can debt collectors demand this info?

[Gaz74205]

Hi,

 

My mother called me last night,

she had a phone call from a collection agency that's she's been dealing with, and paying.

 

She makes payments online, and it wouldn't let her, instead saying she had to call.

 

The guy on the line said they couldn't take any money without getting full details of her finances.

She refused, saying it's none of their business.

 

They say they can't take any money, as by law they need to get these full financial details.

She again refused.

 

The guy said it was to make sure that she is not paying more than she can afford.

she retorted with "are you a ~@~ idiot?

do you think i'd be giving you it if i couldn't afford it?"

 

Her question to me, was is this a legal requirement?

 

I said i was 90% sure they were at it, and that a letter of complaint about this both to the agency,

and the regulator, should be the next step.

 

I've advised her to answer everything they say on the phone with "this is what I'm giving you, take it or leave it"

 

just to make sure of the 10% unsureness, can anyone confirm that this is in fact not a legal requirement?

 

Thanks,

[fkofilee]

Whos the DCA? Whats the debt for?

And no, They cant force her to give finances...

 

More info required before we can advice?

[Gaz74205]

not sure who it is, they said that they legally can't take any money till she gives them full details of incomings and outgoings. I was pretty sure this was a complete lie.

 

not sure what other info you need.

[Conniff]

Mainly who the dca is, she must know that.

[unclebulgaria67]

If she advised of financial hardship previously, this may be why they want to review, as there is i believe a requirement for them to review payments.

 

But it is more likely just to be a ruse to get her to increase payments.

 

Tactic would be to just say in writing that she has worked out her finances and can afford to pay £x per month or week and is happy to do this. If they are refusing to accept payment, they need to do so in writing.

[Gaz74205]

she no doubt does know who the agency is, i don't. I'm at work. I'll call her tonight to find out, but i can't see how it would matter, the rules have got to be the same for them all, no?

[dx100uk]

please tell her to stop using the phone!!!

she is under no legal obligation to discus a debt on the phone

 

shes probably fallen for all their threats and gotten scared and started to stupidly pay them.

 

writing only

 

put the phone down

 

dca's are not bailiffs

and have

no such legal powers

[Gaz74205]

please tell her to stop using the phone!!!

she is under no legal obligation to discus a debt on the phone

 

shes probably fallen for all their threats and gotten scared and started to stupidly pay them.

 

writing only

 

put the phone down

 

dca's are not bailiffs

and have

no such legal powers

 

she is paying cause she doesn't want it hanging over her. I'm writing her a letter to send them saying one, never call again and 2, this is what i'm offering, take it or leave it.

[fkofilee]

she no doubt does know who the agency is, i don't. I'm at work. I'll call her tonight to find out, but i can't see how it would matter, the rules have got to be the same for them all, no?

 

Well... There could be a few things she could do...

But once you tell us the name of the DCA and what type of account it is, maybe we can give more tailored advice,

[Peterbard]

It is accepted and as said I believe good practice for a creditor to ask for a breakdown of income and expenditure when agreeing a plan.

 

If you go to one of the free DMP providers they will require an I and E breakdown, and then they will send it to the creditor along with an offer of payment. It is designed to help the debtor, but as you say can be open to abuse.

 

Have they stopped interest on the debt ?

[dx100uk]

she is paying cause she doesn't want it hanging over her. I'm writing her a letter to send them saying one, never call again and 2, this is what i'm offering, take it or leave it.

 

wrong!

 

we need the details of the debt please and the dca

 

bet a bottom dollar its a bogus debt that she doesn't owe

that was written off ny the original creditor years ago.

 

I would nt be entering into any letter tennis till we have the info.

 

dx

[Gaz74205]

all i needed was to know if they had a legal right to this info as they claimed. I was pretty sure they didn't but wanted to check. I'm up to speed on most stuff here, much of it doesn't apply though as she's happy to pay it, accepts it's hers, but isn't gonna let them dictate payments.

[mikeymack2002]

Short answer NO

[fkofilee]

Of course, supplying an I&E Can be very beneficial to negotiations over payment arrangements etc, however, in this case, not sure that it would be helpful.

Good idea writing a letter, however, its always worth being honest with us if you can get the info because we could see if there is something that may have been missed.

[dx100uk]

just because she is happy to pay it

does not mean the advise we are giving does not apply....

 

blindly paying a dca without doing..say a cca request

to legally check they are even allowed to try and fleece her

should be carried out.

 

dx

[Gaz74205]

I'm aware, and have suggested that, but she says she knows the owes the money and would rather just deal with it than have it hanging over her.

[Peterbard]

The thing is that although they do not have a "legal right", they also are under no legal obligation to accept part payments. So before be to bullish about this it would be as well making sure that the DCA cannot instigate proceedings.

 

A court's view would be:

 

The debtor wants to pay less than they agreed to on a debt they owe, and they want the creditor not to charge interest, the creditor has a perfect right to ensure that the debtor is making the maximum payment they can afford.

 

It is the debtor who desires the accommodation not the creditor, the debtor is contractually required to pay the full amount he has borrowed plus associated interest and charges.

