Heres a good one for you. CSL "On stirct Time Limit"

[teaboy2]

OK cut along story short, when i first started my company i entered into a business broadband and mobile anywhere contract and on one single bill a month, on the bases that it would all be on 1 single account and subscription fees for service each month would be as quoted. Needless to say i ended up with 4 difference accounts, a security system that was a big white box from an American firm that i never asked for or wanted, and non of the bills accept the broadband one saying what the hell they were for. So to cut to the chase BT basically committing misrepresentation in order to get me to sign a contract with them in my opinion, which makes the contract void. So ceased making any payments and switched providers soon after.

 

Now BT have not passed on the board band account debt which they claim around £2,500 including cancellation fees. Nor have they made the slightest whimper about it since i last wrote back putting them in their rightful place, which was back in early 2010 of the top of my head.

 

Anyway they have passed on the mobile account after terminating it in march this year despite no payment being made or the phone being usable since at least June 2009. Now they have past the Mobile debt onto CSL and here is their second letter, which completely lacks any response i to my earlier letter written in response to their first letter.

 

 

Pay Attention to the last sentence, "Please do not simply write as our time limits are strict" WTF, Who they trying to kid, do they really think i am going to give a **** about their time limits, what about the time i waste dealing with the Muppet's.

 

Well there's more, and here is my written letter of response to the above letter.

 

Credit Solutions Limited

Capella Court

Brighton Road

Purley

Surrey

CR8 2PG

 

Date 5th May 2011

 

CSL Ref:

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Thank you for your letter dated 28th April 2011 (or as you put it 28th APR 2011), which was received today 5th May 2011, the contents of which have been noted.

 

You refer in your letter to your previous correspondence to me which you failed to give a date of, so I assume it was your letter dated 14th April 2011 (only letter I have received from you), to reach I emailed a response to on the 19th April 2011 a copy of said email and the letter attached to said email is included in the same envelope as this letter. Note: You have failed to give any response to my letter sent by email.

 

As you cannot possibly deny receipt of my letter that I emailed to you on the 19th April 2011, I take you further letter demanding payment and unjustified threats of legal action as acknowledgement and acceptance to the charges that I informed you that you would incur, in my letter emailed to you on the 19th April 2011. Therefore please also find attached to this letter a 14 day invoice for said charges, note late payment of said invoice will incur further charges of £10 for each week the invoice is unpaid. I will not accept any attempt by yourselves, to avoid payment of the said invoice, as now you have acknowledged the charges by sending a your letter (dated 28th April 2011) demanding payment on a disputed account and such acknowledgement cannot be reversed.

 

As for the threats of legal action in the letter received today, I notice you said the word “MAY”, and you are therefore saying neither that you will or you won’t. Sorry but as a man that likes to be straight to the point, I WILL take legal action against you (CSL) and BT if you do not refrain from your current course of action, and remove any notes or records placed on my credit file, which if any have been, then they will be deemed as libelous and I will sue for detriment and compensation as well as sue BT for misrepresentation of contract.

 

As for your statement;

 

“Legal action would result in further charges being added your account as follows:

 

Solicitors Fees - £50.00

Court Fee - £50.00”

 

So it’s no long MAY result in but now WOULD result in is it? Somehow I don’t think so. Nor do I believe any judge would be happy with your self’s making such a prejudgement, or making statements that such charges will be added purely as a result of yourself taking legal action, when such costs can only be awarded by a judge to the successful party in such court proceedings.

 

Seriously, what’s the £50 solicitors fee for really? As we all know such fee for a solicitor cannot be decided pre-court, as no one knows how much time will be spend on the case, and solicitors charge by the hour. Oh I know that’s the £50 charge for every template letter that solicitors sell to you and your DCA Muppet friends, in an intentional attempt to try and mislead people into think a solicitor has actually looked into the case in questions, when really they have no idea about the case itself.

And as for the following statement;

 

“Please do not write as our time limits are now strict”

 

Do you seriously think I give a rat’s arse about your ****ing time limits? What about the time I have spent writing this letter as a result of your ignorance shown to my first letter that I emailed you? You do not have time limits and are simply urging people to phone you so 1 you can get their phone numbers to constantly harass and abuse them with threats into paying, so your little scrawny little wimpy desk jockeys can earn their commissions, as a result of making threats over the phone to the people whom are already vulnerable. If I want to write my response then I have every right to, and you idiots, have a legal obligation to respond to my written letters whether sent by post or by email. In fact, for that insultingly obnoxious statement, and because it has taken me the best part of hour to deal with your letter, and as that’s 60 minutes of call time lost where each min on the phone to customer can earn me £100 a min in net profit – I’ve added an extra £100 to the invoice.

