Natwest, Capquest and CCS Collect

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

This morning I received another letter from Capquest stating that I still owe them the full amount. They have attached a financial statement detailing payments I have made to Capquest. The statement shows that I paid them £10 on 28/03/13 and another payment of £10 on 20/1/14. I have never paid anything to Capquest, Natwest, CCS Collect or any other DCA involved in this seven year farce.

Luckily I have all my bank statements for the last 3 years which prove that Capquest are telling porkies. I wonder why Capquest think they can convince me that I made payments when I kinow full well I haven't. They must think I'm brain dead.

 

 

Time to ditch the templates and stop them in tracks I think.

 

 

 

 

SO:

 

 

For the Personal Attention of

 

 

Mr Johnathan Bilzin

Managing Director

Capquest Investments

 

 

 

 

Date:

 

 

Ref: Use the one on the last letter.

 

 

Formal Complaint.

 

 

 

 

Dear Mr Bilzin,

 

 

I refer you to recent correspondence between myself and Capquest regarding an alleged debt for £xxxx.xx originating from an account with NatWest Bank.

 

 

I attach herewith a copy of a letter from Capquest dated xx.xx.xxxx alleging that I have made the following payments and the dates on which they were allegedly made.

 

 

Please take note I have not at any time made any such payments to Capquest its agent CCS or NatWest Bank.

 

 

For clarification and the avoidance of any misunderstanding this alleged debt is STATUTE BARRED, the claims that I have made payments at any time are refuted.

 

 

The way Capquest and its agent CCS have conducted the pursuit of this statute barred debt amounts to harassment and the claims that I have made payments are quite obviously untrue and are intended to support Capquests claim that the alleged debt is not statute barred.

 

 

I have conclusive proof that I have not made any such payments.

 

 

I now require Capquest to explain full why it is making false claims , and harassing me for payment of a debt that is statute barred.

 

 

I will be seeking redress from Capquest for the harassment, distress, and the costs involved in dealing with this matter.

 

 

This formal complaint allows Capquest 56 days to investigate and respond to it, but as this matter has already taken xxxxx to reach this stage I would expect a more rapid response and your offer of redress in regard to this matter.

I reserve the right to refer this matter to the FCA and FOS.

 

 

Send signed for and check delivery date.

 

 

( I've tackled this MD before with success.).

[SabreSheep]

This morning I received another letter from Capquest stating that I still owe them the full amount. They have attached a financial statement detailing payments I have made to Capquest. The statement shows that I paid them £10 on 28/03/13 and another payment of £10 on 20/1/14. I have never paid anything to Capquest, Natwest, CCS Collect or any other DCA involved in this seven year farce.

Luckily I have all my bank statements for the last 3 years which prove that Capquest are telling porkies. I wonder why Capquest think they can convince me that I made payments when I kinow full well I haven't. They must think I'm brain dead.

 

 

Did you do any Subject Access Requests around those two times. Wondering if you did that they have unlawfully set aside the fee as payment to the debt

[SabreSheep]

Time to ditch the templates and stop them in tracks I think.

 

The way Capquest and its agent CCS have conducted the pursuit of this statute barred debt amounts to harassment and the claims that I have made payments are quite obviously untrue and are intended to support Capquests claim that the alleged debt NOT is statute barred.

 

 

Just a quick check should he add the "NOT" into the sentence?

[chiefmegawatty]

Time to ditch the templates and stop them in tracks I think.

 

 

 

 

SO:

 

 

For the Personal Attention of

 

 

Mr Johnathan Bilzin

Managing Director

Capquest Investments

 

 

 

 

Date:

 

 

Ref: Use the one on the last letter.

 

 

Formal Complaint.

 

 

 

 

Dear Mr Bilzin,

 

 

I refer you to recent correspondence between myself and Capquest regarding an alleged debt for £xxxx.xx originating from an account with NatWest Bank.

 

 

I attach herewith a copy of a letter from Capquest dated xx.xx.xxxx alleging that I have made the following payments and the dates on which they were allegedly made.

 

 

Please take note I have not at any time made any such payments to Capquest its agent CCS or NatWest Bank.

 

 

For clarification and the avoidance of any misunderstanding this alleged debt is STATUTE BARRED, the claims that I have made payments at any time are refuted.

