Chantry collections contacting employer/ its war

[postggj]

a)for the purpose of, or in connection with, any legal proceedings (including prospective legal proceedings),

 

THIS IS THE PART THAT NEED CLARIFICATION

 

(including prospective legal proceedings),

 

 

MANY THANKS

[coledog]

Postie

 

That is very threatening and I think that you need to inform HR that you are not aware of any 'legal proceedings' and issue a complaint to OFT.

 

Do you know where this has come from? Have Chantry contacted you directly?

[sillygirl1]

It sounds like a back door attempt to 'serve' papers on you via work - which is strictly against guidelines, or an attempt to find out if the HR people are gullible enough to swallow that the 'papers' are an Attachment of Earnings and MUST be acted upon immediately - this tactic is known to be used by some payday loan companies, I even think our friends HFO have tried doing this with no success..... "we will contact your employer with an immediate request for sequestration of your salary to pay our debt...."

[coledog]

They are certainly part of the 'sub prime' lending market and pray on the fact that sub prime borrowers are idiots, which they are not, in the slightest.

[postggj]

Postie

 

That is very threatening and I think that you need to inform HR that you are not aware of any 'legal proceedings' and issue a complaint to OFT.

 

Do you know where this has come from? Have Chantry contacted you directly?

 

 

chantry have not contacted me directly

 

first i new of it was my employer (HR) sent me a form to give them authorisation to release my data to chantry

 

I CAN CONFIRM NO COURT CLAIM OR LEGAL PROCEEDINGS HAVE STARTED SO CALLING ME DEFENDANT HAS ME HOPPING MAD

[DonkeyB]

Post, don’t let the b*ggers get to you! That’s exactly what they want! Your one of the best at keeping others calm, so try and step back a bit yourself.

 

Have you any idea what it might be about? Could this be ID theft?

 

I think a letter before action to Chantry might well be in order. They haven’t even ‘alleged’ anything – straight in with defamation.

[DonkeyB]

(Apologies for typos, can’t edit)

[postggj]

thanks donkey

 

ime not distressed at all, to long n the tooth at this game

 

it just annoys me that they stoop this low and most of the time they get away with it

 

WELL NOT THIS TIME CHANTRY

 

DEFAMATION HERE I COME

[postggj]

JUST A QUICK UPDATE

 

STAGE 1 GRIEVANCE SUBMITTED TO HR AT WORK FOR THERE CONDUCT IN RELEASING MY PERSONAL DATA WITHOUT AUTHORISATION (DONE)

 

RECEIVED THIS FROM CHANTRY

 

I SENT THEM AN EMAIL AND THREW THE BOOK AT THEM, I HELD NOTHING BACK, THEY PICKED ON THE WRONG PERSON WITH ME.

 

LETS SEE HOW THEY TRY AND JUSTIFY THAT LETTER SENT TO MY EMPLOYER:-)

 

 

[napoleon_dynamite]

Just a thought.

As far as I am able to work out, english law allows actions for libel to be brought for any published statements alleged to defame a named or identifiable individual or individuals in a manner that causes them loss in their trade or profession, or causes a reasonable person to think worse of them (good old wikipedia!!!).

Was the statement actually published? Has anyone else apart from your HR department seen the letter? And have you suffered any quantifiable damage or loss? If no, then defamation may be a bit difficult to prove.

[postggj]

INTERESTING COMMENTS FROM A NEW POSTER

 

I USE ENGLISH LAW, NOT WIKIPEDIA

 

THIS IS DEFAMATION, NOT LIBEL

 

What is defamation?

 

Defamation is a false statement made by one individual about another. This statement attempts to discredit that person's character, reputation or credit worthiness. In order to be defamatory, such a statement must be communicated to at least one other person.

 

IN THIS CASE H.R

 

IVE HAD THIS CHECKED OUT BY MY UNION SOLICITORS

 

4 MORE WEEKS TO GO TO GIVE A RESPONSE TO MY COMPLAINT CHANTRY

2 MORE WEEKS FOR MY LETTER BEFORE ACTION

 

IME USING FULL CIVIL PROCEEDURE RULES/ PRE ACTION PROTOCOL

 

BY THE BOOK

 

TICK TOCK TICK TOCK

Edited April 15, 2011 by postggj

[Guest]

post

 

re defamation - 'liability for defamation is divided into the two categories of libel and slander'. libel for eg is re anything written etc. slander for eg is re anything spoken/gestured etc. re damages, the law presumes at least 'some' general damages re libel eg 'injury to reputation'. a 'quantifiable (ie monetary) loss' (that ND refers to) (ie 'special' damages) is distinct from 'general' damages. an action re libel would not require there to be proof of special damages (unless special damages are being claimed in addition to general damages, but then if the special damages claim fails it would not prevent the claim for general damages). whereas, in certain cases an action re slander would require there to be proof of special damage. hope this helps.