 

However out of interest as to what would be said to me on the phone to me if I were to call and as to why you had not responded directly to my email to you on the 19th here is the broken down transcript of the call:

 

Firstly after confirming my ID the first time round:

 

Rep: Can I have an up to date contact number?

 

ME: Up to date contact number, well it should be same as what you’ve already got (stated in reference to number provide in letter emailed on the 19th april 2011)

 

Rep: I don’t have a contact number.

 

Me: Argh well am not giving it you them.

 

Rep: You’re not going to give me a contact number.

 

Me: No Am not going to give, as I no what DCA’s are like and that they contact people left right and centre up to 3 times a day which is virtually harassment

Rep: I can’t continue with the conversation if you can’t err provide a….

 

Me: sorry but there’s nothing stopping you from continuing the conversation, when I have already given you my personal details. I have confirmed my identity to you, so I can discuss the account with you.

 

Rep: Erm No because am requiring a contact number for you; So if you’re not willing to provide that.

 

Me: You’re not legally obliged to have a contact number (meaning my contact number), ok. So if you’re not willing to discuss this account with me just because am not going to give you my contact number, then I’m going to have to report you to the Office of Fair Trading and to the ICO (the Information Commissioners Office).

 

Rep: Ok… Just bear with me one second.

 

I am then put on hold for 4 minutes. Then I get to confirm my id to Malcolm nice chap or so I thought at first. I explained everything to him as to why I dispute the account. But then he too asks for my contact number, which I refused to give (as I knew too well that it was provided in the letter head of the letter I emailed on the 19th april 2011). He said that he needed it in order to correspond with me what BT has to say about my dispute, i basically told him he could put their response in writing, he said no and basically said the only letters you send out are the ones about the account (therefore meaning ones demanding payment). I told him if he does not sent the correspondence in writing informing him it’s a perfectly reasonable request, that he would be in breach of OFT guidelines, he then said that OFT guidelines say that he only has to send correspondent about the account.

 

Sorry, but is not BT response about the dispute on the account, about the account? Yes I think it bloody well is!

 

I admit the settlement offer of 20% was reasonable beyond expectations, but I made it clear that I do not see why I should pay anything, when BT had misrepresented them self’s in the first place.

 

Anyway back to the phone conversation – Malcolm then went onto claim he had not received an email from me that I had send knowing full well you cannot dispute an email as not being delivered. He then said he did not have access to the email account, so I told him to find someone who does, though he never left his sit and carried on talking and then shockingly claimed the email was received on the 3rd may and the letter was sent in response. So I disputed the email being received on the 3rd of May, after all I had sent it on the 19th April and I pointed out that it does not take 10 days from and email being sent till it being received (obviously because it usually only takes 10mins max for it to appear in the recipients inbox).

Now as to Malcolm’s statement about the OFT Guidelines, I suggest you refer him to the following part of the Guidelines:

 

Section 2.8:

 

i. failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued – I.e. failing to provide correspondents as per requested, which in this case is in regards to BT response to my dispute.

 

And I doubt that is the only part that you’re in breach off. As your 25% commission charge you stating in the letter dated 14th April 2011 to me along with the predetermined charges of solicitors fees and court costs (charges), would be added to my account even yet failed to say if that’s only if you win. Am afraid puts you in total breach of section 2.10 in its entirety.

 

Now I shall warn you that you are not to contact me by phone, but in writing only – Just because I contacted you by phone as a test to see what you would say, which you failed by the way, does not give you the right to contact myself by phone and I expect you take note of what is stated in the letter I emailed on the 19th April 2011 to you, by refraining from making phones calls and also any further demands for payment.

 

Also I have included a CD that contains a recording of the phone call I had with your self’s today, surprised? You shouldn’t be really, considering I own a company and during the day I spend my time on the company phone that records all phone calls automatically.

