NCO Europe KEEP calling!

[noomill060]

Two questions:

 

Did you send the stuff by Recorded Delivery

 

and if not,

 

did you retain the reciept from the Post Office or get a Certificate of Posting?

[noomill060]

If you cant prove DELIVERY Paypoo will always find against sellers.

 

If you have proof that you POSTED the item, you can claim against Royal Mail for up to £34.

 

Im afraid you will have refund your buyer. Its a sellers responsibillity to ensure the buyer gets their goods, and its wise to cover yourself against fraudulent claims by ALWAYS sending stuff by Recorded so you can prove delivery if necessary.

 

Sorry if this isnt what you wanted to hear.

[noomill060]

Of course you could always challange NCO to prove you owe Paypal and take you to court. They cant do anything to your credit rating or send bailiffs round to see you without a court order.

 

They will keep ringing you for a length of time and eventually send the case back to Paypal if they get nothing out of you.

 

If you want to tough it out, just refuse to confirm your name and postcode when they ring you.

 

As far as I know, Paypal has NEVER taken anyone to court, but the person claiming they havent recieved the stuff may do, but if its a fraudulent claim they probably wont.

[Movingon]

As far as I know, Paypal has NEVER taken anyone to court, but the person claiming they havent recieved the stuff may do, but if its a fraudulent claim they probably wont.

 

How would you find out?

[noomill060]

Ive been reading the Postage and Payments forum on Ebay for years. Plenty of peeps looking for advice about NCO and accounts limited by Paypoo, but not a squeak about anyone ever being taken to court by NCO or Paypal.

[ncf355]

See my post above re paypal!

 

 

Ask NCO for proof of the debt , they really cant do a damn thing to you so please dont stress over it

 

Tell them you want ALL communication in writing (as is your right!) - for mine it even said that as the debt was in $ I had to pay a mad exchange right

 

This lot are a BUNCH OF ABSOLUTE JOKERS - (actually, check that - jokers are funny, they are just t*****s!

 

[alaistair]

old P.BROWN is very busy apparently, he is flying over to Jersey, Channel Islands this Tuesday to collect about £19 from me for a chargeback from paypal, which I have tried to clear using their online system for about a year!

 

Looking forward to meeting him though...

[nco_loosers]

They have been calling me about 2 supposed debts with pay pal! what loosers! They just called and said that i owe 33 euroes. i said i would not be paying this debt until i have proof that the debt is mine, she laughed at me, said it is only like 20 quid can you just pay it; and i said no, because i have no record of being in this debt.. then she said (at the speed of light) "well you account will go into further action" and hung up.

 

I am now writing to there head office to complain. also it is my legal right to ask for any notes they have made about me on there system, so i think i will do that!!!!

 

What a joke of a company, the fact that the only thing you can find on google for them is a forum to complane about them explains alot!

 

If anyone would like there head office address and tel no let me know!

[Balinoff]

Hi there,

the same things are happened with me too!

Before 1 month i recived call on my cell phone... and one guy told me

we calling you from paypal... can you please confirm your name and address..

I dont say nothing and stop the call. And from then... the calling was starting!

I recived calls and sms from this number 3-4 time per week... but there have another problem which disturb me!

 

In my paypal i use only my cell phone number... but this guys

start to calling me to my Home Phone... and my other Cell phone number !!!

 

I dont use this my number anywhere to internet !!!

 

Can someone here explain me how they have my other numbers ?!?!?!

 

 

Thanks

[bull terrier]

have also received letter from nco and card also saying p brown on a tuesday they dont even know my name card is addressed to someone called furious bob when i called him could not make out what he was saying after reading messages here i am just going to ignore them now thanks

[ODC]

I LIKE THE WAY YOU ARE ALL AGAINST NCO FOR US THAT WORK THERE IT PAYS THE BILLS AND IM SURE U MUST REALISE THAT WE ARE ACTING ON BEHALF OF CLIENTS. ALSO TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS WE ARE ACTUALLY ENTILTED TO CALL PEOPLE TWICE A DAY BEFORE IT IS CLASSED AS HARRASSMENT. IF THERE IS A MISTAKE WITH AN ACC WE DO WHAT WE CAN TO RESOLVE THE MATTER ON YOUR BEHALF AND WITH OUR CLIENTS. TO BE HONEST ITS A JOB IT PAYS THE BILLS AND IF U DONT WANT US TO CALL YOU THEN PAY UP AFTER ALL WE HAVE A LIVING TO MAKE ASWELL

 

You sound like a very well educated and intelligent person ...... NOT. You cannot even spell, or use punctuation. Are you so insecure you need to type everything in CAPITALS. You have no entitlement to call someone about a non existent debt. In my opinion ONE (1) call a day from parasites like NCO is harassment as are the silly threatening cards about your mysteryman who his calling the length and breadth of the U.K. every Tuesday.

 

Get a life and a decent job where your bonus does not rely on bleeding money from those who cannot afford it or even worse who do not even owe your sad company a penny.

[Movingon]

Originally Posted by PAYS THE BILLS

I LIKE THE WAY YOU ARE ALL AGAINST NCO FOR US THAT WORK THERE IT PAYS THE BILLS AND IM SURE U MUST REALISE THAT WE ARE ACTING ON BEHALF OF CLIENTS. ALSO TO CLARIFY A FEW THINGS WE ARE ACTUALLY ENTILTED TO CALL PEOPLE TWICE A DAY BEFORE IT IS CLASSED AS HARRASSMENT. IF THERE IS A MISTAKE WITH AN ACC WE DO WHAT WE CAN TO RESOLVE THE MATTER ON YOUR BEHALF AND WITH OUR CLIENTS. TO BE HONEST ITS A JOB IT PAYS THE BILLS AND IF U DONT WANT US TO CALL YOU THEN PAY UP AFTER ALL WE HAVE A LIVING TO MAKE ASWELL

I have no idea where this "two calls a day" rubbish comes from - show me in the Harrassment Act 1997 where it says that two calls a day is acceptable. Show me in the Telecommunications Act 2006 where it says it's OK to make unwanted calls more than zero times a day.