[Gaz74205]

it's not less than agreed though. its exactly what was agreed, and they are now refusing payments until they get these details.

 

given the likelihood of them actually taking it to court for a sum under £1000 i'm fairly sure she can get a bit aggressive on this with limited hassle.

 

the fact that them pretending to have legal powers that they do not is in violation of the debt collection guidelines from the OFT will be included in the letter, along with a threat to report such action, and i reckon they are likely to cut it out and go on accepting the same as they have been.

[Peterbard]

Hi

I dont think it breaches any guidance to ask for a I and E. As for the arrangement, it can be terminated at any time it is voluntary .

 

I have known many cases of creditors going to court for sums well under 1K. You need to find out the enforceability of any agreement.

 

I have not seen any evidence of them pretending anything, unless I am missing something. The OFT no longer regulates the CCA it is the FCA.

 

you may be right however and it may all be a bluff, but as said best check the agreement before you go burning any bridges.

[fletch70]

While they have no legal right to demand it, they do have a legal duty to treat debtors fairly and maybe this could be interpreted this way. I do think however that they are using it as a ploy to get a larger payment.

 

As for taking to court for under £1000 , this does happen quite frequently. I think the £1000 limit is for getting a charging order not for obtaining a CCJ. A defence of 'I was trying to pay but they wanted an I&E would not work.

 

As I am sure you are aware some DCA's are much easier to deal with than others, I also appreciate that some people believe that a debt is morally owed even when not legally owed . Many people refer to those that only pay what is legally owed as debt avoiders , personally I believe that is the financial sector can not get the paperwork in order they deserve everything they get

[Peterbard]

Hi Fletcch

 

It is procedure now to require an I and E before accepting a voluntary arrangement, as said the government backed DMPs do this as a matter of course and present the to the DCA together with a pro rata offer for repayment.

 

I am not stating any moral view point in fact my approach is completely pragmatic. It would IMO be a mistake to curtail a working arrangement just to prove some kind of point, unless you are very sure that there will be no repercussions.

This is why any possibility of them enforcing should be discounted before sending the creditor packing.

[fletch70]

Hi Dodge

I agree with you

 

Another possibility would be to set up a standing order to pay the creditor

 

 

the OP asked a question-

 

The answer sadly is not quite as simple as a yes/no

 

While they have no right to demand it, they do have a legal duty to treat debtors fairly etc so this may be part of their due diligence

 

If it were me I would do a bit of creative accounting working back from what the offer is and using the upper limits of what are allowed for in the CFS

certainly when i did my I&E these upper limits were far more than I was spending (with the exception of travel costs which I could justify) so left me in a reasonable position

[mikeymack2002]

Setting up a standing order is just as bad.. Why? Because if the DCA collecting it sells the debt the SO could still be paid to the wrong DCA THIS IS BEING A CASH COW.

 

 

Basics, yes the debt may be owed, it maybe collectable, but is it enforceable? The simple way is to spend £1 plus postage to find out. It will be the BEST £1 you spent... Which brings me back to your statement 'I know what I am doing' Obviously not because you are here asking for advice! This is me being blunt but trying to be helpful in assisting you. If you don't want our help then walk away from the thread.

 

 

Finally I&E's to a DCA is like a banker getting your free money..

 

 

This will save posters trying to help you and we will wait to see if eventually you get further letters...

[Gaz74205]

. It would IMO be a mistake to curtail a working arrangement just to prove some kind of point, unless you are very sure that there will be no repercussions.

This is why any possibility of them enforcing should be discounted before sending the creditor packing.

 

the point is that the DCA are the ones curtailing the agreement, and refusing to take payments from her. they have also said that it is a legal requirement for her to hand over this information. as far as i know, and the answers in here say, that was a lie.

 

no one is suggesting refusing to pay. she wants to pay. she just doesn't want to hand over details like this to them as she believes it's none of their business. her circumstances haven't changed. she's an old woman (well, 60) with a heart condition and she's on sick benefits. the continual hassle with them trying to get her to go to these atos meetings to get her working is stress enough. without these arses telling her that despite the fact an agreement was in place, they will not accept any payments without this info.

 

there is no way in hell she'll hand this info over, and i don't think she should have to.

[Gaz74205]

 

 

Basics, yes the debt may be owed, it maybe collectable, but is it enforceable? The simple way is to spend £1 plus postage to find out. It will be the BEST £1 you spent... Which brings me back to your statement 'I know what I am doing' Obviously not because you are here asking for advice! This is me being blunt but trying to be helpful in assisting you. If you don't want our help then walk away from the thread.

 

 

well had you read my posts you'd know it's 1) not me that has the debt and 2) that i have already tried to get her to do this. she doesn't want the hassle. she wants to pay it off and get it over and done with.

 

i asked advice on 1 very specific thing. i said i was 90% sure of the answer, i just wanted to make sure that there had been no new legal developments that meant my info was out of date.

 

you're not being helpful. you're being condescending and pushy, along with seeming like you haven't actually read what has been posted properly.