Moorcroft new template letter

[DeRichleau]

I am sure that the site team already know but in case this is new info, Moorcroft are replying to the 'Doorstep' template letter from the library with their own letter, which implies that the details are 'Not relevant to these circumstances' i.e your alleged debt because they have been gleaned from 'various websites. Rubbish I know, but it may worry some new members to this forum, and a word or two from the site team may re-assure them

kind regards to all

Derichleau

[Annie71]

I think there is more and more of that. I heard the csa are backing motormiles attitude.

If they turn up tell them to go away

[Stigman]

I heard the csa are backing motormiles attitude.

 

The CSA will back nearly every DCA, the CSA President Sara De Tute is also Lowell's Legal & Compliance Director (so no conflict of interest of course).

 

Stigman

[Stigman]

Moorcroft are replying to the 'Doorstep' template letter from the library with their own letter, which implies that the details are 'Not relevant to these circumstances'

 

Now Moorcroft have never used template letters to scare, intimidate and bully people into paying them!

 

As wrote above, they have no right on your property, if anyone does turn up, they have no more right than next doors dog has.

tell them to leave immediately, you do not have to confirm anything and if they refuse call the Police who will remove them for you.

 

Stigman

[renegadeimp]

If they try and say it doesnt apply to them, tell them, and make sure you follow it through, that you are sending it to the OFT/FOS and FSA for their input.

[Bazooka Boo]

A regular tactic most of the bottom dweller DCA's use, further proof of them trying to exploit a debtors lack of knowledge.

Pretty much they are a joke in their chosen industry, when they start sending out puerile missives like that, then you know full well

that they have absolutely no legal knowledge, powers, or any modicum of intelligence.

[Jam_Buttie]

I just don't bother replying to any ****** DCA anymore.

[fkofilee]

Joy! Maybe its worth rejigging the le letter ever so slightly... Just to track them off the scent?

 

Hasnt the CSA gone through a Ton of presidents as well?!?!

I didnt know Miss De Tute had now become President.

[Stigman]

I didnt know Miss De Tute had now become President.

 

http://www.credittoday.co.uk/article/13748/online-news/sara-de-tute-to-join-lowell-group

 

Stigman

[scousepie]

In my opinion Its not even worth responding to DCA's, if they are serious they would start a claim through the courts.. or believe they have a Chance of winning.

[AndyOrch]

In my opinion Its not even worth responding to DCA's, if they are serious they would start a claim through the courts.. or believe they have a Chance of winning.

 

 

Precisely

[fletch70]

Will it get you into trouble if you write

 

Dear sir. I would refer your client to the reply given by pressdman in Arkell v pressdman.

 

If you are not sure what i mean Google is a wonderful tool.

[DeRichleau]

Wonderful!! Never heard of this before and it would be a good ploy to confuse DCA's. Look it up it's worth it.

 

Meanwhile would it be fair to say.....

1 There is a heirachy of DCA's the lower the more useless and the more likely that your debt will be returned

2 If an O C has gone to a DCA in the first place it is unlikely to sue.

3 The DCA's are getting seriously rattled by the fact that so many alleged debtors are fighting back.

[DeRichleau]

Dear Sir,

 

We act for Mr Arkell who is Retail Credit Manager of Granada TV Rental Ltd. His attention has been drawn to an article appearing in the issue of Private Eye dated 9th April 1971 on page 4. The statements made about Mr Arkell are entirely untrue and clearly highly defamatory. We are therefore instructed to require from you immediately your proposals for dealing with the matter.

 

Mr Arkell's first concern is that there should be a full retraction at the earliest possible date in Private Eye and he will also want his costs paid. His attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of your reply.

 

Yours,

 

(Signed)

 

Goodman Derrick & Co.

 

------------------------------

 

Dear Sirs,

 

We acknowledge your letter of 29th April referring to Mr. J. Arkell.

 

We note that Mr Arkell's attitude to damages will be governed by the nature of our reply and would therefore be grateful if you would inform us what his attitude to damages would be, were he to learn that the nature of our reply is as follows: f*** off.

 

Yours,

 

Private Eye

 

[fletch70]

Wonderful!! Never heard of this before and it would be a good ploy to confuse DCA's. Look it up it's worth it.

 

Meanwhile would it be fair to say.....

1 There is a heirachy of DCA's the lower the more useless and the more likely that your debt will be returnedPersonally I would say the lower the more difficult to deal with as they are less compliant

2 If an O C has gone to a DCA in the first place it is unlikely to sue.Not sure I would subscribe to that theory as we know that debt purchaser sue on a regular basis

3 The DCA's are getting seriously rattled by the fact that so many alleged debtors are fighting back. They do seem to be coordinating against template letters and forums

 

Just my personal views. If you look at MH who were a nightmare and now Motormile who I think are ex MH people . They have scant regard for the law.

