threatining messages on answer machine

[silsal]

Hi I have been getting messages from quidmarket on my answering machine (there is 5 of us in our house), saying it is such and such from their legal team and if I dont contact them before 5pm tomorrow they are going to file a CCJ against me, TBH I dont really care what they do to me but other people are listening to these messages, is there anything I can do about it

[renegadeimp]

Get it to the OFT. Its a major violation of their credit licence, as well as a breach of the DPA which must be reported to the ICO and the lenders data controller.

[Bombaymix]

Pure stupidity on their behalf actually leaving a trail of evidence behind.

 

By all means and most importantly report them to the OFT.

 

I'd also send them a letter (telephone harassment) recorded delivery advising them NOT to contact you via telephone.

[stu007]

Hi silsal

 

If you look at this link in the CAG Library it has a telephone by harassment response letter:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/content.php?493-Harassment-by-telephone-response-letter

[dpick]

The way thing's are with OFT and payday loan companies the more complaints the better your complaint might just be the one that makes OFT withdraw the licence for these rip off artist's

 

dpick

[silsal]

Thanks guys for the advice, I have emailed them and advised them that I have reported them and would like any communication by letter only

[radfordred]

the oft and DPA guidelines state companies are allowed to leave msgs on home and mobile numbers - it's work phones that are not allowed to have personal messages on it. if you dont want messages left on a shared voicemail, don't provide it on your application is the simplest way - the info and advice above is massively incorrect and wrong and trying to take the moral highground and suggesting a license may be revoked due to an answerphone msg is way off the mark.

[renegadeimp]

Rad please do not necropost. Especially when you give incorrect advice

[citizenB]

the oft and DPA guidelines state companies are allowed to leave msgs on home and mobile numbers - it's work phones that are not allowed to have personal messages on it. if you dont want messages left on a shared voicemail, don't provide it on your application is the simplest way - the info and advice above is massively incorrect and wrong and trying to take the moral highground and suggesting a license may be revoked due to an answerphone msg is way off the mark.

 

Do they ? Perhaps you could provide a link to the regulations that permits them to do this ? Because I cant find anything that does allow it.

[renegadeimp]

It's strange he posted that as his first post and necro'd the thread.

[fkofilee]

Lol!!! I think it got quiet in the office!! :/

[radfordred]

lol.!! pots and kettles then!

 

just because advice is not what you are used to hearing doesn't make it wrong! read oft's guidance on debt collection, do control and F to find messages and misleading - the guidance is open to interpretation, but it does mean companies can leave messages on our machines if they think it is a personal machine, as in, if we submit the number as our home phone - once you tell them it's shared they should stop - it's also a grey area too as they also state companies are not allowed to mislead, so they HAVE to provide their company name on messages. by rights, what you're saying would also apply to texts / emails and post too as who is to say who is reading them.

[renegadeimp]

They can contact you until they tell you to stop. They are not allowed to continue calling multiple times a day and certainly arent allowed to harass or threaten people over it.

 

Rad, your comments are concerning as i can see you have some basis in reality, but you didnt think it through.

[radfordred]

too right, but when it comes to a point where adults feel harassed over a phone call it's concerning.

 

i find making an arrangement generally stops the phone calls from my experience

- telling companies not to ring and then not making an arrangement

will only make t hem ring back after a week or so.!

 

i'm not being confrontational,

 

but can see that's what's expected on here

- what do you mean i didnt think it through

- i dont understand that bit!

 

i have some basis in reality

 

- lol.!! rthanks

[dx100uk]

sorry cant agree there

 

you should never blindly make arrangements to pay

without doing some basic checks first.

 

no.1. NEVER EVER discuss your debts on the phone

 

2 everything in WRITING ONLY

 

put the phone down.

[citizenB]

too right, but when it comes to a point where adults feel harassed over a phone call it's concerning.

 

i find making an arrangement generally stops the phone calls from my experience

- telling companies not to ring and then not making an arrangement

will only make t hem ring back after a week or so.!

 

i'm not being confrontational,

 

but can see that's what's expected on here

- what do you mean i didnt think it through

- i dont understand that bit!

 

i have some basis in reality

 

- lol.!! rthanks

 

Once a company has been advised that the "debtor" does not want to discuss their financial affairs on the telephone, they are obliged to respect that and communicate in writing.

 

If the "debtor" is simply going to either ignore the calls or continue to state they do not wish to talk to them, then further calls by the company could be classed as harrassment/intimidation.

 

Have a read of

 

Roberts v Halifax and Harrison v Link

 

Judges in both these judgments expessed distate at the way creditors "hound debtors" by telephone and it was pointed out in Harrison v Link that this type of action has no place in debt collection.