Letter to Capquest

[sarahpp]

I am really concerned that Capquest are trying to intimidate people by mentioning baliff action extensively in their letters before they have even issued court proceedings. I believe that this is a breach of the OFT guidelines re unfair practices and the inference of legal powers which they do not have without court backing. Therefore, if anyone has received such a letter, feel free to borrow any of the letter which I am sending to them this week if it is applicable to you and you feel it will help. It would be helpful to know, in any case whether this is their common practice so, that a template letter may be drafted to the OFT so I would be grateful if anyone in a similar position could post on this thread.

 

Further to your letter dated 18th December 2006, before discussions with your company proceed any further I require you to supply the following documentation.

 

Firstly, you must supply me with true copies of the agreements you refer to in these matters. This is my right under the legislation contained within section 77 (1) and section 78 (1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 - your obligation also extends to providing statements of account. I enclose a £1 postal order in payment of the statutory fee. This fee is not to be offset against the amount allegedly owing under any circumstances.

You are reminded that you are obliged to supply these documents, whether you are the original creditor or not, under section 189 of the CCA 1974.

 

As you are aware, a credit agreement that is not properly documented and signed by the customer is totally unenforceable under the CCA and therefore is a complete defence to any court claim that is issued.

Presumably, since you threaten court action in your letter you will have this documentation readily to hand as you will be expected to produce it in court in order to validate the legitimacy of your claim.

 

Take note at this stage, that any legal action you may contemplate will be both vigorously defended and contested.

I have two further concerns relating to the tone and content of the letter which I received on the 20th December.

You have headed your letter “LETTER BEFORE ACTION”. It was dated the 18th December and not received by me until the 20th December and yet you demand a response by the 23rd December. You must be aware that this would not be considered an acceptable length of time to allow for response before court action. I believe that 14 days is the accepted standard and not 1 day (allowing for delivery either side). I shall be mentioning this matter in court should you decide to proceed.

Even more worrying is your threat to send bailiffs to my property before you have even obtained a judgement against me! A good two thirds of your letter refers to the actions which bailiffs may take. I have kept the letter as I intend to produce it in court.

I view this part of the letter as being designed to intimidate and I object most strongly to these tactics. You ignore the fact that:

You may not obtain the judgement. This matter is up to the courts and I have already stated that I will defend myself vigorously and I quote:

“Once the litigation process has been instigated and a judgement has been granted, we will enforce the judgement with a warrant of execution. A Court Enforcement Officer (Baliff) will be assigned immediately to attend your address as endorsed on the warrant”

I think that both the Office of Fair Trading and the courts would be very interested in this statement because what you are basically stating is that you would enforce the judgement without the statutory time allowed to pay and that it is up to you to assign a baliff when, in fact you will have to go back to court to request this.

In my opinion this constitutes a very serious breach of the OFT guidelines on unfair practices and specifically the section which refers to inferences regarding legal powers which you do not have without recourse to the courts.

You will see from the enclosed copy of a letter which has been sent to Marks and Spencer that I am disputing the amount allegedly owing on the original debt.

I will also be writing a letter to the Law Society to enquire whether they are aware that H.L. Legal are dealing with a company whose adherence to good trading practice is tenuous at best.

Please accept this communication as official notification that the alleged debt is “in dispute”

Yours faithfully

I hope that this letter helps at least one person feel less intimidated by these people.

Sarah

 

 

[payingonlyencouragesthem]

Capquest are the bottom dustbin of the distressed debt industry. Their debt portfolio mainly consists of totally noncollectable debts. You did the right thing sending this letter now ignore them.

[sarahpp]

Thanks for the support

 

Yes, I know. They probably only paid about £40 at most for my alleged debt (most of which will be charges anyway) and if they can't come up with the goods within the prescribed time scales then, of course, they cannot enforce the debt.

 

However, I will, as I have other DCAs with questionable tactics, be reporting them to the OFT, Trading Standards and their solicitors to the Law Society. I will also be writing to the original creditor to remind them that the conduct of any DCAs engaged by them reflect on their reputation whether the debt has been sold on or not.