imo

Edited April 16, 2011 by Ford
typ

[napoleon_dynamite]

post

 

re defamation - 'liability for defamation is divided into the two categories of libel and slander'. libel for eg is re anything written etc. slander for eg is re anything spoken/gestured etc. re damages, the law presumes at least 'some' general damages re libel eg 'injury to reputation'. a 'quantifiable (ie monetary) loss' (that ND refers to) (ie 'special' damages) is distinct from 'general' damages. an action re libel would not require there to be proof of special damages (unless special damages are being claimed in addition to general damages, but then if the special damages claim fails it would not prevent the claim for general damages). whereas, in certain cases an action re slander would require there to be proof of special damage. hope this helps.

imo

So thinking aloud... as this is regarding written matter, it would be libel rather than slander? And if a quantifiable, monetary loss can be demonstrated the award of damages would be general damages for loss of reputation PLUS special damages for monetary loss. Two bites at the cherry then!

[Ell-enn]

Did your HR department actually give them information ? that's well out of order !

[Guest]

So thinking aloud... as this is regarding written matter, it would be libel rather than slander? And if a quantifiable, monetary loss can be demonstrated the award of damages would be general damages for loss of reputation PLUS special damages for monetary loss. Two bites at the cherry then!

 

yes, 'any writing' is libel (ie defamation). no, no 'quantifiable' (ie monetary) loss is required re libel re general damages. general damages are 'presumed'. 'special' damages could be claimed in addition if applicable, but it would not affect any claim re general damages. an important distinction is re whether or not it is 'actionable' without evidence of damages. re libel and general damages, yes it would be as it is presumed. there's no 'two bites....' - if there is libel then it is defamation, and the aggrieved is entitled to full redress/compensation.

as post says, 'communicated to at least one other person'.

imo

Edited April 18, 2011 by Ford
typo

[Magnum]

sorry to butt into your post but I am wondering if there was any update on this post as Chantry did exactly the same to me. However my HR dept were quite good they contacted me and advised that I did not have to agree to release the information just send them written confimration that I don't agree. Not sure what Chantry's tactic is as I had already been in contact with them for several months (and they have responded to me at my home address) repaying £25.00 per month but as they are adding £99.00 monthly payments this makes no difference as they were unable to get the information they have taken to contacting me again advising that they want my income and expenditure and cannot accept the £25.00. I did not contact them about their contact to my employer (February) and do not know if it is now too late to do this?

[BankFodder]

Best to complain to the authorities about this kind of contact

[inkslinger]

Shocking behavior indeed........

[postggj]

just a quick update

 

postal ping pong still ongoing

 

waiting for my SAR then its a letter before action

 

little do they realize Ive been in full contact with my union barrister who is just waiting for the green light

 

just following full practice directions and pre-action protocols

[postggj]

well well

 

chantry, you still cant get it right

 

i sent an SAR to chantry AND HAVE GOT BACK SOME ONES DETAILS WITH THE SAME NAME AS ME BUT AN ADDRESS IVE NEVER LIVED AT.

 

that lot is going up to the ico on Monday morning.

 

chantry, you just keep digging a bigger hole for your self.

 

NOW GOING THROUGH THIS SAR

 

ITS A SPEEDLOAN AGREEMENT (NEVER HAD ONE MYSELF AS STATED)

 

THEIR IS NO DEFAULT OR TERMINATION NOTICE, OR NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT. AS I UNDERSTAND IT CHANTRY ARE SPEEDLOANS IN HOUSE DCA

 

SO MY QUESTION IS

EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE IN HOUSE, DOES A DEFAULT AND TERMINATION NOTICE WITH ANY NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT NEED TO BE PRODUCED IN THE SAR DIRECT TO CHANTRY.

 

AND

 

ON THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT IT LISTS

 

DATE AND PAYMENT DUE BUT UNDERNEATH ACCRUED LPI

 

ANY TAKERS ON WHAT LPI IS

[postggj]

 

Edited May 21, 2011 by postggj

[DonkeyB]

Unbelievable... at least there is tacit admission that they fecked up. But it’s still a misguided response. They have no right to contact your employer if there is no legal action (and what they can do is limited anyway), which they admit there is not. It’s a serious and deliberate threat to you.

 

Get that straight off to the ICO and the OFT.

[postggj]

thanks for dropping in

i have them by the nether regions and they know it

 

what i can tell you that this defamation will end up in court

 

that i can asure you on

 

slowly slowly, catchy monkey

[Dotty50]

LPI = Late payment interest

 

Possibly

[postggj]

Thanks dotty

 

ive confirmed that now

 

many thanks