 

What do you hope to achieve by calling someone twice a day? Do you think, when someone is paid monthly, they're going to have any more money at 4pm than they had at 10am? Do you think, when someone is paid monthly, that they're going to have more money on Thursday than they had on Tuesday?

 

You are being told incorrect information by your employers, who are very clearly aware that they are breaking all sorts of Laws. I would STRONGLY advise you to take up employment with a law-abiding organisation.

 

Oh, and as per the Terms and Conditions of this website, have you requested permission from the site admins to be here?

[loverboy]

post edited

[loverboy]

harrsament has to be know to likely cause some one distress, simply calling someone, like kncoking on a door is not legal harrasment , actually, and yes pay your bills and stop looking for excuses

[give_me_it_back]

Oh dear, "LOVERBOY" (!?) are you a friend of "pays the bills"..? Apparently you say you are a "law student"... Oh dear... maybe, when you grow up, you might even get to work for one of the bank's infamous solicitor teams?

 

The first rule you should learn as a 'law student' is to listen...

Original Quote:

"I have been receiving calls from this lot for ages. All they do is say. "Hi. Please call back on.." They never ask for me by name. I am NOT in debt!

 

I plucked up courage to call back tonight. They have no idea who I am. They have no detail under my name or address... They CAN'T tell me why they keep calling!

 

My number is ex directory.

 

They are less than helpful!

 

All they suggest is that I "ignore the phone calls!"

 

End of Original Quote.

 

 

Let me spell that out again - for the hard of thinking...

 

I AM NOT IN DEBT.

 

Perhaps if you don't 'make it' in law, you could always go and 'work' for a debt collection agency..? They take anyone.

[Movingon]

harrsament has to be know to likely cause some one distress, simply calling someone, like kncoking on a door is not legal harrasment , actually, and yes pay your bills and stop looking for excuses

 

As per the rules of access to this site, do you have permission from the admins to be here?

 

You would think that if you're going to come here and say things against the people you're affecting, day in, day out with your harassment, that you would come informed about the issues; that you would have researched the effects that your behaviour has on people, and that you would know why people CANNOT simply "pay their bills" sometimes. Don't forget also that your company add unlawful charges and interest to the accounts of people they are trying to recover cash from, quite apart from the harrassment issue.

 

For completeness, here is Section 1 and some of Section 2 of the Protection From Harrassment Act 1997:

 

1. - (1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct-

• (a) which amounts to harassment of another, and

• (b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to a course of conduct if the person who pursued it shows-

• (a) that it was pursued for the purpose of preventing or detecting crime,

• (b) that it was pursued under any enactment or rule of law or to comply with any condition or requirement imposed by any person under any enactment, or

• © that in the particular circumstances the pursuit of the course of conduct was reasonable.

Offence of harassment. 2. - (1) A person who pursues a course of conduct in breach of section 1 is guilty of an offence.

[ncf355]

Well said SL

 

As said above, educate yourself before you start spouting garbage

[loverboy]

dont be so silly, acts of pariliment are not open to interpretation, harrasment has to have a clear and set parameter.

Sction 7 of the act defines as conduct which includes alarming the person or causing distress, must at least involve two occasions. Thomas v News Group Newspapers. Further to this S1 (3) provides a valid defence when the conduct was pursued for the purpose of detecting crime, any legal requirement or reasonable valid pursuent ie contract !!!

Add to this the test of harrasment is an objective one, s1(2) the defendant or accussed will only be guilty if its shown that a a resonable person in possesion of the same information would think the conduct amounted to harrasment. It is not straitforward and is mainly used in Tort the remedy being injuction.

 

By the way I dont work for NCO but i put the argument that debtors are themselves in breach of contract and law. NCO is legally recovering under common law and that is not harrasment in any court.

Read up on it, please!!!

[Janet-M]

Just a reminder that anyone being abusive to other users is against the forum rules and the post will be edited or removed

[loverboy]

section 3 dude, section 1 does not apply, if pursuing lawful business like common law protection under contract for breach of contract. Entitled to recover and pursue.

Read up

[loverboy]

yes im recieving abuse, people saying talking garbage etc

[Janet-M]

yes im recieving abuse, people saying talking garbage etc

maybe they believe you are .. but as a law student you should know that is not personal abuse

[noomill060]

Its half term- you can tell, cant you?

[noomill060]

"NCO is legally recovering under common law and that is not harrasment in any court."

 

That assumes there is any debt to recover, doesnt it?

If the alleged debtor disputes that there is, the creditor is obliged to investigate- NCO dont.

 

 

 

Read up on it, please!!!

[Movingon]

section 3 dude, section 1 does not apply, if pursuing lawful business like common law protection under contract for breach of contract. Entitled to recover and pursue.

Read up

 

So you might like to advise us (a) what contractural obligation the OP (who has no debt) has to NCO Europe? (b) what contractural obligation ANY debtor has to NCO Europe, where the paperwork for the alleged debt simply does not exist?

 

You are actually talking utter nonsense; and anyone who is genuinely a Law student would have a considerably better grasp of the English Language than you appear to have.