Spurious bill from BT

[womble005]

Hi everyone,

 

I wonder if anyone else has experience of this issue?

 

I moved out of a rented flat in October 2008 and cancelled my contract with BT according to their requirements.

 

I then opened an account with a different telephone and broadband provider at my new address (which was a different flat in the same street).

 

Earlier this year, BT sent a very spurious bill for just under £60 to my old address.

The postman knew I had moved from no. 50 to no. 62, and so delivered it to me.

 

I informed BT on six separate occasions that on the date of the bill, I was not living at no. 50.

I also told them that it would appear they had simply used my name on a bill which should have been addressed to the current tenant.

 

They ignored all of my communications and simply kept chasing me for the money.

 

BT have now sold the debt to a company called "Past Due Credit Solutions" who are similarly chasing me for the money.

 

I have informed Past Due Credit Solutions that, on the date of the bill, I had had no business with BT since October 2009

when my account was closed and all outstanding monies paid in full.

 

Past Due Credit Solutions are asking for a copy of my tenancy agreement in order for me to "prove" that I was not living at no. 50 when this "debt" was incurred.

 

Firstly, I don't believe I am under any obligation to provide a consumer credit recovery agency with "proof" of anything under current UK law. Is that correct?

 

Secondly, being an assured short hold tenancy agreement would only "prove" that I was the tenant at an address between two dates. It wouldn't serve to prove I was actually living there at the time, nor state whether I then renewed that tenancy after the expiry date.

 

Ergo, how would me sending them a copy of tenancy agreements to show I was the tenant at no. 50 between October 2006 and October 2009 prove that I wasn't STILL the tenant there in February 2013 when BT issued a bill in my name at that address?

 

I don't understand how Past Due Credit Solutions will simply agree that I WASN'T living at the property in February this year just because I send them copies of tenancy agreements for the periods when I WAS living there.

 

Any advice gratefully received!

Edited June 16, 2013 by womble005
missed a word out!

[dx100uk]

ignore them

 

they are not bailiff and have no such legal powers

 

if this does not show

on your CRA file

 

its doing you no harm

 

sz

[renegadeimp]

Agreed. This lot contacted me last year for an address i havent lived at since 2010. I've heard nothing since they sent the letter. Everything was paid and cancelled. Seems like their automated systems send accounts to this DCA, and doesnt check if its actually been paid or not.

 

As for their silly letter, the onus is on THEM to prove you owe the debt. Not for you to prove you dont.

 

If you feel like conversing with them, send them the Prove it letter from the CAG library. Although imo they arent even worth the cost of the stamp.

Edited June 16, 2013 by renegadeimp

[womble005]

Thank you for your responses, that's really helpful.

 

I sent back a (vaguely sarcastic) reply, so hopefully they'll get the message!

 

Thanks again.

[renegadeimp]

You can send whatever you like to a DCA. As dx said, there is NOTHING they can do. They have no power at all apart from wasting paper by sending you letters. However, you don't want to start playing letter tennis with them. It's a waste of time and money on both your parts.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi everyone,

 

I wonder if anyone else has experience of this issue?

 

I moved out of a rented flat in October 2008 and cancelled my contract with BT according to their requirements.

 

I then opened an account with a different telephone and broadband provider at my new address (which was a different flat in the same street).

 

Earlier this year, BT sent a very spurious bill for just under £60 to my old address.

The postman knew I had moved from no. 50 to no. 62, and so delivered it to me.

 

I informed BT on six separate occasions that on the date of the bill, I was not living at no. 50.

I also told them that it would appear they had simply used my name on a bill which should have been addressed to the current tenant.

 

They ignored all of my communications and simply kept chasing me for the money.

 

BT have now sold the debt to a company called "Past Due Credit Solutions" who are similarly chasing me for the money.

 

I have informed Past Due Credit Solutions that, on the date of the bill, I had had no business with BT since October 2009

when my account was closed and all outstanding monies paid in full.

 

Past Due Credit Solutions are asking for a copy of my tenancy agreement in order for me to "prove" that I was not living at no. 50 when this "debt" was incurred.

 

Firstly, I don't believe I am under any obligation to provide a consumer credit recovery agency with "proof" of anything under current UK law. Is that correct?

 

Secondly, being an assured short hold tenancy agreement would only "prove" that I was the tenant at an address between two dates. It wouldn't serve to prove I was actually living there at the time, nor state whether I then renewed that tenancy after the expiry date.

 

Ergo, how would me sending them a copy of tenancy agreements to show I was the tenant at no. 50 between October 2006 and October 2009 prove that I wasn't STILL the tenant there in February 2013 when BT issued a bill in my name at that address?

 

I don't understand how Past Due Credit Solutions will simply agree that I WASN'T living at the property in February this year just because I send them copies of tenancy agreements for the periods when I WAS living there.

 

Any advice gratefully received!

You should complain to Past Due regarding their ''requirement'' for you to prove you are not the debtor, this is a breach of OFT Guidance.

Also if you have not done so check CRA files.