No CCA received but now 2 DCAs chasing me.

[marcander]

Hi,

I took out a personal unsecured loan with Al and Leics in 2000 for £15,000. I fell on hard times in 2001, was defaulted and then started an informal/temporary payment starting at £2.00 per month in 2001. I have continued to pay increased amounts until in 2009 I was paying £35 per month and was asked by the new owners Santandar to substantially increase payments or face county court.

 

I am a carer for my disabled wife and after suffering from cancer myself in 2006 I receive only income support and carer's allowance. I told them I couldn't increase it much but I felt pressured by the threat of Court. I offered to pay £85 p month even though I couldnt afford it. They said they would accept this arrangement until April this year.

 

However, in January this year I received a pre court notice of intended litigation letter from Moorcraft. They quoted the balance at around £12,500 and said if no comms etc or full payment within 7 days then possible court etc.

 

I sent a CCA request immediately and they received on 9th Feb. They acknowledged and said would pass on to Santand and would cease any collection activity. I continued to pay the next 2 months payments, I then stopped my payments in May as the account was now well in dispute.

 

In May Moorcraft said they could not comply as they were not now handling the account and to avoid doubt I should resubmit to their client. They returned my £1 fee. I have not re-submitted to anyone as I believe I need only send one CCA request. I believe the account is still therefore in dispute while I await my CCA.

 

In July I received a nice letter from Santander saying they had noticed I had not made any payments and could they be of any help? They also sent a statement and lo and behold there was a credit for £1 on it even though Moorcraft had returned my CCA fee. I didn't answer.

 

4 weeks ago I received a pre court possible litigation letter again from Moorcroaft, same account but a different Moorcraft ref number so they obviously dont know its the same account. 2 weeks ago I received another from Moorcraft saying could they help with debt counselling.

Then last week I received another pre court possible litigation letter from moorcraft. On the same day I received a phone call from Equidebt, I did not answer the security questions and told them "in writing only from now on."

This morning I received a letter from Equidebt following the call, stating the balance to Santandar and saying they hope this clarifies the matter but not asking for money.

 

My assumptions for anyone's comments are;

 

Santandar have no CCA aggreement.

Moorcraft have backed out once it was in dispute but have since been given a batch to deal with from Santand and dont realise that its the same account.

 

Equidebt are having a look at it to see what their chances of success are because their letter does not actually ask for payment but acts as if I had contacted them. I assume that they are aware of account in dispute.

 

The Equidebt phone number has called me again this week but I have not answered.

 

I am logging all calls and keeping letters etc and considering this account is still in dispute to have two DCAs chasing in the same week by letter and phone seems to be adding ammunition to my case.

 

With the help and education I have received from this great site I see my next moves as nothing really, I believe the account is still in dispute and therefore I am still within my rights to withhold payments until I receive my CCA.

 

I would appreciate any comments.

 

Just one question really, they cannot try and bankrupt me can they? without a CCA?

 

Anyways thanks to all

 

comments appreciated,

 

M

[lord_tiger_putin]

Hi,

This morning I received a letter from Equidebt following the call, stating the balance to Santandar and saying they hope this clarifies the matter but not asking for money.

M

 

The OFT guidelines on Debt Collection states that:

 

Creditors should not use more than one debt-collecting agency at any one time.

 

I would suggest you send a formal complaint to Santandar, including asking them for their complaint procedure and asked them to answer why they are breaching the OFT guidelines. Make it also clear to them that you will report this to the FOS if you do not receive a satisfactory reply from them. (Complaints to the FOS costs £500, no matter the outcome, so it is something they will want to prevent).

 

This will make them sweat a bit and probably get one slime ball off your back!

[harrassed senior]

Well, you could send the 'bemused' letter to Equidebt which states why are you chasing me when the debt is already 'in dispute' and should not be passed on. However, a few months' ago a fellow CAG member and myself were receiving letters from Equidebt, same day, same letter. I replied to each one of the 4 letters I received, he ignored all 4. I never received any replies to my letters, and after the 4 attempts they went away from both of us!!

