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

[stu007]

Hi

 

@theghost can see your point but are these companies not suppose to check the accuracy of the data recieved from original client/creditor to ensure the data recieved is actually accurate as even in their letter they seem to pass this responsibility onto the Client that gave them the data.

 

As for who the 'Original Client' is a very good question have asked but never get told as im not the Debtor

 

@ Brig they have all acted to some extent is a similar manner the classic was the previous DCA to Lowell who were (MDR) who refused on the phone to clarifiy what or who MDR were but very insistant that i give them details (note this wasnt security question) and they didnt like it when i pointed out that why am i going to give any details out over the phone to someone who refuses to clarifiy who or what (MDR) stands for and their business. Got very angry did MOORCROFT so i stated well send your collectors to my door laughed and hung up.

 

What has really got to me about the letter as it seems to me that Lowells in a way are blaming the Original Client for the data but no mention at all that they failed to check the accuracy of that data from the client.

 

On the first contact on 10th October in the morning which isnt in my letter as i kept that one was that. Even this staff member when asked who Lowells were refused to go into it and when questioned further and asked if they were a debt collection agency refused to confirm anything. So yet another DCA refusing to confirm their status.

 

To be laughed at on the phone for having to ask to speak to a manager numerous times.

 

High Level of Customer Service.

 

1. Refuse to confirm if a debt collection agency.

2. Refuse request to speak to a manager and laugh at them on the phone.

3. When caught using inaccurate data pass the buck and blame the original client mmmm they were the ones that used that inaccurate data and failed to check it was accurate.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I see this as ''conspircy'' of the kind

that infest the debt collection ''industry''

all ot the DCAs buying a debt for a small

percentage of the original debt, the failing,

shove it into a large portfolio of lemons, so

it goes round and round tax benefits taken

time after time and at no time is there any

proof that their victims actually have any

liability.

[cerberusalert]

When Lowells bought the debt the also acquired the 'Rights & Responsibilities', one of the responsibilities was to ensure that any data was in fact correct. They can't worm their way out of it, they must have passed the same information on to their agents or are they claiming it was a pure coincidence that those agents all obtained the same erroneous information from elsewhere?

[theghost]

How do you expect them to do a data check on a phone number given to them by the original creditor?

 

Clearly there would be an implicit suggestion from the original creditor that they were providing Lowell with 'valid' data.

 

As you are unhappy with Lowell what action do you plan to take?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I think it goes further back to the OC passing

information that is false knowingly or not they

started this ominous ball rolling and they and

all the factions in between are resposible for

what has happened to an innocent person.

[stu007]

Hi

 

totally agree Brig.

 

I did ask for a full apology from the Chief Executive but obviously they have no backbone to apologise for the actions of his company get someone else to do it.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

There is a lot more to be done before

considering what ''action'' is needed,

no rash decisions or quick decisions.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Stu leave this now review it as I suggested this

discussion ''off the cuff'' will solve or prove

nothing.

[cerberusalert]

How do you expect them to do a data check on a phone number given to them by the original creditor?

 

Clearly there would be an implicit suggestion from the original creditor that they were providing Lowell with 'valid' data.

 

As you are unhappy with Lowell what action do you plan to take?

 

It is a breach of the Data Protection Act to process incorrect data.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

And further breach to compound the breach

over and over again.

[stu007]

@ theghost well see your point but their are telephone directories and the internet.

 

and amazingly the debtor they are after is on a social networking site. Now if i could find that out well need i say more.

[theghost]

It may well be a breach of the DPA but all they did was ring a number - its hardly the crime of the century so I am struggling to see where you can go with htis aginst Lowells. OC, maybe, but not Lowells.

 

Thwy will blame the CO all day long and that s where any reasonable person would turn to. It would be a different matter if they had kept ringing you on an incorrect number.

[theghost]

@ theghost well see your point but their are telephone directories and the internet.

 

and amazingly the debtor they are after is on a social networking site. Now if i could find that out well need i say more.

 

I dont think it is reasonable for ANY organisation to routinley cross reference every phone number they recieve with existing directories - do you?

[cerberusalert]

I dont think it is reasonable for ANY organisation to routinley cross reference every phone number they recieve with existing directories - do you?

 

It might not be reasonable to some people but it is a condition of their license to ensure the information they collate is correct. maybe they should employ the services of this lot; http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?326379-Cretin-(oops)-Credit-Today...(6-Viewing)-nbsp or maybe they did?

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The Ghost you seem suddenly protective towards

Lowell here this in not just about Lowell it is the

whole process of harassment of a disabled person.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Nice one cerberus!!!!!!!!!

[stu007]

Hi

 

Thanks for all the advice and Brig you are correct no rash decisions.

[cerberusalert]

Just to add, if anyone else thinks it may be unreasonable to expect the credit industry and their cohorts to verify their data read this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-484772/Grandmother-terrorised-death-bank-wrongly-hounded-16-000.html

[theghost]

The Ghost you seem suddenly protective towards

Lowell here this in not just about Lowell it is the

whole process of harassment of a disabled person.

 

Lets call it realistic, not protective.

 

 

He will almost certainly be wasting his time trying to do anything against Lowell, I am absolutley certain of it - he can do whatever he wants of course, it his lfie and his time. But what he should be aksing hismelf is (for exmaple) how owuld a court view such a situation and I am struglging to see how you could pin any form of harassment or DPA breach on Lowell.

 

 

I would imagine there is a significant difference in law between routinley verifying information and taking steps to check the accuracy of informationwhen there is an inkling it is not accurate.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Superb!!!!

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

The Ghost why are you concerned so about Lowlife

it has been stated it is the whole sorry irresponsible

bunch from the OC onwards that are the problem.

[theghost]

If you had read my posts you will have seen I have stated multiple times the fault lies with the OC and the OP should focus his energies on them.

 

 

Anyhow, the Op has said he doesnt know who the OC is so not sure what he can do at this stage until he finds out.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

That is what is being said and being considered carefully

together with ALL the implications down the line.

[stu007]

Hi All

 

Please please dont argue can see all points and yes i am angry at Lowells and the others but the big problem has been who the original creditor is.

 

I have never been able to get this information and the classic is as i am not the debtor they use the data protection act and refuse that information so why call me classic.

 

If their is a way to find this information i would but feel i would just have the door closed and DPA used as not the debtor.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Stu I will PM you at the weekend.

 

Brig.