 

Also am charging you 23p for the cost of today’s phone call to you. After all you did instruct me to call you, so its only fair you pay my phone bill for that call. The Rate is 0.01p a min as follows:

 

05/05/2011 11:49

 

Outgoing call

 

020-87634533

 

Phone of Teaboy2

 

United Kingdom

 

00:22:06

 

£0.2300

 

Now have a pleasant day, and enjoy the time spend writing your letter to me in response to my to this letter and the letter YOU WILL write to me about BT’s response to my dispute.

 

Yours Sincerely and With Prejudice

 

Teaboy2

Proprietor

Teaboy2's Company

 

P.s. This letter has been sent by post and by email.

Now funnily enough, when i tried to send by email it was blocked at their end. So will be sending by post, though to Malcolm credit he did say they were having problems with their email system. Either that or they have blocked my email address lol

 

Talk about taking the **** or what, "Please do not simply write, as or time limits are now very strict."

 

Refusing to discuss the account with me unless i gave them my contact number, despite giving them my name address and post code to confirm my ID. Jesus, i think a report to the OFT, Trading Standards and ICO is in order don't you guys? yeah i thought you would agree with me.

 

Must say i was shocked at just how pathetic the last sentence was, as well as their original refusal to discuss the account if i did give them my phone number LMAO

Edited May 5, 2011 by teaboy2

[Happyhippy1959]

Teaboy, that's great... Contact number me arse,,,,, love the latest strict time limits,,,, where are they digging these up from...

[teaboy2]

Lol yeah, i was so shock i laughed, but i charged them a total of £200.23pm for time spent detail with the letter, and £100 pounds for that 1 sentence alone, which considering its taken up much of my time to day, where i could earn the equivalent amount within 2 1 min phone calls that i could have made if i had not spent 4 hours (burning recording to disc, creating an invoice for them, writing the letter, attempting to send by email etc, though will be posting hard copy in post too) in total dealing with this.

 

where they got that Time Limit thing from is anyone guess. Time must be really precious for them, either that or writing letters back in response take up to much time and they not making enough money as a result, so have reverted to sending out just demands by mail, as poor old Malcolm was probably referring to when he said they only send out letters regarding the account, after refusing to sent me any correspondence by mail regarding BT's reply to what i had told him.

 

As for BT, well i doubt they will dare risk taking it further, unless they want an expensive legal bill and negative publicity when they lose in court for it.

 

I would post the recording up but for legal reason i not legally allowed to, due to privacy and data protection laws, that protect them this time round, plus i can not be arsed editing it right now. Though i may try to do so at the weekend, that way no names or personal details will be in it, meaning i can then post it up but will have to ask the site team review it prior to myself posting it up. Just to give you guys a laugh.

[Happyhippy1959]

Can't wait,,,, Love it....

 

Yep, I am having trouble with O2 through of all people Moorcrap,,, my contract came to an end in March 2010 I rang them to cancel told them I was nearly Bankrupt and they talked me in over the phone to a £10.00 a month deal. It was not even for me it was for the ex and she ran up a bill of £109.00 and never paid it..Moorcrap keep adding charges even though I have a letter from O2 stating what i owe,, so now every time those muppets say £145.00 I send a copy of O2's letter and a bill of £10.00 for my time.. That stopped em dead in there tracks... If they can charge excessive illegal fee's why can't we when we re-hash the same old argument.

[teaboy2]

Exactly, mate.

 

I would love to see their faces when the read the letter and see the invoice i sent them for my time and loss of profit as a result of dealing with their letter. Not to mention the suprise on their faces when the realise the call was being recorded. Pity they were actually polite, though somewhat misleading and reluctant to discuss the account due to lack of my phone number, as having a recording of them being abusive and/or threatening, would have been the icing on the cake. But never mind lol.

 

As for mobile phones, well i know what you mean, had lowells after me for 1 phone that was 1 of 2 unsolicited phones on 3g network, that were sent to me. I sold them as unconditional gifts, yet they say as the sim card was entered, it is deemed acceptance of the terms. Yeah right, love to see them try to prove that in court lol

[42man]

Interesting what it says on their website

 

"We are fully committed to, and extremely passionate about, service quality. In order to maintain this high quality service delivery we scrutinise all procedures, identify best practice and then document this in a clear and concise manual (I'd suggest reading it sometime and sticking to your ISO procedures). This method of working gives all employees the luxury of being part of a team that constantly and without exception (hahaha) delivers a service which is of the highest quality." (looks lovely on a website but in practice...)

[Happyhippy1959]

ha ha ha,,, sounds like both CSL and BT go on 42 man who is the joker in the pack !!!!??????

