NCO Europe KEEP calling!

[noomill060]

"So you basiclly borrowed the money from the bank"

 

Really?

 

Its up to you to prove it

 

 

spent it and now you dont want to pay it back?

 

 

Not until you or the OC prove that you have any right to it back!

 

 

Until you can comply with a CCA74 s.77/78 request, you're simply begging.

[ODC]

Ahhh well done sir, hate to tell you this but your claim is a little drop in the sea to be honest, DCA's collect stupid amounts of money to make up for that, and break the rules all the time to be honest, but you won't close down DCA's, they are simply too big.Ask the boss of a certain DCA down Reigate way.

 

Well they may fool some people but as CAG grows stronger each day we are wiping the smile off their faces thats why you need to come on here and be abusive. You dont have the intelligence to properly argue your case. Enjoy your CRAP job while it lasts.

Edited March 24, 2009 by ODC
Spelling like a DCA muppet

[ODC]

#

So you basiclly borrowed the money from the bank,spent it and now you dont want to pay it back? So this is exactl why people like yourself, get phone calls and letters everyday - and it would lead to further action. Fair enough all we do is ring you every day, but by burying your head in sand wont resolve your issues

 

Of course you can ring as many times as you want, it dosent mean we have to answer you, you sad little TROLL

[noomill060]

Ring ring

 

Hello?

 

This is NCO- Barclays want their money back and all the interest

 

Do you have any proof that I agreed to pay it back?

 

Like what?

 

A signed agreement where I agreed to pay it back with interest, and at what rate.

 

 

Errrrrrrr, no, sorry. They dont have it anymore

 

"That was silly of them, byeeee!"

[noomill060]

Hey Churchill, can you get a court to make someone pay an unenforceable debt?

 

 

Errrrrrrrrrrr, no.

[mistery88]

"So you basiclly borrowed the money from the bank"

 

Really?

 

Its up to you to prove it

 

 

spent it and now you dont want to pay it back?

 

 

Not until you or the OC prove that you have any right to it back!

 

 

Until you can comply with a CCA74 s.77/78 request, you're simply

 

 

begging.

 

 

 

Begging is the correct word, Most people who DCA's call are generally in arrears, and 80 percent of the time people are thankful for the reminder and pay up straight away, its supposed to be a service, then there's the people who have been made redundant, NCO staff's job then is to advise debters on what to do, e,g contact client, sort out insurance.

 

Then theres the people who are in debt and refuse to pay because they cant be bothered, NCO staff are supposed to just terminate the call, but of course see it as a great argument and relish the opportunity, thats were the DCA's go wrong.

 

In Paypals case the whole thing is apparently a c**k up, as paypal are stupid enough to send through contact details of people who dont owe money, but other clients, mostly credit card companies, dont send false information through, and most people are just in arrears on their accounts, or out of work, or cant afford repayments, thats when the client takes the debter to court.

 

You are in your right not to deal with DCA's especially that one based in India;), but the idea of them is supposed to make things easy, plus the client doesnt have the resources nor the time to collect money off people.

 

If you are in arrears and a DCA phones you up for the payment, and you have the funds, just pay it, makes things easy, if you dont want to deal with 3rd party companies, just deal through the client, but bear in mind that the DCA's can phone you as it states in your credit agreement until the debt is resolved.

 

And if you dont owe debt but are getting abused by the DCA's then this forum makes sense (although some cases are far stretched), and deal directly through the client to get it stopped.

 

And if you owe debt and have no excuse and dont deal with the DCA or the client then thats fair enough, but i couldnt be bothered being in that persons shoes:D

 

There have also been known cases when the DCA's will purchase the debt off the client, thats the only time when you will have to deal directly through the DCA, although it is rare, and again your credit agreement does state that the client has the right to do that.

Edited March 24, 2009 by mistery88

[noomill060]

"but bear in mind that the DCA's can phone you as it states in your credit agreement until the debt is resolved."

 

 

Hey Churchill,

 

If they dont have a credit agreement, do they have any right to ring you at all, like consent as specified by the DPA?

 

 

Errrrrrrrrrrr, no.

 

 

 

 

This is the crux of it- most credit card agreements simply dont exist (lost) or dont comply with CCA74 anyway, as they are simply application forms missing all the bits to make them into agreements.

[noomill060]

But yeah, Paypal and NCO are a complete disaster. Both should be royally shafted.

[mistery88]

Well they may fool some people but as CAG grows stronger each day we are wiping the smile off their faces thats why you need to come on here and be abusive. You dont have the intelligence to properly argue your case. Enjoy your CRAP job while it lasts.

 

As i have said ODC i dont work there anymore, and it wasn't a crap job anyway, was very good actually(i take it your a treasurer on 160k a year;))

 

Im not trying to be abusive, i was trying to discuss, but of course your labelled a troll straight away, im actually in the middle on this topic,

 

And please dont question my intelligence, it really is the most laughable insult you could give me:roll:

[mistery88]

"but bear in mind that the DCA's can phone you as it states in your credit agreement until the debt is resolved."

 

 

Hey Churchill,

 

If they dont have a credit agreement, do they have any right to ring you at all, like consent as specified by the DPA?

 

 

Errrrrrrrrrrr, no.

 

 

 

 

This is the crux of it- most credit card agreements simply dont exist (lost) or dont comply with CCA74 anyway, as they are simply application forms missing all the bits to make them into agreements.

 

 

Very good point, but yes, it is easy to get hold of it, except for most clients:D

[noomill060]

We're not questioning your intelligence, its merely your understanding of the law which is in question.

 

We get lots of monkeys trolling here, it makes a pleasant change to talk to an organ grinder, if that is indeed what you are.

