Equidebt And Allegedly Breaking Fraud Act 2006

[Equi]

I am having a little battle with Equidebt chasing a non existent claim on behalf of a company called Zestdew PLC.

 

After constant phone calls I sent them a nice long winded letter:

 

26 March 2011

FAO V Wilkins

 

Dear V Wilkins,

 

Reference no:

 

 

You have contacted me regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself.

I would point out that I have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to Zestdew PLC and I hereby demand that you provide the Loan Agreement between myself and Zestdew PLC.

I note further that Zestdew PLC is an affiliate of Lehman Brothers which has declared bankruptcy.

I am familiar with the Office of Fair Trading debt collection Guidance which states that it is unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

I would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

I would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my liability for the debt in question.

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

I am writing also in relation to the quantity and frequency of telephone calls that I have received from your company, which I deem to be personally harassing.

I hereby request that these stop.

I now require all further correspondence from your company to be made in writing only and only if you can provide evidence as to my liability as requested.

I am of the view that your continued harassment of me by telephone puts you in breach of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act 1970, and the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

If you continue to harass me by telephone, you will also be in breach of the Communications Act (2003) s.127 and I will report you to OFCOM, Trading Standards and The Office of Fair Trading, meaning that you will be liable to a substantial fine.

Be advised that any further telephone calls from your company will be recorded and notes taken as evidence.

Should it be your intention as you have warned to arrange a “doorstep call”, please remember that there is only an implied license under English Common Law for certain people to visit me on my property without express permission; such as the postman etc and this does not include doorstep collectors. etc, (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.).

Please therefore take note that, I revoke license under English Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so without my permission, you will then be liable to damages for a tort of trespass. You would also be conspiring in a trespass if you sent someone from a doorstop collection service company to visit me.

I look forward to your reply.

---

So they replied saying all would be put on hold.

Two months passed and they got in touch by writing and enclosed a copy of a loan agreement. Sadly for them they supplied a Lloyds TSB agreement and nothing from Zestdew PLC.

They then sent a demand and threatened me with legal action.

I then contacted the Office of Fair Trading, Trading Standards, Action Fraud and in turn was listed with the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau.

This was then my turn once again to write to these people:

Equidebt Limited

Equity House

Ettington Road

Wellesbourne

Warwickshire

CV35 9GA

 

12th July 2011

 

Ref

 

To Whom It May Concern

 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

 

I recently received a copy of a Loan Agreement which you sent to my address. You failed to supply any Loan Agreement pertaining to your NAMED CLIENT.

 

Further, there is NO SUCH COMPANY as Zestdew PLC. That entity ceased trading and rebranded itself as Zestdew Limited. Further, Zestdew Limited is IN ADMINISTRATION and the Administrators have not issued youany agreement to represent them.

 

Any portfolio which may have at any time been held by either of the companies named above has been returned to their originating supplier. Having already spoken to the Bank for which you supplied a copy of a Loan Agreement, I am to have nothing to do with you.

 

You have FAILED to provide any copy of a Loan Agreement from Zestdew PLC because frankly there is NO SUCH AGREEMENT.

 

I have an agreement with my Bank, not with any brokerage company which no longer exists. Your use of current legislation to obtain details of my financial status with the sole aim of trawling is abhorrent and will not be tolerated. I have a reference number from the Office of Fair Trading and a complaint has been filed with Trading Standards and Action Fraud and a complaint is being filed with Kent Police and the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau. Your further correspondence and my reply shall be added to this complaint.

 

Moreover attempting to acquire money through misrepresentation is a CRIMINAL OFFENCE. You claim your client is a company which DOES NOT EXIST. You threaten me with legal action by stating you shall pass to your Solicitors. I now give you notice I consider you have intentionally caused Distress And Alarm. I moreover demand you cease all further activity towards me, especially when you have the absolute audacity to threaten me in such a manner for a so called client which DOES NOT EXIST.

 

-----

 

Now move forward another week and I have just received a letter stating they are arranging a Doorstep Collection.

 

I shall be detaining this person under Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006 when they arrive and demand payment.

 

I have a crime reference number. I have notified Equidebt in writing which they have ignored. Equidebt is subject to a OFT investigation. The National Fraud Intelligence Bureau has details of this case.

 

I think it is also time for civil suit for Distress and Alarm.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

subbing

[Kitten1]

Subbing!!

 

They're cheeky bu&&ers aren't they?!?!?

[dx100uk]

this could be fun.....

 

dx

[RoyalIrish]

Go for the kill!

[Huff&Puff]

Those are very nicely written letters. Unfortunately, they are also way beyond the reading age of a DCA threat monkey (and especially Equidebt ones, who are particularly stupid - I know from experience ). Therefore the only response from them will be what you have already got, the next letter in the threatogram machine

[PGH7447]

Love it - cant wait the next installment - nice letters by the way

[rockwell304]

Equi, this is great! if the doorstep idiot turns up hold him for attempting to extort money from you, I assume a citizens arrest still applies, and call the police.

