition, had any questions been asked, the insurance should not have been provided.

 

He set about requesting a reclaim and was totally blanked, but at the same time B/card set Mercers on him.

 

At first he just wrote back to Mercers and B/card, explaining there was a dispute but just received more strongly worded and scary threats from Mercers.

 

Then he decided enough was enough and put Mercers on notice that should they continue to threaten him whilst the accounts were in dispute he would charge them £50.00 for each letter he was forced to respond to. The only communication he wanted to receive was either the court papers they kept threatening him with or advice that his complaint was being investigated. They ignored him, sent him more threats by way of "48 notices". So he sent them an invoice for £50.00.

 

When no payment had been received after 3 weeks, he issued a claim against Mercers out of his local court. Mercers didnt acknowledge the claim and the court awarded Q, judgment by default.

 

About a week after they received the notice of Judgment, Barclays Bank filed an application to strike out the judgment with a whinging witness statement claiming that their postal system was such that it would take almost 4 weeks for a letter to reach it's intended destination within the Bank. That as Mercers were a wholly owned subsidiary of Barclays Bank Plc that they were going to fight the judgment.

 

Q put together a suitably worded response opposing the application.

 

Remember, this is for an amount of £50.00 so when Q arrived at court for the application hearing, he was astonished to be confronted by a Barrister who made an attempt to frighten Q's OH into discontinuing advising that they were going to entering the world of contract law and Q wouldnt stand a chance. Q put a stop to the conversation and said he was going to advise the Judge of this intimidation.

 

Apparently they were not inside the court for long. Q's oppostion statement which pointed out that an organisation the size of Barclaycard should at least have a system in place that would prioritise legal paperwork, therefore they shouldnt be allowed to use that as an excuse for not responding. He pointed out that all the way through, he had been reasonable in his request for documents and for someone to deal with his complaint. That Barclays should not be allowed to introduce contract law for what was a simple admin charge.

 

The Judge apparently was not too happy with the Barrister for a couple of reasons and agreed with Q. The application was dismissed and the earlier judgment stood. On top of which costs were to be paid to Q for the hearing.

 

The Order was worded.

 

"The application be dismissed without considering the merits on the grounds taht it is disproportionate and contrary to the over riding objectives.

"

[citizenB]

I meant to say also, that part of their application to strike out was that B/shark believed they had a triable issue citing contract law

 

Barclays/Mercers was the reason that Q invested in Truecall because they were constantly telephoning. Once that was installed, the hate mail started

[UnmoderatetheNet]

This is a great story, this deserves media attention, love it, well done to you, hopefully more people go for it.

[questioner]

QB – many thanks for presenting this concise run down of events.

 

I seem to recall that the judge also hinted that this case could open the floodgates for others in a similar position.

In layman’s terms the judge appeared to be telling the bank that a small claims admin fee like mine was NOT worth wasting the court’s time over, i.e. it was “disproportionate to costs”. The representative was not a happy little bunny about this and tried to protest but the judge virtually through him out on his ear. Go away you silly little man - seemed to be the gist of what the judge said to the bank representative.

 

The admin fee was related to the account that did ‘not’ hold PPI (PBP) too. This is a significant latter point that I want to reiterate.

 

I wish to know how I can utilise the ‘Judgment’ to best effect against this horrid company. They most certainly DO NOT want this story leaking out as it will naturally affect their ability to hassle consumers via their belligerent DCA techniques.

I do hope that my efforts will help others too that have been targeted by them for ‘treatment.’

 

As I have said before – most companies pay up on admin fees, but this one got overconfident and paid the price.

[Jameson78]

I think this has the makings of a cult thread. Thank you Q!

Subbing!

[rockwell304]

This is brilliant! Well done!

 

I am just about ready to send a £70 (£35 x 2)admin charge to Capquest for the time and effort taken in trying to interpret their drivel!

[questioner]

'Cap-pest' lol - ah yes....

 

They are a joke.

 

I managed to rid myself of them before I even had a truecall to block such calls and before I was sending admin fees.

 

Their foolish little phone monkey got too shirty and I happily pressed back.

 

He thankfully lost his cool following a touch of sarcasm from yours truly and even gave his first name. I reported him to OFT and very quickly I received a terribly grovelling apology from CP. They subsequently closed the account and sent it back to Capone. That was a very nice day;)

 

These days my mate truecall tells them all to waddle off - or words to that effect .

 

I still log the zapped calls though and report any persistent callers to OFT etc with a full written log of the calls.

 

 

I still could do with a bit of nice advice though about how best to utilise the last winning judgment against these poor, pathetic creatures.