 

 

The way Capquest and its agent CCS have conducted the pursuit of this statute barred debt amounts to harassment and the claims that I have made payments are quite obviously untrue and are intended to support Capquests claim that the alleged debt is not statute barred.

 

 

I have conclusive proof that I have not made any such payments.

 

 

I now require Capquest to explain full why it is making false claims , and harassing me for payment of a debt that is statute barred.

 

 

I will be seeking redress from Capquest for the harassment, distress, and the costs involved in dealing with this matter.

 

 

This formal complaint allows Capquest 56 days to investigate and respond to it, but as this matter has already taken xxxxx to reach this stage I would expect a more rapid response and your offer of redress in regard to this matter.

I reserve the right to refer this matter to the FCA and FOS.

 

 

Send signed for and check delivery date.

 

 

( I've tackled this MD before with success.).

 

OK thanks Brig. I spent about 30mins today on the phone to the FCA.

They gave me advice very similar to your kind advice so I wrote a letter to Capquest along similar lines to your suggestion.

The FCA said if Capquest continue to chase the debt then report them to the financial ombudsman.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

OK thanks Brig. I spent about 30mins today on the phone to the FCA.

They gave me advice very similar to your kind advice so I wrote a letter to Capquest along similar lines to your suggestion.

The FCA said if Capquest continue to chase the debt then report them to the financial ombudsman.

Well lets hope this stops this nonsense once and for all!!

[chiefmegawatty]

Did you do any Subject Access Requests around those two times. Wondering if you did that they have unlawfully set aside the fee as payment to the debt

 

I haven't done any Subject Access Requests at any time, but I understand what you are suggesting.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

There is something seriously adrift with Capquest and alleged payments restarting the SB "clock" too many instances imo.

[chiefmegawatty]

I am astonished with these DCA's.

 

They will go to the end of the earth to recover trivial debts even when they know the debts are statute barred.

 

Producing false financial statements detailing fake payments must surely amount to attempted fraud.

 

I think the Government should look into the way DCA's are conducting their business and tighten-up the law.

 

I understand that in Scotland, statute barred means the debt doesn't exist and is completely deleted.

 

Why isn't English law the same I ask myself.

[SabreSheep]

Remove every possible scenario and anything left no matter how improbable must be the truth.

 

SO if its not SARS and happens to many others a lot then its either a deliberate misrepresentation and systematic or extreme incompetence.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

I am astonished with these DCA's. They will go to the end of the earth to recover trivial debts even when they know the debts are statute barred.

Producing false financial statements detailing fake payments must surely amount to attempted fraud. I think the Government should look into the way DCA's are conducting their business and tighten-up the law.

I understand that in Scotland, statute barred means the debt doesn't exist and is completely deleted.

Why isn't English law the same I ask myself.

 

 

I often wonder if this kind of unfair and misleading business practice is just the lower levels of DCA staff attempting to impress management who fail to train and manage them, if these alleged payments are invented and not a confusion/mistake on accounts then indeed this is serious.

 

 

Scotland has its own legal system, but in England and Wales the Government some years ago caved in to threats from debt purchasers/DCA of flooding the courts with claims if the limitation periods were change hence we lag behind not only Scotland but much of Europe.

Edited May 28, 2014 by ims21

[chiefmegawatty]

I often wonder if this kind of unfair and misleading business practice is just the lower levels of DCA staff attempting to impress management who fail to train and manage them, if these alleged payments are invented and not a confusion/mistake on accounts then indeed this is serious.

 

 

Scotland has its own legal system, but in England and Wales the Government some years ago caved in to threats from debt purchasers/DCA of flooding the courts with claims if the limitation periods were change hence we lag behind not only Scotland but much of Europe.

 

Hi Brig, I am certain that the payments and dates were invented, so yes it is serious.

The FCA told me that should any legal action come about, I will end up being compensated with an amount equal to or more than the alleged debt.

Edited May 28, 2014 by ims21

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi Brig, I am certain that the payments and dates were invented, so yes it is serious.

The FCA told me that should any legal action come about, I will end up being compensated with an amount equal to or more than the alleged debt.

Well I'm glad the FCA sees this in a practical way it bodes well for the future I think.

