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

[dadofholly]

Maybe there is no hard copy of the complaints procedure. And if they are informing you of it in writing - why would you need another copy of it in writing?

 

You have asked for the procedure and they have finaly informed you of them. So not sure where else you can go with this - writing to them again, in my view, would be pointless - it will just become a roundabout.

 

I am actually surprised that they are still replying to you at all.

[brokebutnotbeatn]

What they have put in writing to you is perfectly adequate and there really is no-where else to go with this IMHO.

[stu007]

Hi Caggers

 

well thanks for advice again.

 

Saw veteran at weekend and he aint going to respond at all to Motormile Finance but he did point out something I hadnt even clicked to which is:

 

1. Cheque Centre uk are the Client/Original Creditor but have washed there hands of the Motormile Issue.

2. Motormiles last letter States "On a point of law, an assignment of a contract assigns the benefit and not the burden".

 

The veteran was laughing his head off and all he said is so Cheque Centre UK are the Original Creditor who has assigned this to Motormile finance.

 

Cheque Centre Uk in its last has washed its hands of dealing with Motormile Finance as nothing they can do to enforce.

 

Now veteran said if this is the case Cheque Centre UK as they have assigned this debt are legally responsible for the actions of Motormile Finance and can take relevant action to enforce then to rectify this issue.

 

What are you thoughts as veteran wants to send a really really nasty letter so to speak to Cheque Centre UK about there inaction to resolve the action of Motormile I am a bit stuck on what to say to veteran.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I say let him have his way fire off then put this

to Tony Hetherington Financial Mail on Sunday.

[stu007]

Hi Brig

 

Thank you again for your help but I an just stumped in what to advise him to put in a letter to Cheque Centre about this.

 

I do feel Cheque Centre Uk have been less than honest with the veteran by not telling him they had assigned the debt and were still responsible for motormiles actions and just washing there hands of the issue with motormile as in there final letter:

 

* Cheque Centre have confirmed that Motormile Finance in not their customer or client.

* Cheque Centre confirm that the customer gave them the incorrect data.

* Cheque Centre confirm that they passed on the inaccurate data onto Motormile Finance.

* Cheque Centre confirm that they passed account onto Motormile Finance and all documentation relating to it.

* Cheque Centre are unable to pursue the complaint with Motormile Finance.

 

Therefore as the customer took this supposed debt through Cheque Centre in turn Cheque Centre have assigned the Debt to Motormile Finance passing on incorrect data to Motormile Finance but refusing to pursue Motormile any further.

 

What would you advise would be the best way to approach this with Cheque Centre UK any points of law to throw at them in a letter, there legal responsibility and failure to take action.

 

many thanks

Edited April 17, 2012 by stu007

[dadofholly]

I think - but may be wrong - that MM are incorrect on the assignment - unless they have purchased the agreement their response about assigning the benefit and not the burden is not relevant. They seem to have researched the law - but got the wrong law.

 

Unless they have purchased the account - in which case they are the creditor.

[stu007]

Hi

 

@DOH thanks for your input can see where you are coming from.

 

It just seems that Cheque Centre and Motormile are not being Transparent at all about this and as Motormile have basically passed the buck again veteran thinks its about time to hit Cheque Centre who have refused to pursue Motormile.

 

Veteran think cheque Centre really dont want to rock the boat with Motormile as its a Director responding to veteran but a Director that has breached Motormiles own Complaints Procedure and that Cheque Centre have only recently started using Motormile to collect debts.

 

As Motormile has stated about assigment of a contract and really passed the buck straight back to Cheque Centre without stating it veteran is now certain Cheque Centre are responsible for this whole sorry situation as he remember a conversation with cheque centre at the begining when they thought he was put on hold but heard the whole conversation between call operator and their manager who confirmed that cheque centre were now using Motormile Finance to collect debts owed to them nothing about them selling the debt to Motormile so what Motormile have said sounds about correct and Cheque Centre are playing games.

 

Veteran wants to send Cheque Centre a really strongly worded letter about there lack of transparency and refusal to deal with Motormile just because its a Director at Motormile responding to veteran.

