Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • get the FOS done and see. i have a feeling you might not need to do the latter.    
    • Noted, thanks re-draft it is then 🙄    If it does go to FOS and its upheld can I also go for the throat and apply to set aside the suspended judgement (consent order) based  CCA  sections 86E not providing default sum notices 86(5) not entitled to enforce agreement  87(1) and 88(2) leading to unlawful repudiation of the credit agreement. Just an idea. 
    • CB ....this conclusion is true.   as for PB, i can assure you that user most probably ( well i know but shouldn't say} holds the record here for the most reported posts by users as well as from those of the site team concerning his posts. if you hold on someones username further info can be seen.   however , a bit like say vodaphone or virgin media , very large companies with millions of customers will get the most complaints made against them...and that equates to posting levels here too. as for 'royalties account holder' that again merely points, by a default label in the software package we use, to the number of posts made.   one could further this by noting were we to agree with all their posts they would be on the siteteam... i will leave you to understand why not .....       don't think anyone did?    regards  DX
    • Is it just that? Oh I thought it was because of all the effort he and others made to rightly bring DCBL to court. But he just got lucky there I suppose. Lucky he didn't bring his complaint to this forum first because if he had of done, he'd be £10K poorer right now. And for something that Peterbard describes as benefitting from being newsworthy, I am struggling to find all the news reports that refer to it.       Confucius  say "he who backpedals, falls off bike."    I'm not surprised in the least that you, a gold account holder on this forum, would adopt a dismissive attitude to this well deserved victory in court against DCBL, however I'm curious as to why you opted to reduce the issues at stake to being 'simply' about ' the EA fell foul of the regulation which defines "relevant premises".   That certainly wasn't any argument that Iain Gould furthered and he's a civil actions lawyer whom, dare I say it, know a hell of a lot more about trespass and misuse of private information than you do.   The judge never mentioned "relevant premises" either. Not during the hearing or in his judgement. And you never mentioned it either prior to know. In fact, in the original  in the original 2018 thread you even went so far as to suggest that whatever address was on the writ was irrelevant because, "interestingly, if the address is not  a requirement it would not be possible to sue the bailiff for wrong attendance under section 66."   Not that your wrongfully held opinion that non debtors are also subject to the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 matters, because as I had already pointed out in the first video because the claimant wasn't suing for wrong attendance under section 66.   He sued for trespass. Part 66 never applied to him because he was not the debtor and never had been. You and the likes of DCBL can disregard that obvious point as much as you like, but bailiffs do not have a blanket immunity from trespass.   Have a look at the article Iain Gould has written on his blog about the case. It might help you understand the tort of trespass in some small way, and might help you adopt a more balanced approach to those poor sods who owed no debt and have had their homes raided and their privacy breached by EAs, and then - to add insult to injury - they come to you looking for help.   What makes it worse is that your defective understanding of when an Enforcement Agents action can give rise to trespass is backed up by your site team members who think it's their job to echo your mistakes not by justifying what you say - because they can't - but by making defamatory remarks at the expense of those who give the 'correct advice'.   Unlike you and your team members I don't hide behind the protection of anonymity. Nobody can hold you to account if you get it wrong, or heaven forbid, if it turns out you  have been working for a firm of debt collectors all along. To add to this, you don't seem to care much about removing libellous remarks from your forum when a legitimate complaint is raised.   To respond to Bank Fodders comment that "At some point in the video it has screenshots of this forum and the narrative suggests that some people agree that an enforcement agent has the power to enter into a property to check on identity. I think that it is intended that the CAG is associated with this belief."   Seriously? I have to point it out to you.   Maybe it has something to do with key members of this forum smearing me on the original thread by saying how wrong my narrative was and then implying I was a Freeman of the Land.   Maybe it had something to do with Gold Member Peter Bard leaving this comment on the same thread that stated:   "The point I was trying to make is that the EA will not be as interested in paperwork as in physical proof that the debtor does or does not live there.   As said there is no requirement for an address on a warrant, in fact the debtor may live at several addresses and the bailiff may attend to serve at any of them. The warrant is against the debtor, not the debtor at an address. It requires only enough info to identify the person.( see CPR wherever it is).   The bailiff will be much more interested in getting in and checking for clothes in wardrobes, sleeping accommodation, letters etc."   I'm sorry if that wasn't enough for you to justify me bringing that point up in the video. I did consider coming here before I completed it and asking those members if they intended to maintain their position that the Enforcement Agent had acted within the law but strangely the forum account I had used to make my first and only posting on this forum in 2018 - to counter the smears - would not allow me to sign in.   Far be it from me to draw any conclusions about my input not being welcome here, I figured Peterbard and some of the key members here would use their creative skills at providing a blanket immunity from civil liability for all EAs by misinterpreting key legislation in their behalf.    It looks like I was right about that also. Unfortunately I have given in to temptation, and am choosing to respond, even though I know how utterly futile it is.
    • There was another poster (Hammy1962) who understood (#3) the distance selling point you were trying to make, but you may have inadvertantly put him off in your subsequent post.  He may still be following this thread.  Wonder if he has any ideas that could possibly help you?    I'm concerned about how you continue if the TS route is not helpful...
  • Our picks