 

Ok- so, my letters on their own may not do much good but, collectively they just might. After all, if Capquest don't come up with the goods in time, they will have committed a criminal (not civil) offence.

 

We all know what Capquest are like and how they love to intimidate whoever they think are vulnerable and open to empty threats.

 

Ignoring them completely does not solve the problem long term for other people which is why I am not just going to forget about it.

[NitrousOxide]

Hi,

I'm having to deal with these as well. My case is they are persuing an already paid off debt relentlessly.

I've had the long letters with bailliff talk on them as well. I'll type one up later and post it.

[payingonlyencouragesthem]

Reporting the solicitors to the Law Society would probably be the most effective of those measures. The Law Society are bound to investigate all non frivolous complaints against solicitors and the latter are bound to comply with any recommendations that result from the complaint. In the case of HL Legal there has been speculation in other forums as to whether they are real solicitors or not. Their letters have no DX numbers and reportedly one of the founders was a solicitor who was struck off for keeping money due to barristers.

[sarahpp]

Thanks for that. I spent last night digging around a bit but, H L Legal really is like the Scarlet Pimpernell as far as digging up information is concerned. I had read on another thread a while ago that it looked like they may be in trouble with the Law Society but, I cannot track down any firm information. I managed to find a web site which was under construction HL Legal & Collections - Consumer Collections but, any other information is very scant.

 

I am going to draft a letter to the OFT in the next couple of days, which I will post on the thread.

[spotnot]

HL Legal are officially 'in Liquidation'. Ordered by the court to liquidate over unpaid tax!! HL legal and Collection will be a new company taking over the 'clients' of HL Legal.

[sarahpp]

Ah -thanks for that Spotnot. Where did you get the info if you don't mind me asking?

 

I notice from a letter they sent me that they also practice as HL Credit Control and HL Legal - presumably they shouldn't be using the name on their headed paper if they are in liquidation. My letter (received in early December) was signed H L Legal and not H L Legal and Collections.

 

It is interesting also, that the e-mail address provided for queries is [email protected] which I presume translates as capquest debt recovery H L

 

The reference they use is described using a CASE NUMBER with letters and numbers following it which are designed to mimic exactly the format of a CASE NUMBER which would be used on a court document - naughty, naughty

[spotnot]

Companies House. Have access to website. And they were liquidated on 19 September 2005. No company with the name HL credit control officially exists.

[sarahpp]

Thanks for the info.

[stan5131]

Just wanted to subscribe to this thread. Wishing you best of luck with these cowboys, they are the lowest of the low!

[sarahpp]

Had a letter from Capquest this morning.

 

"Further to recent contact with our office and your request for further information in relation to the above account, we would confirm that your account is now on hold for 28 days whilst we obtain the information required.

 

If you have any proof of payments or correspondence that would assist with your query, please forward these documents, with a brief covering letter, to our Collections Administration department, so that we can resolve this matter as soon as possible"

 

The 28 days is to comply with the OFT guidelines on disputed debts. It has no bearing on the 12 + 1 month statutory timescales for the supply of the agreement.

 

It is interesting though, isn't it, that a company which is threatening not only imminent litigation but, indeed the action they will take (i.e. the baliffs) post litigation. Yet, where is the agreement they will need to produce in court in the very near future? It appears that they want me to do the work for them.

 

Letter for the OFT first I think.

[stan5131]

Do they seriously think you are going to help them out? lol

[sarahpp]

Do you know, I think they do!!! How naive do they think I am?

[sarahpp]

Very many thanks to Demon X Slash for this which is on the sticky at the beginning of the Debt & Baliffs forum. It is the OFT complaint form:

 

http://www.oft.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/B3999175-A9BC-469D-AD5B-BA284DE36E01/0/complaint.DOC

[sarahpp]

Well, that was easy. I completed the complaint form from Demon's link and sent it off. I didn't even need a stamp (if I had a scanner I wouldn't have even needed to have posted it - I could have sent it + my supporting docs. by e-mail)

 

Just in case anyone has received the same letter and is not quite sure which of the OFT guidelines Capquest have breached, this is the main one- and it is something that the OFT are keen to monitor:

 

False representation of authority and/or legal position- those contacting debtors must not be deceitful by misrepresenting their authority and/ or the legal position.