 

I'm looking forward to this! I really hope he turns up.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

You can make a citizens arrest, but you may

not use unreasonable means to detain, and for no longer

than 30 minutes ( same rules apply to CPSO's)

[Equi]

I have left strict instructions with my family on what to do, as I have a business to run and may not be at the premises when they call. The Police Station is 400 yards away so 30 minutes is plenty of time, especially as I shall be calling on them Monday to advise them I shall make a Citizens Arrest as soon as the doorstep collector confirms they are at my premises on behalf of Equidebt and Zestdew PLC and have asked for financial settlement or financial arrangement. That is the specific offence under Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006:

 

 

(1)A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a)dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b)intends, by making the representation—

(i)to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii)to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2)A representation is false if—

(a)it is untrue or misleading, and

(b)the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3)“Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—

(a)the person making the representation, or

(b)any other person.

(4)A representation may be express or implied.

(5)For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Great Equi, keep us posted:madgrin:

[Equi]

All I have to do is get the doorstep collector to admit the activity is on behalf of Zestdew PLC (via Equidebt) and that he/she wants me to agree financial payment and the law has been broken. All because Zestdew PLC does not exist.

 

I also don't care if Equidebt read this forum thread (I hope they do). They are under investigation by the OFT and the NFIB now has an active case recorded.

 

The penalty FYI for contravening Section 2 of the Fraud Act 2006 is 12 months imprisonment followed by 10 years if they repeat offend.

 

 

 

(1)A person is guilty of fraud if he is in breach of any of the sections listed in subsection (2) (which provide for different ways of committing the offence).

 

(2)The sections are—

 

(a)section 2 (fraud by false representation),

 

(b)section 3 (fraud by failing to disclose information), and

 

©section 4 (fraud by abuse of position).

 

(3)A person who is guilty of fraud is liable—

 

(a)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum (or to both);

 

(b)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine (or to both).

 

(4)Subsection (3)(a) applies in relation to Northern Ireland as if the reference to 12 months were a reference to 6 months.

[Equi]

No doubt someone will get around to me. However I have received no further correspondence and no doorstep collector to arrest.

 

I can only assume their legal eagles know I have the law on my side on this one.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

A very ghostly silence nearly

a month, lets hope it stays

this way:madgrin:

[sillygirl1]

Equidebt are debt purchasers and also have people who get data from the courts and send them letters saying they can help... they are a bottom feeder firm and hopefully will be sunk by their own poor practices.

[PriorityOne]

Why have you used "Without Prejudice"?

[brokebutnotbeatn]

oooh. I hope someone does turn up - good luck!

[Equi]

Without Prejudice:

A statement set onto a written document such as a letter, which qualifies the signatory as exempt from the content to the extent that it may be interpreted as containing admissions or other interpretations which could later be used against him or her; or as otherwise affecting any legal rights of the principal of, or the person signing.

[PriorityOne]

Without Prejudice:

A statement set onto a written document such as a letter, which qualifies the signatory as exempt from the content to the extent that it may be interpreted as containing admissions or other interpretations which could later be used against him or her; or as otherwise affecting any legal rights of the principal of, or the person signing.

 

I know what it means. I'm asking why you used it.

[Equi]

So that my letter cannot be construed as my last word on the matter and opening the option for me to pursue civil suit for distress and alarm.

[PriorityOne]

So that my letter cannot be construed as my last word on the matter and opening the option for me to pursue civil suit for distress and alarm.

 

All it means (IMO) is that you can't show it in court as part of your proceedings, should you decide to take any or defend against any. People tend to use this term to try and sound legally savvy, without actually understanding what it means for them.

 

No offence intended.

[Equi]

No offence taken. It can be shown as part of a chain of correspondence but not separately.

 

It also ensures that anything written can not be taken as accountable, for example the explanation to them as to why they are acting unlawfully.

 

Nobody likes being in debt but nobody likes bottom feeding parasites making the situation worse.

[PriorityOne]

No offence taken. It can be shown as part of a chain of correspondence but not separately.

 

It also ensures that anything written can not be taken as accountable, for example the explanation to them as to why they are acting unlawfully.

 

Nobody likes being in debt but nobody likes bottom feeding parasites making the situation worse.

 

I don't see the point then..... sorry. My own point was.... that a court (for example) should have access to all parts of your paper trail in this type of situation.

 

When you're fighting against any form of injustice, it's important to be able to account for everything you've tried to do to resolve things, otherwise you could be protecting the wrong person, if you get my drift.

 

[BruceyBoy]

This company contacted me today so naturally I googled them and this thread came up, I find it thoroughly interesting reading... I recorded the conversation I had with the woman, it's a bizarre conversation, I'm thinking of posting it online somewhere for people to hear, I will have to bleep out a few of my personal details of course. What was the outcome of this situation with Equidebt? They are claiming that I owe a company £375, I'm pretty scared to be honest.

[dx100uk]

start your own thread please

 

see below

 

dx