 

This is where i am stumped as to what to advise veteran to put in a letter and he also asked me if I could ask forum for there valued suggestion on a letter to Cheque Centre. I was also wondering if this is correct what enforcement action could Cheque Centre have done to Motormile?

 

The Veteran asks me to say "Many Thanks to all on this great forum for such great help and advice which has not only been helpful to me but others".

Edited April 18, 2012 by stu007

[stu007]

Hi Caggers

 

Does anyone have any advice on what to put in a letter to Cheque Centre about the previous posts as veteran feels they aint being transparent at all.

[Bang!]

Base it on the law - as if their own procedures cannot help - then the law is there to do the same...

 

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1997/40/contents

 

Harassment in Scotland (section 8)

 

8 Harassment.

 

(1)Every individual has a right to be free from harassment and, accordingly, a person must not pursue a course of conduct which amounts to harassment of another and—

(a)is intended to amount to harassment of that person; or

(b)occurs in circumstances where it would appear to a reasonable person that it would amount to harassment of that person.

 

(2)An actual or apprehended breach of subsection (1) may be the subject of a claim in civil proceedings by the person who is or may be the victim of the course of conduct in question; and any such claim shall be known as an action of harassment.

 

(3)For the purposes of this section—

“conduct” includes speech;

“harassment” of a person includes causing the person alarm or distress; and

a course of conduct must involve conduct on at least two occasions.

 

(4)It shall be a defence to any action of harassment to show that the course of conduct complained of—

(a)was authorised by, under or by virtue of any enactment or rule of law;

(b)was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime; or

©was, in the particular circumstances, reasonable.

 

(5)In an action of harassment the court may, without prejudice to any other remedies which it may grant—

(a)award damages;

(b)grant—

(i)interdict or interim interdict;

(ii)if it is satisfied that it is appropriate for it to do so in order to protect the person from further harassment, an order, to be known as a “non-harassment order”, requiring the defender to refrain from such conduct in relation to the pursuer as may be specified in the order for such period (which includes an indeterminate period) as may be so specified,

but a person may not be subjected to the same prohibitions in an interdict or interim interdict and a non-harassment order at the same time.

 

(6)The damages which may be awarded in an action of harassment include damages for any anxiety caused by the harassment and any financial loss resulting from it.

 

(7)Without prejudice to any right to seek review of any interlocutor, a person against whom a non-harassment order has been made, or the person for whose protection the order was made, may apply to the court by which the order was made for revocation of or a variation of the order and, on any such application, the court may revoke the order or vary it in such manner as it considers appropriate.

 

(8)In section 10(1) of the M1Damages (Scotland) Act 1976 (interpretation), in the definition of “personal injuries”, after “to reputation” there is inserted “ , or injury resulting from harassment actionable under section 8 of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 ”.

[give them FA]

"a course of conduct must involve conduct on at least two occasions"

 

which is why it won't apply in this case.

[Bazooka Boo]

"a course of conduct must involve conduct on at least two occasions"

 

which is why it won't apply in this case.

 

So what advice are you contributing then?

[give them FA]

Advice as to the law.

[Bazooka Boo]

Advice as to the law.

 

What Law?

Common Law? Consumer legislation? Statutes? Acts?

Two posts and no credible advice, what are you contributing to this thread?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

What Law?

Common Law? Consumer legislation? Statutes? Acts?

Two posts and no credible advice, what are you contributing to this thread?

 

Disruption nothing more best ignnored Boo.

[give them FA]

No problem, you guys carry on. No doubt you have your own version of how the Harassment Act works. I am probably the only one on this thread who has ever put it into effect and recovered damages with it, but, what do I know?

 

That doesn't mean I don't wish Stu and his friend good luck on this. I hate DCA's as much as you do. That's why I got harassment damages off one of them....

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

GTFA, no one is arguing that you have not had

experience,but for advice to be useful it needs

to be in full context and explained.

[give them FA]

OK, as you can see I have been following this one for a while. And we are all on the same side! (Remind me not to get on the wrong side of the Vet!) and I do admire the way in which he has taken these people on and will not let go. I was simply puzzled that when LBA's were mentioned, I was having problems understanding what "action" in law was being contemplated. The Harassment Act can't apply as there must be a minimum of two acts to constitute a course of conduct, and there has (so far as I can see) only been one- the initial phone call. If I am wrong as to the facts, then I stand to be corrected.