It is a tough environment out there for the DCA's because there are more and more can't pays and what is the use in making claims against people with little or no income, maybe negative equity

They have to work on scale now as seems to be demonstrated by the numbers of mergers and acquisitions. It is almost impossible to keep track of who now owns whom .

[Desperate Daniella]

I had a letter pushed through the door last month from some organization I've never heard of, about a debt I don't even owe!

 

I sent them an emailed doorstep letter but added that if anyone turned up and caused any embarrassment which resulted in financial loss I would sue them for damages, and that the last time I called the police about an unwanted visitor they responded in three minutes.

 

I haven't heard another word.

 

The "unwanted visitor" was actually a deaf man collecting for a charity for the deaf. It was quite late and I asked who it was without opening the door. But of course he couldn't hear me, and he kept banging loudly on the door and ringing the bell. I was terrified so called the police and they really did turn up in three minutes. He'd gone but they found him further down the road doing the same thing and advised him that just one knock or ring would do!

[DeRichleau]

Debt purchasers sue regularly! Quite surprised by that. Don't get me wrong I totally believe you. However I always thought that if a debt was purchased it was right down at the bottom of the food chain and court action would not be viable. If you have time please reply I'm learning from you here I have a couple of pals I am attempting to help out.

[Desperate Daniella]

Wonderful!! Never heard of this before and it would be a good ploy to confuse DCA's. Look it up it's worth it.

 

Meanwhile would it be fair to say.....

1 There is a heirachy of DCA's the lower the more useless and the more likely that your debt will be returned

2 If an O C has gone to a DCA in the first place it is unlikely to sue.

3 The DCA's are getting seriously rattled by the fact that so many alleged debtors are fighting back.

 

Yes there is a hierarchy. There are debt collectors and debt buyers. The debt buyers are at the top and will always be more aggressive. Someone suggested yesterday on another thread that Lowell, for example, have about 5,000 cases on the go at once. Cabot are also keen to issue claims where they can.

 

The banks and card companies like to distance themselves from the nastier bits of debt collecting so if they ask for the money a couple of times and you don't pay they'll firstly use debt collectors but if these fail they then sell the accounts in a job lot to a debt buyer for about 10p in the £1. So if a debt buyer can get the original debt paid and the charges they load on top they will be very happy indeed.

 

The DCAs don't like people fighting back but I doubt if they are seriously rattled because most people will still be bullied into paying up because they are frightened or because they don't know how to fight back. I wouldn't have known where to begin without CAG.

[Desperate Daniella]

It's very important to respond to letters from DCAs argumentatively. Put them on the spot and force them to let you know if they hold enforceable agreements. Make it very clear that you won't let them get away with producing cut and paste agreements, agreements without prescribed terms, or anything like that.

 

Quote the Waksman Judgment in Carey v HSBC paragraph 234 (4) about copies of original agreements having to be supplied where an agreement has been varied, and their obligations under CPUTR 2008. In other words, throw everything at them. If you see a cut and paste agreement tell them. Accuse them of misrepresentation. Anything you like.

 

Make it clear you are going to be a nightmare. It really does work.

[sillygirl1]

I just keep it short and sweet....

 

Dear DCA

 

I am compiling a list of my creditors with a view to going bankrupt. Please supply full details of the alleged debt and you will be included in the list.

 

Even if I don't hear from you the communication previously sent will be added.

 

Goodbye and don't forget to NEVER call me on the phone as I can't afford one.

[Desperate Daniella]

I just keep it short and sweet....

 

Dear DCA

 

I am compiling a list of my creditors with a view to going bankrupt. Please supply full details of the alleged debt and you will be included in the list.

 

Even if I don't hear from you the communication previously sent will be added.

 

Goodbye and don't forget to NEVER call me on the phone as I can't afford one.

 

Love it. That is brilliant! I'm not 100% certain it would get them to back off immediately though if you had a large debt and sadly most of mine are, or were.

[Annie71]

Depends if you have a job or assets.

[Desperate Daniella]

You are right. It does.

[Desperate Daniella]

Just one more thing....

 

I know that some people think that a DCA can take them to court if they want to, and they will be able to fight it off if the DCA doesn't have an enforceable agreement but sadly that is not always the case. If you get a judge who thinks you are trying to avoid paying the money on a technicality they may well rule against you even when they shouldn't.

 

Unless you have all the legal arguments at your fingertips you may lose.

 

Read this:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?217721-Cap1-debt-many-dcas-could-not-find-CCa-Dryden-Fairfax-Claim-form-HELP!

 

And here is another cautionary tale of a debt for less than £1,000 when Lowell issued a court claim. It's an absolute horror story.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?401203-lowell-joined-3-debts-2-mobile-1-credit-card-made-me-BK-now-want-my-house!!

 

So I may be a total wimp in that I don't want to go to Court, but I'd much rather see them off before it gets that far.

 

DD

[fkofilee]

DD what was the outcome of the Lowell thread for Bankruptcy?

I dont have time to read 44 pages haha ^__^ xp