    • @curryspcworld @TeamKnowhowUK - Samsung 75 8K TV - completely broken by Currys. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426151-samsung-75-8k-tv-completely-broken-by-currys/&do=findComment&comment=5069075
      • 5 replies
    • @skinnyfoodco Skinny Foods. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/426130-skinny-foods/&do=findComment&comment=5068996
      • 8 replies
    • I’m in desperate need of help
       
      I bought some clothes online in may through Evans and paid through PayPal
      returned them all seven days later
       
      I waited the 14days for my refund and no refund came
      I put in a dispute through PayPal but I didn’t get any emails to escalate the case - PayPal closed it. 
      evans said they couldn’t refund the money because PayPal have cancelled the refund because of the open dispute
       
      I contacted PayPal
      they said the dispute had been closed but Evans at no point had attempted a refund.
      fast forward to today
       
      I’ve got copies of numerous messages sent to and from twitter messages as it’s the only way I can contact them
      I’ve also contacted their customer service too
      all I get is PayPal have cancelled refund because dispute is still open.
       
      I have proved that the dispute is closed
      I have got an email saying that if Evans sent the refund they would accept it
      but up until the date I got the email they have not once attempted a refund .
       
       I have sent them a letter before court email
      I have even offered to have the full refund as a gift card just to get this sorted !
       
      I’m literally at the end of my tether and don’t know where to turn next !
       
      i suffer with mental health issues and this is affecting my health and I’d saved the money for a year to buy these clothes as I’m on a low income .
    • In desperate need of help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/425244-in-desperate-need-of-help/&do=findComment&comment=5067040
      • 29 replies

Recommended Posts

Good morning, I hope someone can give me a little bit of advice on an issue please?

 

I have received an email from Octopus Energy advising that I have a debt and that it has been referred to Churchill Recovery Solutions. 

Fair enough, I am in arrears. 

 

However, there are issues about the email that concern me.

They have copied my ex-wife into the email and also sent a copy to my son.

My son's email address does not appear on the other recipients so I can only assume that he has been copied in under Bcc.

 

So the concern here is, where did they get these email addresses from?

I never supplied them so have I been hacked?

 

Secondly, have they breached GDPR laws by copying other people not named on the account into sensitive and confidential information?

The claimed balance outstanding was clearly displayed on the email.

 

I am a little unsure of what steps to take here and would appreciate any advice/opinions please.

 

Many thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  Hi welcome to CAG, just a couple of questions so the Team can get a bit more background and explore options with you.

  Are those other people  copied on the Register of Electors at and are living at your address?

 

Is the bill solely in your name only?

 

Bit naughty if they have involved third parties, and that would be breach of GDPR, same as if a bailiff knocked and gave full details of a third party debt to you.

 

Might be worth contacting the ICO and asking them, I would ask Octopus what they are doing, if by phone record the call.  You could tell them that you consider it a GDPR breach and you will be reporting them. to ICO.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

My son lives with me and he is on the electoral roll.

My ex moved out 2 years ago and I doubt if she is still on the roll. 

The account is in my name only and the other email addresses have never been supplied to Octopus.

 

The account is in my name only and I cannot see how they got the other email addresses. 

I would prefer to keep any correspondence with Octopus in writing so that there is a clear record of any discussion, but if I reply to the mail, do I just pose these questions and ask where they got the info (have they hacked me) and why have they copied in other people who are not on the account or is there a set form I need to use?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do it with a Formal letter of Complaint, as they had no business copying anyone else into any email, also indicate all correspondence now by Mail, Save the emails and the addresses it was copied to as they will be part of any ICO complaint Looks like a GDPR breach, other Team members will be along soon with further advice.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

they wont have hacked you no.

but probably use social media and credit file to see what other adults lives their during a period of arrears.

as they are all equally liable.

