Wescot Credit Services

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

BB I've just bumped Lambs last post please have a look

Brig

[Bazooka Boo]

On it.

[teaboy2]

@Ghost

 

I can confirm that you are incorrect, as Section 40 Administration of Justice Act 1970 still applies.

 

You are refering subsetion 3a of section 40 administration of justice act 1970:

 

(3A) Subsection (1) above does not apply to anything done by a person to another in circumstances where what is done is a commercial practice within the meaning of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the other is a consumer in relation to that practice.

 

However the following is clear, and as DCA can only contact alleged debtors and mostly can not prove an agreement (or its enforceability) and/or the debt existed or belongs to the person they are contacting, then they are therefore in breach of the following (Section 26 CPUTR 2008) which puts them in breach of section 40 of the administration of justice act in its entirety regardless of subsection 3a: (the same applies if its being disputed in anyway)

 

Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008/1277

Schedule 1 Commercial practices which are in all circumstances considered unfair

 

26.

Making persistent and unwanted solicitations by telephone, fax, e-mail or other remote media except in circumstances and to the extent justified to enforce a contractual obligation. (Though even then the amount of calls must not be excessive if they are then they would not past the reasonableness test)

 

In other words they are only allowed to make persistent phone calls to the extent of enforcing an agreement/contract but only if the agreement/contract is enforceable and proven that the person they are contacting is the other party to the contract. However as the DCA was not a named party to the Original agreement/contract, then they have no right to enforce any rights on any proven or alleged contract unless they are specifically named in the contract as a named 3rd party, therefore only the original creditor and named 3rd parties are entitled to make such calls to enforce the agreement/contract. Also if the debt is sold to a DCA then any agreement/contract with the OC ceases to exist, therefore there is no agreement/contract in existence that can be enforced and the debt can only be enforce if the agreement is produced in court but only if the termination of the agreement was lawful and not unlawfully rescinded - In other words the agreement/contract ceases to exist at the point of sale of the debt (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain & Co NLD 14 July 1998 )

 

Ghost i have noticed that your still fairly new to the forum, i do not know your proffession, but i have seen a few of your posts and i must honestly admit, you need to do some research more on leglisation and regulations before posting. End of the day Harassment is Harassment hence the protection of Harassment Act 1997 which would also take precendence over subsection 3a

Edited June 21, 2011 by teaboy2

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

[knigget]

*High 5's Da Teaboy*..Most elequantly put there sir..

[2Grumpy]

Just a thought - should we organise a campaign of telephone harassment against Wetcloths about this

 

"Hello - I understand from postings on the internet that you people enjoy pestering schoolgirls - do you have any comment to make"

 

How about the national newspapers?

[knigget]

What startles me most , is that any one can try to justify a Debt collection agency full stop.. Any Debt collection agency runs off peoples misery and misfortuneand most of all their fear of being taken to court..I'm not talking about debt dodgers..I am talking about people who have found themselves in a situation where paying just to live has become impossible and they have fallen into the debt trap, either by being conned by ads on tv to get a "Payday" loan to see them through, or by an over zealous company that is not willing to see things from the consumers point of view and lack the understanding of the human condition..

 

We must remember that when these Debt collection agencies Buy debts, they are paying 7-10% of what is being asked by the original creditor. That in itself should tell us something, like we didn't really owe that much to start with, other wise the original company would have done their level best to help the consumer pay off what was owed in its entirity..

Remember too that when a debt is bought by a DCA the original contract with the original creditor is Extinguished.i.e. It has been settled as far as the original creditor is concerned. I am currently going through this with the bunch of n00b's we know and love as Cabot..

 

It matters not a jot to these DCA's what your situation is, they do not care n the slightest if you are suicidal because of their actions or what misery or embarrassment they cause or create.

I have found that by taking away the controversy they are creating does wonders..

I have sent numerous "Conditional acceptance " Notices to them, all the do is try to steam roller people through the fact that in reality, there is not one single thing they can do to get money from you..Yes they can take you to court, yes they can seek money liability orders, but any order is chargable, if you ordered anything from the net, you would expect to pay for it at the rate being charged by the supplier..Look in to this on the net..I can not offer advice on this as I am not qualified to do so .. Any Advice I would give would be to use the net to research everything you can about what DCA's can and cannot do..believe me they can't do much. They will realize that you are not a push over and eventually sell the debt on to another DCA..

