OFT launches revised debt collection guidance

[42man]

http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2011/113-11

[rebel11]

Good Stuff, needed revising, just need Creditors, DCA's to take note.

[ims21]

Hi

 

Just read through the updated guidance......an awful lot of really useful and clear guidance.

 

Everyone suffering at the hands of DCAs should read this.

 

I can see a big increase in the number of complaints going to the OFT.

 

ims

[LostAtSea]

Good stuff, I'd love to see legislation requiring any one chasing a debt has to send a copy of this with, say, the NoA.

[coledog]

Good! About time too

[Crocdoc]

Time will tell whether or not the latest guidelines go far enough, nevertheles having read through the details this publication does seem to address many of the issues that have been raised by various organisations. For example, the ever increasing demands for payment to SB accounts and misleading letters suggesting legal status. In looking closely at the pretence of legal status, it makes you wonder what the private parking industry will do now.

 

I am sure that there are many more points that can be taken out of this publication.

[silverfox1961]

Having just spent the last 45 minutes reading it, 3 quite important items popped out at me

 

Satutory Demands not to be sent inappropraitely. Are you reading Capquest?

The right of set-off. Banks won't be able to offset a debt against an overdraft if it is shown the debtor is in difficulty (well that's how I read it)

 

Annexe B gives very clear guidance on what statute barring means although it still falls short of when the limitation period actually starts

[Crocdoc]

As for Statute Barred, I am Scotland based and take the view that the system in place up here is much easier to deal with and identify. In most cases they back off when it is pointed out that no court action has been taken and no written acknowledgement has been provided by the debtor throughout the five year perod. It can then be left to the DCA to prove otherwise, which they very rarely can.

[Old Cogger]

as usual the others in th U.K. have longer periods to wait i.e. statute Barred.

[Crocdoc]

I must be honest, I have never understood why there is varied legislation, my only fear is that if the issue is raised the simpler system may be lost .

[dadofholly]

Good Stuff, needed revising, just need Creditors, DCA's to take note.

 

I bet we will see a flock of these first :flypig:

[Seminole]

These are good as far as they go but, in reality, they're pretty useless in the context of a regulatory system that fails to protect members of the public.We don't need guidelines, we need a code of practice with penalties for deliberate non-compliance in individual cases as well as the overall credit licensing regime to deal with persistent offenders. If a company sends a postcard that makes it obvious that it's from a debt collector, they should be fined each and every time that they do this. A regime with teeth would simply the debt collection process and make it fairer.

[rebel11]

Are you saying that this isn't a seminole moment?

 

These are good as far as they go but, in reality, they're pretty useless in the context of a regulatory system that fails to protect members of the public.We don't need guidelines, we need a code of practice with penalties for deliberate non-compliance in individual cases as well as the overall credit licensing regime to deal with persistent offenders. If a company sends a postcard that makes it obvious that it's from a debt collector, they should be fined each and every time that they do this. A regime with teeth would simply the debt collection process and make it fairer.

[Seminole]

lol

[dadofholly]

Are you saying that this isn't a seminole moment?

 

Rebel get your coat - i'll call the taxi

[Old Cogger]

Rebel get your coat - i'll call the taxi

 

Fares Please!!! move down the Taxi make room Pls

[rebel11]

O.K.

 

Rebel get your coat - i'll call the taxi

[rebel11]

Great we've got conductors in taxi's must be a firm run by DCA's.

 

Fares Please!!! move down the Taxi make room Pls

[Old Cogger]

Great we've got conductors in taxi's must be a firm run by DCA's.

 

Petrol Monies -

and no swearing on this thread pls calling XXX!s.

[rebel11]

I'll do what the Fulham manager did, fine a player for missing a penalty and fine himself for losing the match. Consider myself fined for my posts.

 

Petrol Monies -

and no swearing on this thread pls calling XXX!s.

[MrBill09]

I'm reliatively new to actually reading OFT guidance, but from just reading various posts going back years on CAG, old media articles, Money Saving Expert forums etc etc, I'm actually left quite disappointed by the OFT. I can't help feel that the recession of 2008 and subsequent bank bailouts has seriously affected the decision making of the OFT. The initial responses on the ipost are all 'yeah, about time' etc but what does this new guidance actually say? To my eyes (and again, I stress I am not a lawyer and these things are quite complicated to follow), this latest guidance is all well and good, but there are hundreds, no thousands, if not tens of thousands of posts on these forums again and again and again about seemingly blatant breaches of previous guidance, data protection LAW BREAKING (personal pet hate at the moment) etc etc, but how often do we hear about the creditors getting seriously reprimanded, fined, closed down, directors castrated etc? Never, to my mind, so new guidance is only worth something if it's properly enforced. The occasion that I have had to complain to the OFT about unfair/unlawful practices by people in the credit industry seemed decidely un-interested which is a serious kick in the teeth, bearing in mind this is supposed to be all about consumer protection.