 

 

The decision on "criminal " charges is for a later date once you long and very drawn out saga is put to bed.

 

 

I would suggest some research into other " transgression" on the part of Capquest to back up this current scenario.

Edited May 28, 2014 by ims21

[chiefmegawatty]

Well I'm glad the FCA sees this in a practical way it bodes well for the future I think.

 

 

The decision on "criminal " charges is for a later date once you long and very drawn out saga is put to bed.

 

 

I would suggest some research into other " transgression" on the part of Capquest to back up this current scenario.

 

Hi Brig, I think the FCA were referring to legal action in a County Court and not a criminal magistrates court regarding compensation. This whole issue is really a civil case and should never come to criminal court. I feel confident that if this ever went to County court, Capquest would simply claim that it was an admin error to prevent any further action against them.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Hi Brig, I think the FCA were referring to legal action in a County Court and not a criminal magistrates court regarding compensation. This whole issue is really a civil case and should never come to criminal court. I feel confident that if this ever went to County court, Capquest would simply claim that it was an admin error to prevent any further action against them.

 

 

I do not think such actions could remain just a civil matter it is too serious and could have far ranging effects on how DCAs and debt purchasers conduct their business.

Edited May 28, 2014 by ims21

[fletch70]

Brig. Regarding your letter, do the FOs still exist. Wouldn't want anyone to look silly by misquoting things.

[SabreSheep]

It does exist. Although im a bit confused myself.

 

For certain things the FOS *IS* the FCA

[ims21]

Brig. Regarding your letter, do the FOs still exist. Wouldn't want anyone to look silly by misquoting things.

 

Yes fos does exist and is the body with whom to lodge a complaint if things cannot be resolved ith the financial business itself.

 

It does exist. Although im a bit confused myself.

 

For certain things the FOS *IS* the FCA

 

Not quite but I see where you are coming from.

 

 

The FCA does not handle or get involved in individual disputes. Although people may wish to submit a complaint direct the FCA to make themselves feel better, nothing will be done with it and the complainant will, at most, get a response back simply advising to contact the financial business concerned or take the complaint to fos.

 

While the Utopian desire of the FCA to have fos deal with complaints in a timely manner is admirable, the evidence on CAG is that fos can be painfully slow. Whether that will change as the FCA get a tighter hold on things, well only time will tell.

 

All regulated firms must have a complaints procedure in place and must make periodic returns direct to the FCA of all complaints received and the resolution (or non resolution) data.

 

Where a resolution cannot be reached between the two parties, then fos is the next port of call if the regulatory route is the one being taken.

 

The formal complaint to the firm should state that it is indeed a formal complaint which means that there is an 8 week "window" for the form to investigate and give a decision.

 

If a decision is given and all parties are happy with it then the matter is deemed resolved.

 

If no resolution is achieved or if the 8 week time limit is exceeded then the door to fos is opened.

 

The formal complaint to the business should not be a rant or aggressive but should clearly set out the base issues being complained about and details as to what the complainant wishes the business to do about it and the overall desired outcome.

 

Bullet points can be used to perhaps make the various points stand out more and make for easier reading and understanding by the recipient.

 

Keep the complaint letter to the point and avoid waffle, accusatory or overly confrontational language.

 

If a complaint to fos is needed, the complaint should be constructed in a similar fashion to the above, i.e. setting out the facts, what you have tried to do about it with the company concerned and why you are unhappy with the firm's response.

 

You can enclose any documents and evidence that you have accumulated to help get your points over.

 

It is, in my view, wise to consider letters of formal complaint and complaints to fos over a short period of time and to work on them a bit so that you are sure that they are as effective as you believe they can be.

 

Whacking out a quick letter in a fit of pique is not the way to go about it.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Brig. Regarding your letter, do the FOs still exist. Wouldn't want anyone to look silly by misquoting things.[/quote

 

 

The Financial Ombudsman Service remains in place the OFT has been replaced with the FCA.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

It does exist. Although im a bit confused myself.

 

For certain things the FOS *IS* the FCA

Wrong The Ombudsman Service is NOT part of the FCA.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Yes fos does exist and is the body with whom to lodge a complaint if things cannot be resolved ith the financial business itself.

 

 

 

Not quite but I see where you are coming from.