 

The bottom line is this..If you have a contract with the original lender and someone volunteers to pay the debt off for you, with out your knowledge or consent, Can you beheld liable to them ?....If John owed Paul £200 and john couldn't pay Paul, But Kieth steps in and pays Paul, who owes the money to who?. Did John ask Kieth to pay Paul?.No ..so if Kieth took John to court and told the Judge.."I paid the £200 back to Paul, becuse I knew John didn't have the money"..the Judge would ask.."Did you ask John if he wanted you to do that?"...ect...ect..

A contract is between 2 or more parties Each offering mutually agreed terms, conditions and something of value that has a mutually agreed outcome and benefits all parties involved in the contract. Each party to any contract Must be party on their own free will and be in FULL knowledge of the terms and conditions and if they are not suitable to you at that time you have the right not to contract.

When a DCA buys a debt, do you have the opportunity to negotiate terms and conditions with them ? or are they dictated? The latter of course, so a unilateral contract exsists, that is totally un-enforcable in Law..The Only time it becomes enforcable is if you consent to it and offer repayments to them on their terms...!

 

This is only My view point on DCA's and How I deal with them..I am not offering this as advice, only telling my little story about what they do and how I personally see them..

Take heart every one..ALL DCA's are bottom feeders that thrive on peoples misery..Don't let the *****rds Grind you down..!

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Every point taken and agree,but I think all of tend to forget that some who

post their problems here have already had their lives ruined by the original

creditors especially the intransigence of bloated bank and other who refuse

to help but would rather harass.

(End Rant)

Brig.

[knigget]

Every point taken and agree,but I think all of tend to forget that some who

post their problems here have already had their lives ruined by the original

creditors especially the intransigence of bloated bank and other who refuse

to help but would rather harass.

(End Rant)

Brig.

*Salutes The Brig..**

 

I heartily agree Brig..My point is..if its the original creditor, they have more to lose than a Dca..so in "MOST" cases will tow the regulatory line, because the OFT and trading standards are more stringent to regualar companies, But with DCA they expect them to break the rules, (thats why regular companies resort to using them) so any situation you involve them in (OFT and Trading standards) tends to get the old Eyes rolling and the "Oh them again" tut ..reaction from any regulatory body...

Thats my opinion anyway..

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi Ki

[bdcarr]

Also, Dont forget that Mobile Phone Numbers became public a few years back and if you dont want them in the public domain you have to inform the agency.

 

Info I received in 2009:

"From early next week all uk mobiles will be on a directory which will mean that anyone will be able to access the numbers. It is easy to unsubscribe, but it must be done before the beginning of next week to make sure you are ex-directory. You may want to suggest it to all your friends and family who have uk mobiles, or they could be swamped by unsolicited messages and calls. Removal is recommended by the BBC - see link below

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/working_lunch/8091621.stm

 

All numbers including those belonging to children will be open to cold calling and the general abuse that less scrupulous telesales people subject us to.

 

To remove your number go here (you need your mobile number with you to do this, they text you a code)...

 

 

http://www.118800.co.uk/removeme/remove.html

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

*Salutes The Brig..**

 

I heartily agree Brig..My point is..if its the original creditor, they have more to lose than a Dca..so in "MOST" cases will tow the regulatory line, because the OFT and trading standards are more stringent to regualar companies, But with DCA they expect them to break the rules, (thats why regular companies resort to using them) so any situation you involve them in (OFT and Trading standards) tends to get the old Eyes rolling and the "Oh them again" tut ..reaction from any regulatory body...

Thats my opinion anyway..

Hi Knigget again I agree and return the salute:thumb:

I have seen today a young couple who have been driven to distraction because of a debt of small proportions just enough

for BR they have been visited,phoned land line and mobiles, e-mailed and mailed, the situation arose from a tragedy (you might guess at what kind from my user name)

 

They did not ask for sympathy, they did not try to avoid the debt, what did they get from a major financial group no help just hell and it has not got to a DCA yet:-x

[2Grumpy]

Also, Dont forget that Mobile Phone Numbers became public a few years back and if you dont want them in the public domain you have to inform the agency.