 

As I understand it this has been cumulative harassment because these people have the wrong phone number; but I can't see a case being established against any individual company for reasons stated above. As I have said repeatedly I would like to be wrong. DCA's are parasitic ****.

 

I think that the complaints through channels is good and as I have stated previously here ought to lead to a centralised database so that once a number is found to be invalid it isn't simply passed on for someone else to try. If that's what's been happening. Facts regarding the original debtor seem to be in short supply!

 

If there is some other avenue in law to claim damages, I haven't seen it; but would be behind it 100%.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I deal with a multitude of types of cases the variety of

the problems and the methods of dealing with them are

just as varied I learn something new every day.

English Civil Law is a monster that is ever evolving through

case law Carey and Mcgruffick two fairly recent cases

have changed the way we look at and deal with paperwork

for debts CCAs/reecons.

 

If this were to escalate to litugation there would be a massive

amount of research to find similarities and matches in the cases.

 

There are as my tutor used to quote among many others seems

to fit this situation, ''There are more ways of killing a pig than choking

it with butter'' look beyond the obvious.

[give them FA]

Thanks for that Brig and will keep watching. If there is anything I can contribute I will. I didn't want to sound like I was being the proverbial wet blanket, but I had some fear that an unsustainable legal action might go forward which would give comfort to the enemy if it failed on technical grounds.

 

Good luck!

[stu007]

Hi Caggers

 

Everyones point of view is valuable and when i have shown the veteran this site on my laptop as he sits and reads the replys well at that point he had a tear in his eye and was amazed at all the helpful advice provided by everyone on CAG. Not seen veteran in a wee while as not been keeping to well myself but phone veteran to see how he is.

 

Just to clarify no Letter Before Action has been sent to Cheque Centre or Motormile Finance or has been typed up.

 

Now What is confusing now is Motormiles last letter of 9th April 2012:

 

1. "Our complaints procedure is that you provide your complaint in writing and then our Complaints Director replies to you within 14 days. However, through your tenacity, you obtained my name and adressed your complaint to me personally. As such, I have replied to you personally and the matter circumnavigated the usual complaints process."

 

* Neither the Veteran nor myself knew there Complaints Procedure as it is not available even on there Website.

* How could you Circumnavigate a Complaints Procedure which you have no knowledge nor been given a copy of.

(as a Director of this Company should he not be fully aware of there own Complaint Procedure as is he not responsible for that Policy and Procedure).

 

* It took Numerous request for this Complaint Procedure and yes he has written it in a letter

(i) is this actually there procedure or written to please veteran as no Hard Copy. (ii) Veteran actually asked for an actual copy of the Complaints Procedure as what is written does not explain all the stages of a Complaint.

 

* As every responce from this company has taken longer than the 14 days stated by Motormile by some weeks has this Director of Motormile in breached of their own Complaints Procedure which he should be fully aware of.

 

2. "On a point of law, an assignment of a contract assigns the benefit and not the burden. As such, we have not taken on all "legal rights and responsibilities", but we have taken on certain of those responsibilities - one being to ensure our data is accurately maintained. This we have done."

 

* So Cheque Centre has stated they passed account to Motormile but will take no action where Motormile is concerned but Motormile are saying they aint got the burden so IMO they are passing this back to Cheque Centre without stating it. IMO neither Motormile nor Cheque Centre are being very transparent about this what are they scared of.

 

* So who is responsible for this mess Motormile or Cheque Centre - IMO from what Motormile states the bucks back with Cheque Centre.

 

3. "Revealing a companies details does not breach the Data Protection Act."

 

* I may be wrong but they contacted veteran for the debtor they were chasing so he was an "UKNOWN PERSON" to them and when asked who gave them this info whic is to do with the debtor not veteran they revealed to veteran the company that gave then this information which was actually to do with debtor so how have they not breached DPA.

 

4. "I refute your administration charge as having no basis in contract, or otherwise."

 

* They are the ones that kicked this all off by not replying to correspondance and breaching there own internal Complaint Procedure which for a Director is shameful.