 

 

The FCA does not handle or get involved in individual disputes. Although people may wish to submit a complaint direct the FCA to make themselves feel better, nothing will be done with it and the complainant will, at most, get a response back simply advising to contact the financial business concerned or take the complaint to fos.

 

While the Utopian desire of the FCA to have fos deal with complaints in a timely manner is admirable, the evidence on CAG is that fos can be painfully slow. Whether that will change as the FCA get a tighter hold on things, well only time will tell.

 

All regulated firms must have a complaints procedure in place and must make periodic returns direct to the FCA of all complaints received and the resolution (or non resolution) data.

 

Where a resolution cannot be reached between the two parties, then fos is the next port of call if the regulatory route is the one being taken.

 

The formal complaint to the firm should state that it is indeed a formal complaint which means that there is an 8 week "window" for the form to investigate and give a decision.

 

If a decision is given and all parties are happy with it then the matter is deemed resolved.

 

If no resolution is achieved or if the 8 week time limit is exceeded then the door to fos is opened.

 

The formal complaint to the business should not be a rant or aggressive but should clearly set out the base issues being complained about and details as to what the complainant wishes the business to do about it and the overall desired outcome.

 

Bullet points can be used to perhaps make the various points stand out more and make for easier reading and understanding by the recipient.

 

Keep the complaint letter to the point and avoid waffle, accusatory or overly confrontational language.

 

If a complaint to fos is needed, the complaint should be constructed in a similar fashion to the above, i.e. setting out the facts, what you have tried to do about it with the company concerned and why you are unhappy with the firm's response.

 

You can enclose any documents and evidence that you have accumulated to help get your points over.

 

It is, in my view, wise to consider letters of formal complaint and complaints to fos over a short period of time and to work on them a bit so that you are sure that they are as effective as you believe they can be.

 

Whacking out a quick letter in a fit of pique is not the way to go about it.

 

 

Hardly "Fit Of Pique after all the years this has been dragging on time for action I think.

[fletch70]

Sorry folks , not sure if that was too much vino or just a senior moment

[chiefmegawatty]

Hi Brig, Yes I have been wondering about this along similar lines to you.

Capquest said in their letter that the attached statement shows payments I had made not to NatWest

but to Capquest !!

On closer inspection of the statement it matches an extract of the statement Natwest printed out for me

a few months ago when I visited my local branch.

However, Capquest's version shows different dates of money transfers into the account.

Capquest have obviously taken an extract from my NatWest bank statement from years ago, changed the dates of the transactions to make out the debt isn't statute barred then claim that I had been paying them.

You are right, this is serious.

Knowing for certain that I have made no payments to NatWest or Capquest perhaps I should report Capquest to Action Fraud.

Edited May 29, 2014 by ims21

[SabreSheep]

Wrong The Ombudsman Service is NOT part of the FCA.

 

Correct I was confused

[ims21]

Hi Brig, Yes I have been wondering about this along similar lines to you.

Capquest said in their letter that the attached statement shows payments I had made not to NatWest

but to Capquest !!

On closer inspection of the statement it matches an extract of the statement Natwest printed out for me

a few months ago when I visited my local branch.

However, Capquest's version shows different dates of money transfers into the account.

Capquest have obviously taken an extract from my NatWest bank statement from years ago, changed the dates of the transactions to make out the debt isn't statute barred then claim that I had been paying them.

You are right, this is serious.

Knowing for certain that I have made no payments to NatWest or Capquest perhaps I should report Capquest to Action Fraud.

 

These are all things that you should be addressing in your formal complaint to Capquest.

 

You should be asking for them to provide chapter and verse on each of the payments they say have been made to them.

 

The longer you put off writing to Capquest, the longer it will be before you can escalate your complaint to fos.

[chiefmegawatty]

These are all things that you should be addressing in your formal complaint to Capquest.

 

You should be asking for them to provide chapter and verse on each of the payments they say have been made to them.

 

The longer you put off writing to Capquest, the longer it will be before you can escalate your complaint to fos.

 

I wrote to Capquest yesterday outlining all these issues and a few others.

I mentioned in my letter that Capquest had placed a default on my CRA report in 2012 which showed a default date of 23/05/2007 and on 23/05/2013 it was removed. I therefore asked them how the hell they consider the debt to not be statute barred.