 

how old are the arrears?

and hoe did they come about?

is it for your present address.

 

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The arrears do go back some years and are for my present address.

They came about due to financial difficulties and I have never been able to recover from them.

 

You say that other adults at the address are liable?

How so?

The account is in my name only so how can anyone else be accountable?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its utility not council tax,  they could be liable for Council Tax or a proportion if those were the arrears. If was a student house they might then for sure.

 

Have a look at this might be a start

 

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/experts/article-2282193/If-isnt-household-bills-I-pay-ex-housemate-them.html

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, this appears to confirm my suspicion that they are not liable and should not have been contacted during a collection process. 

 

I am quite sure that they have breached GDPR regulations, I just need to establish the best way of formulating a response to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wait for DX and a couple of others to come back, there might be more to it so all t's crossed and i's dotted first.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

as we've seen with student share debts. other adults are equally responsible for utils bills but not water 

so is this gas / electric and how long ago was this debt 1st ran up?

 

now were these emails to the other adults telling them you owe octopus  money

or

that as you had not paid they were to make the shortfall

 

you say BCC 

as for CRS you ignore them.

 

historically how many months / years ago was this debt run up.

and did oct send you the correct bills without estimated readings used?

 

dont auto assume when a util co send a bill about debt, it is correct and due.

if they have used estimated readings or have did not send a bill at the time, they can't just back bill willy nilly esp if its their mistake.

 

 

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The email is addressed solely to me.

I am certain that my son was a Bcc recipient as his email address is not visible on the ones sent to either myself or my ex, but it is the exact same email and on his copy you can see it addressed to myself and my ex.

At present the bill is estimated but readings were supplied shortly prior to lockdown, I don't dispute that there is a debt, what I am concerned with here is them sending details thereof to 2 other people who are not on the account and one of them left here 2 years ago.  I don't believe they had a right to do that

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 If its a domestic address and a normal account, thought they could only bill who is on the Tenancy agreement or Mortgage, as isn't a Tenancy in Common. if Joint tenancy and other party gone, didn't think children who have gained majority can be held liable, as not on any paperwork, apart from Electoral roll.  Is a Lodger liable?

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

 

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

well anyway.

as its the same email then

and not directed at them to pay

no its not correct they have done it under gdpr etc etc.

 

so regarding the debt.

what readings prior to this have you been sending?

to prove this billing is correct or not 

have regularly sent them before 

and is the estimated readings higher than your actual usage.

when does the debt First date back too aswell

 

 

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, brassnecked said:

 If its a domestic address and a normal account, thought they could only bill who is on the Tenancy agreement or Mortgage, as isn't a Tenancy in Common. if Joint tenancy and other party gone, didn't think children who have gained majority can be held liable, as not on any paperwork, apart from Electoral roll.  Is a Lodger liable?

There are no lodgers

 

2 hours ago, dx100uk said:

no its not correct they have done it under gdpr etc etc.

 

Not sure I understand what you mean there.  

I have been sporadic with submitting readings but their estimate is close to actual

Link to post
Share on other sites

they can't just blindly sent an email that you owe to the other adults in the property. no.

 

was this always octopus or were you Iresa originally?

 

dx

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and historically how long have you been in debt to them.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

smells bad to me

get an sar off to them.

 

so you've always been behind with payments for 4yrs and does any of this debt date back to the time before octopus took over?

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it does, the debt goes back to the days of GB Energy. 

What happened was that they wanted payment upfront so the account always had to be in credit. 

 

When I got notice that they were going into liquidation, I was nearly 2 payments in credit. 

I cancelled my dd to protect my funds, didn't reinstate it, ran into other difficulties and left it for ages.

I only make online payments and have never been able to address the arrears.

 

I don't dispute the fact that I'm in arrears.

I'm not happy with them sending that email to my son and my ex and that is the issue I want address with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i understand and agree you should write a formal letter of complaint about the email by royal mail.

 

i also think you should totally dispute the arrears balance, esp as it goes back so long

 

send them an sar and add to the text in it that you want statements/bills dating back to the gb energy a/c.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no simply write what you did here

keep it short and simple.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

 

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

 

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...