 

Good luck all with your individual quests against the oppressors.

[Fred Bassett]

'Cap-pest' lol - ah yes....

 

They are a joke.

 

I managed to rid myself of them before I even had a truecall to block such calls and before I was sending admin fees.

 

Their foolish little phone monkey got too shirty and I happily pressed back.

 

He thankfully lost his cool following a touch of sarcasm from yours truly and even gave his first name. I reported him to OFT and very quickly I received a terribly grovelling apology from CP. They subsequently closed the account and sent it back to Capone. That was a very nice day;)

 

These days my mate truecall tells them all to waddle off - or words to that effect .

 

I still log the zapped calls though and report any persistent callers to OFT etc with a full written log of the calls.

 

 

I still could do with a bit of nice advice though about how best to utilise the last winning judgment against these poor, pathetic creatures.

 

Good luck all with your individual quests against the oppressors.

 

 

I can't help you with that but I remain very interested in your efforts and will hopefully be utilising them soon myself.

 

Regards.

 

Fred

[questioner]

Fred - thanks for that.

 

I hope you can good some good results as I have.

[babybear39]

Hey Q

 

Subbing as cr@pquest are catching up with 1st crud re: SDs in my view

[Guest HeftyHippo]

if you want to make use of it, send a simple press release to suitable newspapers, banking/management/consumer journals etc giving the bare facts. It would get more attention if they were late paying because then the headline would be "Enforcement action for unpaid debt taken against bank/dca" etc

 

not only do the public need to know, but the industry as well

[Rayne]

Press DEFO need to know on this one. Q ur a star :D

[questioner]

Press DEFO need to know on this one. Q ur a star :D

 

 

 

It is rather tempting to blow this one out into the open - will think more on it...

 

 

I still require more advice however regarding how best to use the Judgement recently gained.

Edited July 28, 2010 by questioner

[questioner]

Hey Q

 

Subbing as cr@pquest are catching up with 1st crud re: SDs in my view

 

Ah yes "cr@pquest"

 

What a pesky little outfit they can be.

 

I had to rid myself of them when they took on a Capone file last year. I advise anyone to complain to OFT about them and others as it all helps to stuff them up.

 

I am also currently in the process of dealing with them over a BOS dispute that they should not be playing with. The last shark played with the file before protests and threats of admin charges forced it to let go. So now these unprofessional little clowns are on the case... so very predictable they are too...yawn!!

 

I feel they will end up like Ist Crudite and even possibly lose their trading licence before too long.

 

If I had no disputes I think I would have to create some as this sport is so addictive...

 

 

Happy days .

 

Say BB - Do you have any new data that I may be able to utilise against cr@pquest seeing as you mention them?

[babybear39]

Allegedly, the guy that signs their SDs MAY not exist

[questioner]

Allegedly, the guy that signs their SDs MAY not exist

 

 

The one who signed the last love letter to me is just a messy squiggle with no printed name next to it..

[lord_tiger_putin]

When it comes to issuing admin charges for being unnecessarily harassed, I find that most annoying DCAs pay up after a little initial complaining rather than taking it into litigation.

 

However, I recently sued one in court that was an in-house agent for a leading bank. They wanted to take it all the way; therefore I met them in front of the judge.

 

Thankfully, the judge came out in favour of me and said that the DCA was virtually wasting court time as the matter of a simple admin charge was disproportionate to costs. The bank later paid my admin fee, costs etc. They were decidedly unhappy about my victory.

 

Of course I now have the judgment filed away and I am wondering what good effect I can put this to now.

Can I perhaps use the judgment against the DCA/bank to report them to the CRA - issue a default against them...?

 

Or maybe use it to protest to the ICO that they are breaching the DPA?

 

There must be some way we can use the judgment to good effect?

 

Expert opinions always welcomed...

 

 

 

 

Q

 

Any advice what to reply when they states that they do not accept any charge as they have not entered in to any contract to do so?

[cerberusalert]

Don't you find it strange that they like to slap charges on an a/c even though you have no contract with them?

 

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

[lord_tiger_putin]

Don't you find it strange that they like to slap charges on an a/c even though you have no contract with them?

 

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

 

Actually I send the invoice to Albion Collections but receive this response from Aqua Card! The situation is exactly the same as the OP.

[cerberusalert]

Albion are the inhouse collection arm of the RBS who own Aqua Card.

[Drederick Tatum]

Any advice what to reply when they states that they do not accept any charge as they have not entered in to any contract to do so?

 

There's a similar thread here if you're interested where he talks about this scenario in the opening post.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?257619-Turning-the-tables-on-DCA-Bullies