 

I've also seen a general swerve away from 'reclaiming the right' (I found my original sign-up email confirmation today and the tone was very much 'you're probably here to screw the banks' - i.e. vaguely militant almost) - yet since then, the OFT have basically said 'oh no, hang on a minute....I know we have all this law and legislation and guidance etc....but now that you mugs have started to realise that most banks haven't been abiding by the law, we've actually now decided it doesn't quite mean what we originally meant it to mean (in case everyone takes on the banks and win, leading to collapse of economy #2, only bigger), but something entirely different.

 

Some of the stuff is embarrassing. Bank charges? what the hell happened there? Creditors unable to provide any original paperwork? No problem! Thats fine, so long as the can send you a blank copy of some T's and C's. Do they even need you to hav signed or dated it? No, of course not! Now, come on - in what other universe could you NOT be able to provide any contracts or paperwork and still expect the customer to be bound by you imaginary bit of paper? I'm not advocating people taking out money specifically to then try to not pay it back, but the banks are worth BILLIONS. They basically hold up the economy. They deal with trillions (probably literally) of international transactions each year, usually without a problem - you're telling me they can't store their files properly?!

 

I'm all for clarity, but I can't help feeling like the rules just get changed to whatever best the 'big people' and yet again, us tiny little consumers have to fight all our own battles and take the cr*p.

 

If I sound bitter, it's because I bloody am!

 

For instance - read the 'stupid person condescend-o-gram' by the OFT towards the end of this document;

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/OFT1272.pdf

 

I think I'm just going to go and lie down in a road somewhere the way I feel today :o(

[theghost]

I am guessing the bit about not having to provide agreements is mainly to do with decisions of courts and not the OFT.

 

The new OFT guidance is actually very restrictive. But you cannot enforce laws without the proper funding and lets not forget most enforcement authorities are having cuts at the moment and they need to prioritise. On top of that credit issues are (certainly for TS) not a major priority from what I have seen. Plus, I am sure there is lots of enforcement going on that you don't necessarily hear about.

 

Looking forward, the credit regime in the UK could be in for significant change if the OFT is broken up and the FCA created (most likely). They are also talking about getting rid of the Consumer Credit Act and having an FSA style rulebook. This could create significant change is the way things are done - whetehr it is better or worse remains to be seen.

[dadofholly]

The OFT will, and do take action, as long as they are provided with enough complaints, AND evidence.

 

They just do not reply to individual complaints - that is more trading standards.

 

I would suggest that if anyone has an issue, and requires a personal response, then complain to Trading Standards. But i would encourage everyone to also complain to the OFT. The OFT will act on weight of numbers - OR actual evidence of offences being committed, so it is imortant to still complain to them.

 

AS for the Data Protection issue - that is for the ICO who are basicly toothless - it's in this area more enforcement power is needed. If the ICO do find in your favour you can sue any company that has breached your data and take them to court. The ICO have an advice leaflet on their website, on this issue. But again complain.

 

As for the OFT guidance on the CCA - they are correct that the lack of an agreement does not mean the debt no longer exists. The problem is the Carey Judgement. But in fact Carey never realy changed anything - it just gave a case for DCA's to missuse - and abuse - and try to manipulate the views of County Court Judges by cherry picking parts of the judgement.

 

There has been a recent appeal to another high profile case - and the judgement is due out next week. Lets hope that has gone the right way, and swing things back in favour of the consumer.

Edited October 19, 2011 by dadofholly

[Uncle Peter]

"The OFT accepts that in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, statute barred debt still exists and is therefore recoverable."

 

I was under the impression once you pointed out to the DCA it was statute barred they went away - what's to stop them from continuing to pester you for the debt forever more if it's still recoverable?

 

I ask this, as I'm on the cusp of being able to reel off 'statute barred' at some DCAs who, amongst other things, have somehow managed to get hold of my ex directory mobile number and have been making good use of it recently.

[dadofholly]

The OFT also accepts that once you tell a company a debt is stat barred then that company ceases recovery action against you.

 

So if they persist - report them.