Disabled Veteran Harrassed for 4yrs by DCA for debt of unknown person

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Exactly stu, I really feel others should not be decrying his

and your efforts by stating that it's not worth complaing

a statement that can only be described as blatantly stupid

and mis guided , the power of complaining and following

the complaints to a conclusion can drammatically change

atittudes of regulators and government it IS the power

of consumers.

[stu007]

Hi Brig

 

Fully agree with you and i know veteran would.

 

I will let you know as an example how determind he can be, some years ago h took on a Local Authority fighting them for over 6yrs and he won his case full apology, all his money back which was a considerable amount and changed local authority policy and veterans agency were in back ground observing at veterans request.

 

It was then taken further by the veterans agency who in turn passed finding onto ministers so when he gets his teeth into something and knows he is fully in the right he will not let go until it is resolved to his satisfaction not theres.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi Brig

 

Fully agree with you and i know veteran would.

 

I will let you know as an example how determind he can be, some years ago h took on a Local Authority fighting them for over 6yrs and he won his case full apology, all his money back which was a considerable amount and changed local authority policy and veterans agency were in back ground observing at veterans request.

 

It was then taken further by the veterans agency who in turn passed finding onto ministers so when he gets his teeth into something and knows he is fully in the right he will not let go until it is resolved to his satisfaction not theres.

Hi stu,

You know you and the vet will always have my support, please

don't hesitate to ask if there is anything I can do!!!

 

Brig.

[stu007]

Hi Brig

 

Thank you for that its very much appreciated

 

Getting a new scanner tomorrow so i can scan any incoming response letter from these idiots minus personal detail and put on CAG as well

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Looking forward to seeing it stu.

[stu007]

Hi Brig

 

Dont laugh you jogged my mind to check my other computer as i was sure i managed to scan lowells 1st response letter of 8th Nov 2011 before scanner gave up.

 

Ok should have checked earlier well here is there Response Letter from Lowells Dated 8th Nov 2011.

 

Also please note his response to this letter is in Post #293

Edited January 24, 2012 by stu007

[stu007]

Hi All

 

Well here is the letter sent recorded delivery today to Welcome Financial Services ooopps not meant to say that its WFS its a secret cos the company name is classed as personal information under the Data Protection Act mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi All

 

Well here is the letter sent recorded delivery today to Welcome Financial Services ooopps not meant to say that its WFS its a secret cos the company name is classed as personal information under the Data Protection Act mmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

Nice:madgrin:

[stu007]

Hi Brig

 

Should also mention veteran had call from TS on phone for over an hour and all he has told me while laughing his head off was cant wait to see how these companies get out of this lol.

[Bazooka Boo]

I have a 'bill of costs' letter somewhere?? Which you can outline your fees and send them so they are in no doubt as to your fees.

[stu007]

Bazooka Boo

 

That would be great much appreciated.

 

the veteran is also counting the clock down with Lowells, Motormile Finance and Cheque Centre as he did give them 14 working days to respond.

 

They have all recieved the letters but not even an acknowledgement yet and he is sooo looking forward to it even TS have been surprised at his determination not just to hold these companies to account but that hole sector.

[theghost]

With regards to WFS not giving their full name perhaps it has something to do with not wanting the person picking up the phone not knowing they are calling about a debt related issue until they have spoken to the account holder.

 

Chances are if they said they were a DCA then people would complain that privacy is being breached by the mere name of the company (i.e x must owe money because a DCA called him)

[give them FA]

Stu, I am sorry to always be the "Devil's Advocate" but I have to point out that Welcome's refusal to identify themselves was indeed fully in line with the Data Protection Act.

 

Do not forget, the data they are required to protect is that of the DEBTOR. Miss X. If they make contact by telephone, they cannot reveal anything about Miss X unless and until they are certain that she is the person they are talking to. This is the reason they ask the "security questions" to cover themselves on this score.

 

Of course it's immediately obvious that your friend the Vet is not Miss X., as he's the wrong gender. Hence they CANNOT give him the information requested. If they identify themselves as being a DCA, then they have given out the information that Miss X is being pursued for debt and they are in breach of the DPA AS REGARDS MISS X who is the person they hold the data on! That's why they use an unidentifiable acronym when talking to a third party.

 

I am also wondering whether, rather than Lowells having passed the debt and phone info on, these people are chasing an entirely different debt and knew nothing about Lowells' contact. This Miss X may have left a whole load of debts which are being collected independent of each other- perhaps the replies from the latest companies will shed light on it.