 

Personally, I would wait until they sort it out amongst themselves. You have logged everything, and your letters are being ignored, so sit back and wait. The Account IS still in dispute and that should be an end to it until or if anyone ever supplies an answer to your CCA request.

[PGH7447]

and ignore the Pr-School division letters from morecrap, they are designed to intimidate and have no legal force behind them whatsoever, the account is well and truly in dispute and requires no further action from you until such time has they provide a valid agreement.

[marcander]

Thanks all for the helpful comments.

 

The overwhelming reaction is to write here and there and use the "in dispute" letters but I agree that I am not obliged to do anything further after formally requesting the CCA so I will just sit tight and collect the ammunition.

 

Another letter today from Equidet requiring full payment. One of their debt collectors will be "contacting me either at home or at my place of work". (I should be so lucky) I am also getting a phone call a day ( unanswered of course) after telling them last week on their first call that I insist on communication by letter only.

 

I have an Eegg credit card debt defaulted also in 2001 and being handled from day one by Moorcraft. Same with that, was paying £1.00 per month 2001 now paying £30.00 per month. The odd thing about that is that I seem to remember the original debt was about £4250.00 in 2001 and even after all my informal payments from 2001 to today the debt 18 months ago was around £6200.00. I suspect that there may be fees and charges applied. I have never had a statement from Moorcraft/Eggg so I am today sending them a CCA request and we will see where we go from there. Tell me if I have it wrong but I think it's better to make a CCA request before a SAR as if there is no CCA agreement then everything stops anyway. If there is a bona fide agreement then maybe a SAR and see if there are reclaimable fees.

 

I really do appreciate the help and advice on here.

 

So, thanks again to all. By the way where are the little stars to click on on profiles? I couldn't find them.

 

kindest regards

 

M

[PGH7447]

always cca the dca or moron trying to collect and sar the OC, if you have been paying and the amount has gone up then include with the cca a demand for a statement of accounts that they must now supply to you every year

[marcander]

I have now received 11 phone calls from Equidibt and 7 phonecalls from Moorcraft over the last 3 weeks. I have also received 8 letters in total from both over the same period. The latest moorcraft says they will accept £120 per month and the latest equdebbt says they will accept £622 per month and unless they hear from me they will assume this is ok with me.

 

All this for the same account and whilst that account is still in dispute for non-compliance/supply of CCA.

 

It gets better and better.

 

I read of a judge saying that these companies should at least keep proper records and know what they are doing.

 

Anyways will keep the thread posted,

thanks again to all,

 

M

[Bazooka Boo]

Send the muppets these letters, http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/52-harassment/135--harassment-by-telephone-response-letter-

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/resources/templates-library/52-harassment/133-formal-notice-of-telephone-recording-

 

As for their continued misuse and telephone harassment make a formal complaint to http://www.ofcom.org.uk/contact-us/

 

127Improper use of public electronic communications network E+W+S+N.I.

 

(1)A person is guilty of an offence if he—

 

(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character; or

 

(b)causes any such message or matter to be so sent.

 

(2)A person is guilty of an offence if, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety to another, he—

 

(a)sends by means of a public electronic communications network, a message that he knows to be false,

 

(b)causes such a message to be sent; or

 

©persistently makes use of a public electronic communications network.

 

(3)A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or to both.

 

(4)Subsections (1) and (2) do not apply to anything done in the course of providing a programme service (within the meaning of the Broadcasting Act 1990 (c. 42)).

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127

 

1 Prohibition of harassment. E+W

 

(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.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/section/1

[cerberusalert]

Complain to Trading Standards via Consumer Direct about these muppets http://www.consumerdirect.gov.uk/contact

 

Both their derrières will then get a good kicking.

[PGH7447]

£622 per month LOL, even by these idiots standards this is taking the proverbial, some phone drone hoping to boost their xmas bonus

[Bazooka Boo]

£622 a month will be paying the morons rent OR Mortgage¬!