* Due to this failure they made veteran incure costs responding due to their failures.

* The stress and mental anguish this has caused due to a Director breaching their own policies.

 

5. They have refuse any gesture of good will or a donation to Help for Heroes.

 

What i am having difficulty with as they state they aint got burden which leads me to believe it now passed back to Cheque Centre who stated in their last letter they cant do anything else to help with Motormile. Can you see the problem feels like they are playing ping pong.

 

If the Burden part is correct well Motormile stated it IMO any correspondence should go to Cheque Centre but its what to put in a letter as veteran is adament this aint finished as he does not like being played games with by these two companies and he wants to hit Cheque Centre with a very strong letter.

 

This is where I am stuck in what to write and i can see his point.

 

Your advice and help in what to put in a letter would be gratefully appreciated. Thanks again CAGGERS

Edited April 30, 2012 by stu007

[dadofholly]

1. He is not stating that you have deliberatley managed to circumnavigate the procedure - but rather this is what happened, as a fact, when you contacted him directly. Thus by passing their complaints procedure.

 

2. I have stated before on this thread - i believe that on the assignment issue they are talking nonsense. The quote about the 'benefit and burden' etc. is not relevant here as they have not been assigned the debt - they are just collectiong on behalf of a client. It is Cheque Centre who is responsible as it is their agreement - so they are also responsible for agents acting on their behalf.

 

3. I don't believe they have breached the DPA - and if they have, who is the injured party? It cannot be said to be the Veteran as they have not given out any of his personal information. If a breach has occured here it may be worth a complaint to the ICO but there is certainly nothing here warranting legal action, if indeed there is even grounds for a complaint.

 

4. Unfortunatley he is correct - your claim has no basis in contract - though you may try to claim this amount as a loss/cost via a County Court i feel the case would be struck out an early stage.

 

5. They can refuse - they are under no obligation to make such a donation.

 

As for writing to them or CC i believe you will just be wasting your valuble time - they are passing the buck - and the buck should stop with CC.

 

The problem you have here - and correct me if i am wrong - but there was only ever one phone call regarding this matter to the Vet - and when the Vet pointed out they were barking up the wrong tree they ceased to chase him.

 

Now there is no way that a Court will call that harrasment - and in my view there is nothing here to warrant legal action. There defence would simply be - sorry we made an error and put it right as soon as we knew about it. - What else can we expect of them?

 

If you phoned someone up accidentley as a wrong number - you simply would not call them again, which is the right course of action. But if you was to keep phoning them - having been informed it was the wrong number - then it would be harrassment.

 

Stu - i have to be honest - i think you are simply flogging a dead horse here - and it would be better to simply move on - there is no basis for legal action.

 

What is it you hope to achieve by writing again?

Edited May 1, 2012 by dadofholly

[stu007]

Hi Caggers

 

Well just a wee update.

 

Spoke with the ICO today about my concern with Motormile revealing that Cheque Centre gave them the data and revealing this information to an unknown person and also quoting "Revealing a companies details does not breach the Data Protection Act" from Motormiles responce.

 

Was quite a discussion but they were very helpful and the up shot is veteran is to make a complaint to ICO with all documentation and that Motormile are actually inaccurate due to the following.

 

1. As veteran is neither their Customer nor an Authorised Third Party therefore they had no right to that information.

2. Cheque Centre confirming they passed account to Motormile.

 

Would love to know the CAGs take on this was a bit of a surprise as only phoned for a bit of advice on another matter then brought this up.

[dadofholly]

On point 1 above. What information are you saying they had no right to? If it was the telephone number - then you are correct - but they didn't know it was incorrect untill they called the number.

 

On point 2. Who is the injured party? I don't understand how that can be seen as a breach as MM are acting for CC. To fail to pass on that piece of inforation would be to mislead as to the true facts. (something you have complained about - so can you now complain about them doing what you asked them to do).

 

I am sure - but correct me if i am wrong you have been advised to contact organisations such as the OFT, ICO and trading standards already. That advise still stands.

 

As for the outcome of any complaint on the above issues - they are in fact quite minor breaches - if they are indeed breaches - but the ICO will simply request that the CC and MM put measures in place to enure any alleged breaches do not happen in future.