[noomill060]

Very good point, but yes, it is easy to get hold of it, except for most clients:D

 

Indeed, easy to get hold if it exists.

 

If its an only a application form , you may as well make a paper dart out of it, though.

[ODC]

 

As i have said ODC i dont work there anymore, and it wasn't a crap job anyway, was very good actually(i take it your a treasurer on 160k a year;))

 

Im not trying to be abusive, i was trying to discuss, but of course your labelled a troll straight away, im actually in the middle on this topic,

 

And please dont question my intelligence, it really is the most laughable insult you could give me:roll:

 

Having read your educationally challenged earlier posts I really do not need to question your intelligence. You have proven it's as sound as your pathetic attempts at defending the behaviour of DCAs who have NO LEGAL POWERS whatsoever.

[noomill060]

I take it you know the difference t'wixt agreement and application form?

 

We do.

[noomill060]

And if you do know the difference, it follows that if you are aware that hassling without the consent of an individual, (consent expressed in a credit agreement) is less than legal and can be criminal.

 

An application form is an application form, no matter whether it says "This is a credit agreement under CCA74, sign only of you wish to bound by its terms"

 

It can say whatever you want to print on it, but if it aint got the 4 prescribed terms, its an application form.

 

Hassle me on the strength of that and I will cost you a lot of money.

[mistery88]

We're not questioning your intelligence, its merely your understanding of the law which is in question.

 

We get lots of monkeys trolling here, it makes a pleasant change to talk to an organ grinder, if that is indeed what you are.

 

Well, im not here to **** people off, put it that way. i just have experience in a DCA, and yes it is interesting to hear a different point of view and the legal side of things in much more detail, DCA's could do a much better job, with a much more customer service style approach, but its not actually the DCA's who make up the rules, its the client who decides what is said on the phone, how it is said, and how to collect, but what can you expect from companies like Barclays and Paypal who's admin is as organised as a bull in a China shop:wink:

 

One thing i will say is that nobody deserves to be spoken to like crap on the phone, especially if you are not in debt, and that is were the whole situation is completely wrong, the only time you should be distressed, is when it gets to the point when you have been taken to court, or you have gone bankrupt, and in most cases thats something you definetly bring on yourself.

[noomill060]

Quite honestly, I dont think DCAs could operate within the law even if they tried.

 

"its the client who decides what is said on the phone, how it is said, and how to collect,"

 

Thats the Nuremburg defence- "I voss only obeying orders" -but doesnt abrogate your own personal duty to comply with the law.

[mistery88]

 

Having read your educationally challenged earlier posts I really do not need to question your intelligence. You have proven it's as sound as your pathetic attempts at defending the behaviour of DCAs who have NO LEGAL POWERS whatsoever.

 

Educationally challenged?

 

Again, im laughing at you, especially as all you have done is,

 

Question my intelligence.

 

Abuse a job i once had.

 

And have nothing but a one sided argument instead of a discussion.

 

They are surely the signs of a TRUE TROLL.

[noomill060]

ODC- this person is so far up the food chain, they have shown that they have no real experience of whatwe know really goes with DCAs.

 

Note that this person has no answer to illegal harassment of people, where no CCA exists. Indeed they have admited what we all ways suspected- that most OCs dont have CCAs to provide to DCAs! This explains why no one evr gets one when asked!

 

And we've always given them credit for having a hidden agenda. Truth is- they really dont have them. the whole thing is a fraud and if everyone stood up and said:

 

"my debt? what debt? Prove that I have a debt"

 

they would be stuffed, along with the entire financial system.

 

Oh, hang on...

 

 

Well, not a fraud, but a confidence trick where everyone pretends that the Emporer is wearing the finest silks from Persia, until someone says, errrrrrrr, no, hes stark nekid.

Edited March 25, 2009 by freakyleaky
Language

[noomill060]

Very good point, but yes, it is easy to get hold of it, except for most clients:D

 

 

See they admit it!

 

Finally, the truth is out there.

 

Thanks for your honesty.

[mistery88]

Quite honestly, I dont think DCAs could operate within the law even if they tried.

 

"its the client who decides what is said on the phone, how it is said, and how to collect,"

 

Thats the Nuremburg defence- "I voss only obeying orders" -but doesnt abrogate your own personal duty to comply with the law.

 

It is the Nuremburg defence, and i suppose you could ask, if it worked in WW2, could it still work now.

 

The difference being in WW2 if your General gave you an order and you considered it illegal therefore refusing an order, you would be shot, therefore being damned in both cases, for the DCA's that isn't the case:-)

I cant seem to remember Barclays shooting somebody at a DCA for not taking orders:D

[noomill060]

'tis true, gassing Jews and the mentally handicapped was not illegal in Nazi Germany. Neither is genocide against Christians in southern Sudan today.

 

That didnt stop an arrest warrant against Sudan's president being issued by the International Criminal Court at the Hague. Anyone obeting his orders now faces charges eventually being brought against them- as has happend with Serbian war criminals etc.

 

Just because someone else (Barclays,Paypal) tells you to do something illegal and pays you for it, wouldnt provide you with a defence in court.

 

You would be tried for your own actions, probably along with the OC.

[mistery88]

See they admit it!

 

Finally, the truth is out there.

 

Thanks for your honesty.

 

 

WOW i just got a complement on cag, im HONEST:grin:

 

No problem.

[noomill060]

The Yorkshire Ripper claimed that God told him to do it.

 

Note that its Peter Sutcliffe doing time at Her Majestys Pleasure, not God.

[mistery88]

The Yorkshire Ripper claimed that God told him to do it.

 

Note that its Peter Sutcliffe doing time at Her Majestys Pleasure, not God.

 

Well yes, and thats Al Qaeda's excuse as well, although i would amagine it to be pretty hard to get God in jail;-)