 

Info I received in 2009:

"From early next week all uk mobiles will be on a directory which will mean that anyone will be able to access the numbers. It is easy to unsubscribe, but it must be done before the beginning of next week to make sure you are ex-directory. You may want to suggest it to all your friends and family who have uk mobiles, or they could be swamped by unsolicited messages and calls. Removal is recommended by the BBC - see link below

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/working_lunch/8091621.stm

 

All numbers including those belonging to children will be open to cold calling and the general abuse that less scrupulous telesales people subject us to.

 

To remove your number go here (you need your mobile number with you to do this, they text you a code)...

 

 

http://www.118800.co.uk/removeme/remove.html

 

 

That url doesn't do anything. The 118800.co.uk website is non-existent

 

there was so much opposition to that that I don't think the mobile companies went ahead

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I fancy your right grumpy,just got a new phone and asked

about the proposed directory and was told it hadn't happened.

[little teacup]

More news. One of the letters has been delivered and signed for today. The letter with the PO Box address is still in the system. The email was replied to asking me to contact them. I replied and said I have now sort it out.

My daughter had another message at 5 past 10 this morning.

LT

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

They really can't help themselves can they Lt

revenge will be sweet:madgrin:

[little teacup]

Hi All

Below is a copy of the email I received from Wescot today. I think we might be getting somewhere!!!!!

LT

 

Thank you for your email, this matter is of concern to us and we want to ensure that further calls are not made to the telephone number you have provided to us. However, as soon as we received your email we conducted a full sweep of all telephone numbers called, and the number you have provided does not show. Therefore, would you kindly provide us with the dates and times of the previous calls we have made to this number.

A copy of Wescot’s Complaints Procedure is enclosed which provides you with details of how we deal with complaints or concerns.

May I thank you in advance for your assistance in this matter.

[teaboy2]

thats the vein letter of denial i expected them to send you, in a vein attempt to cover their arses, by denying they were behind the calls - they really are pretty dumb after all the incoming call number will be in your daugthers mobile for missed and answered calls proving it was them.

[little teacup]

The fools!

I have already replied giving them the dates and times of calls. If they want I can even tell them what the message is that they kept leaving!!

LT

[teaboy2]

If it was me i would tell them what their own text message is and the number it was sent from, saying "so your denial is worthless and a pathetic attempt to cover your own backsides and nothing less than an apology is required. As its pretty dam clear the number was in your system me, otherwise you would not have had it to send the message in the first place - Oh and another thing, don't tell me i gave you the number when you actually got it from sharing data with other companys in breach of my rights under the data protection act 1998"

[2Grumpy]

It will be interesting to see whether the calls and texts stop "coincidentally at the same time" as they received your letter & email

 

most likely they actioned one of them without replying and then quite accurately replied to the second one that the number isn't there - because they had just removed it

 

might be worth pointing out that you sent several letters and emails and does their reply cover all of them or just the second and subsequent ones ...

[Huff&Puff]

I know from personal experience with them, that Westcot will lie, lie again, and then lie some more. They will do so quite unashamedly too, and carry on lying even when it would be obvious to anyone else that they have been caught out

 

Take nothing that they say at face value.

[2Grumpy]

I know from personal experience with them, that Westcot will lie, lie again, and then lie some more. They will do so quite unashamedly too, and carry on lying even when it would be obvious to anyone else that they have been caught out.

 

Yes - just like the banks - I don't know who infected who with their appalling behavior

[MARTIN3030]

Ok,following reported posts and taking a look in here it is quite obvious that there is some conflict.

From what I have read there has been frustration and posts made that seemingly have not been in the OPs expectations at all.

Let me assure everyone that the site exists for grass roots consumers,and will always be so.

There has to be site team intervention where it can clearly be seen that the OPs thread is being undermined by flaming,whichever way that may be presented.

After looking at more recent posts,there has been a need to remove both originals and those with quoted content.

Apologies to those affected who have contributed in good faith and spirit of the CAG.

There have been some further allegations made which do not directly relate to the issues here,I will also be looking at those sep.

I would ask that those who may have info to assist with that,report it to the team via the black triangle.

Opinions and contributions can often be conflicting,however we will not tolerate any orchestrated or deliberate flaming.Hope that spells things out.

[little teacup]

Hi All

Just a little update.

4 days without any calls or messages!!!!

LT