 

Anyway, good luck with it, your vet sounds as if he loves a good fight, I hope it gets there! What it should lead to the creation of is a national database of "wrong numbers" so that DCAs could check to see if the number was valid. If the vet's had the number for five years, and it was re-allocated after Miss X went, chances are all her debts may be statute barred- it is five years in Scotland, isn't it?

 

*same conclusion as you, theghost, you posted as I was writing!!*

Edited January 25, 2012 by give them FA

[stu007]

Hi

 

The classic is Miss XXXXX left school just over 1yr ago how do i know this you ask - well the school phoned my number for Miss XXXXX to say info passed to Job Centre but gets better.

 

a few months after that Job Centre Plus phone my number for Miss XXXXX as they had a job interview for her so you can guess my response was to tell them about all this and why is she fraudulently given out my phone number as hers.

 

Also do agree these different companies are probably chasing different debts.

[dadofholly]

With regards to WFS not giving their full name perhaps it has something to do with not wanting the person picking up the phone not knowing they are calling about a debt related issue until they have spoken to the account holder.

 

Chances are if they said they were a DCA then people would complain that privacy is being breached by the mere name of the company (i.e x must owe money because a DCA called him)

 

That being the case they should not have identified themselves as WFS - but merely say that they are calling on a private matter.

 

WFS is what Welcome was known as - in fact google wfs and they come up in the top three - with their website clearly shown as http://www.wfs.co.uk - so that arguement holds no weight - even if they believed that is the case.

[theghost]

That being the case they should not have identified themselves as WFS - but merely say that they are calling on a private matter.

 

WFS is what Welcome was known as - in fact google wfs and they come up in the top three - with their website clearly shown as www.wfs.co.uk - so that arguement holds no weight - even if they believed that is the case.

 

Refusing to identify themselves or hiding their number will probably be a breach of some regulation or another.

 

By being vague they are trying to ensure that they do not reveal they are a DCA and therefore breach the DCG by embarassing the debtor.

 

Of course, there is nothing to stop the call reciever doing their own research and finding out they are a DCA/finance company but the company cannot be held liable for that.

 

Its a bit of a hole in the system but will always exist as long as trace activity is legal.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

No one should ever confirm who they are until

the caller has identified who they are and who they

work for, if asked if they can speak to xxxx before they

have given such information the recipient should answer

NO and hang up.

[dadofholly]

Agree Brig.

 

If any one calls me and asks me to answer security questions i refuse.

 

They call them security questions - but as i always reply - "you, a stranger, has called me out of the blue asking personal details that can be used for ID theft, for security purposes, you must be having a laugh, if you have anything to say write to me." And then i put the phone down.

 

We all know the only reason these people use the phone is to try and put pressure on people, to make decisions on the spot.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I believe if a caller does not when I

answer the phone say hello my names

is xxxxx calling from xxxx can I please

speak to xxxx, then they are not going

to speak to anyone:madgrin:

[give them FA]

Conversation with me goes:

 

Hello.

 

Is that/Can I speak to Give them FA?

 

Who's calling?

 

It's Joe from XYZ.

 

I'm sorry, I think you have the wrong number, there isn't any Give them FA here.

 

Thanks, sorry to have bothered you. OR Have you any idea where I can reach him?

 

No problem, have a good day. OR No, I don't know him, though I get the occasional call asking for him.

 

Hang up.

 

And none of them has EVER rung back- they DO take no for an answer.

[dadofholly]

Conversation with me goes:

 

Hello.

 

Is that/Can I speak to Give them FA?

 

Who's calling?

 

It's Joe from XYZ.

 

I'm sorry, I think you have the wrong number, there isn't any Give them FA here.

 

Thanks, sorry to have bothered you. OR Have you any idea where I can reach him?

 

No problem, have a good day. OR No, I don't know him, though I get the occasional call asking for him.

 

Hang up.

 

And none of them has EVER rung back- they DO take no for an answer.

 

Depends on the company - as not all do - and some will just keep calling regardless.

[give them FA]

Well, to be fair, a couple have. But I save the number so if they call again I reject the call without answering it. They then stop. They may be bastards but they are not stupid bastards. If they know they are wasting their time they will look for easier targets.

[stu007]

Hi

 

Well this is the letter recieved by veteran from Lowells yesterday made him laugh dont think they are liking it that he wont let it drop.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I agree stu this is weaing them down.

[give them FA]

Should that not read "Customer Relations" rather than "Consumer Relations"?