 

Both in Capquest's case - they have certainly misrepresented the correct legal position in order to intimidate and exploit a (perceived) lack of knowledge.

[blackrain]

Ah, HL and CapQuest. Keep watching this space. I am trying to muster people for a very large swamping complaint to Trading Standards about Cap 1. We can cause them a lot of aggro if we do it together.

 

HL are trying to charge me court costs without actually starting a court claim against me. Which is imaginative to say the least. Oh and Debitas are Cap 1s peeps too and just as bad.

[sarahpp]

Thanks blackrain - I have noticed Martin's excellent sticky at the beginning of this forum. It will be really useful to see if the complaints re DCAs follow a pattern.

[sarahpp]

Two things to report off the back of my first letter to Capquest

 

The OFT have written to say that they are investigating my complaint about Capquest

 

Capquest have written to me saying that I have to confirm my previous addresses within 10 days in order for them to process my request or they will pass it on to another department for further action.

 

Nope - not playing that game Capquest

 

I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 1st February 2007 which was clearly sent in order to delay sending me the documentation I referred to in my letter dated 30th December.

I would draw your attention to this paragraph of my previous letter.

“You will see from the enclosed copy of a letter which has been sent to Marks and Spencer that I am disputing the amount allegedly owing on the original debt.”

Therefore, you could have reasonably concluded that the debt was not unacknowledged but, the amount was. You claimed to have bought this debt and be considering imminent court action. Consequently, I asked for documentation to prove ownership i.e. The Original Agreement which you would have to produce in court. If you have purchased this debt then, you should have already have had the Agreement in your possession because you should have been abiding by its’ Terms and Conditions.

To be requesting further information from me within 10 days before you proceed with my request (which you have already had for a month) is unacceptable.

 

YF

[stan5131]

Nice one! Stick to your timetable.

[salisburyowl]

Hi there

 

I received one of these heavy handed baliff type letters from capquest over a 'bought debt' one I thought had been paid off years ago. I sent my CCA request off ( recorded deliver of course) they got it on 31/1/07 so I'm just waiting now and as yet heard nothing!

[sarahpp]

Hello

 

Have you posted this on Martin's thread also SO? I think he is in the process of collating information and Capquest's name has appeared frequently (no surprise there!)

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/general-debt/58086-mass-complaint-add-your.html

[salisburyowl]

Well I received an interesting letter from capquest today 14th Feb 07 in response to the cca request that they received on jan 31st 07.

 

Dear Mr Owl

 

Furtherto recent contact with our office and your request for further information in relation to the above account, we would confirm that your account is now on hold for 28 days whilst we obtain the information required.

 

If you have any proof of payments or correspondence that would assist with your query, please forward these documents, with a brief covering letter, to our collections department, so that we can resolve this matter as soon as possible.

 

Yours sincerely

 

collections administration department

 

Now I gather from this that they haven't got the relevant paperwork so they can't produce it just yet. What should I do now? I have no paperwork or correspondence regarding this debt ( not that I would send it to them if I had any).

 

Any suggestions?????

 

Salisburyowl

[sarahpp]

I got a letter exactly the same as yours when I first sent in my cca request. It isn't up to you to supply them with extra information to locate a Credit Agreement which they should already have in their possession.

[stivis]

Got a phone call from Capquest today. Said to them your not supposed to phone me . I sent you a dispute and CCA letter in early January via my solicitor , and you haven't replied ,

CQ We have not received it

OH yes you have I sent it recorded, and I've checked

CQ Are you talking of harrasment letter?

No , The Credit Agreement I allegedly have with you,But if you want to talk about that letter, you've got one of them as well, you should be writing to me only

CQ We don't send letters we phone