 

Yep, love now sending out my invoices may get CSL to collect off moorcrap.

[teaboy2]

So true 42man, says one thing on their website, but when actually talking with them its a completely different story.

 

And Hippy, good idea, in fact i may get moorcrap to collect from CSL lol

[teaboy2]

Have edited the recording of the phone call ready for posting.

 

42Man, i have sent you a pm in regards to having the site team review it first before i post it up.

[Happyhippy1959]

Yep,,, great idea debt collectors collecting off debt collectors love it..... Mind you some would collect off there poor dear Mum's me thinks....

[teaboy2]

Lol they probably would as well.

 

Any way i have the audio, tried sending it to the Site Admin for review but it keeps failing to deliver. So if any one knows of a free site where i can upload the file for you to download it from, let me know. But I'll not be able to publish the link till site admin say its ok to do so.

[brokebutnotbeatn]

uSendit?

[Fred Bassett]

Lol they probably would as well.

 

Any way i have the audio, tried sending it to the Site Admin for review but it keeps failing to deliver. So if any one knows of a free site where i can upload the file for you to download it from, let me know. But I'll not be able to publish the link till site admin say its ok to do so.

 

You can upload audio files for nothing to Photobucket nowadays.

 

Regards.

 

Fred

[teaboy2]

Tried photobucket but it does not allow you to upload audio, just videos and photos, well not .wav files types anyway.

 

So currently uploading to mediafire.com, Will then post a link to the site admin by PM/Email for them to review prior to posting a link on the thread for you all to download and listen to it (Take the mick out of my accent too lol)

[teaboy2]

haven't had a response ftrom site admin or site team about the posting the link to the phone recording yet guys.

[harrassed senior]

You could always make a complaint to NID which looks after the rights of people with hearing difficulties, such as myself. Although I have a 'phone a True Call has been a blessing because I can SEE from the report online (with proof) which numbers keep ringing, but cannot SPEAK on the 'phone as even with 'aids' I do not always get what is said and can and sometimes do respond inappropriately!! I am of an age where we were taught the 'politeness' of responding by written letter, not just e-mail either, I don't approach them with this method either as I feel it gives them a further intrusion into my personal space.

 

Tell them it is their problem if the job trainee threatomatic button pusher can only work whilst on loan from their nursery, giving rise to 'their strict timetable'!

[teaboy2]

Hi HS

 

now that is an excellent idea, as it is discriminative and puts those like yourself with hear difficulties at an further disadvantage. As for emails, i use them as its easier and saves paper (am a green person just like my company and our products are) and it saves on buying stamps and/or proof of postage as receipt of the email being read is proof it was received. They rarely respond in full by email and normally respond by written letter, but the benefit of them responding by email is you can save and back up their responses without having to manually file letters by hand.

 

Well will get a complaint off to NID about CSL and send them a copy of the letter too.

[ar_123]

Love your letter!

 

I just upload my calls to the CAG website using the attachment feature when posting and haven't had problems from the mods/admin, would love to hear the call

[teaboy2]

won't let me do it, says invalid file both .wav and .zip type file.

 

Guess ill just have to post the link then, since admin haven't got back to me.

 

here it is http://www.mediafire.com/?833iqdgesy8u33v

[ar_123]

Now downloading...

 

I always upload ".mp3s" and they work, guess zips and wavs dont.

[teaboy2]

maybe its cos it over 10mb? oh well nevermind

[Fred Bassett]

You could always make a complaint to NID which looks after the rights of people with hearing difficulties, such as myself. Although I have a 'phone a True Call has been a blessing because I can SEE from the report online (with proof) which numbers keep ringing, but cannot SPEAK on the 'phone as even with 'aids' I do not always get what is said and can and sometimes do respond inappropriately!! I am of an age where we were taught the 'politeness' of responding by written letter, not just e-mail either, I don't approach them with this method either as I feel it gives them a further intrusion into my personal space.

 

Tell them it is their problem if the job trainee threatomatic button pusher can only work whilst on loan from their nursery, giving rise to 'their strict timetable'!

 

It's the essential dishonesty of that statement that should be challenged. What they really want to say is "Please do not simply write because it gives our call centre chimps no opportunity to lie, threaten, bully and harass you". We all know full well what it's about and so do they, but they dare not admit it.

[pebbles71]

subbing