Help me fight the disgusting 1st Credit Ltd

[isuedlowellandwon]

I absolutely despise 1st Credit Ltd with every cell in my body.

 

These scumbags served my 67 year old mother with a Statutory Demand under the Insolvency Act using a process server infront of her neighbours with regards to an alleged debt from the year 2000, just a few months ago.

 

She collapsed afterwards, she had just had a hip replacement. Being threatened with bankruptcy at aged 67 for an alleged debt you can't recall is an abomination. They knew they'd get thrown out of the County Court for it being Statute Barred so they sought this method.

 

It was written off in the end after threats to go to the media. The alleged debt was actually Statute Barred as per the Limitations Act 1980 as far as I was concerned, also as per the OFTs Guidelines.

 

The company used TERROR tactics to try and force an old lady to pay.

 

I am constantly sending complaints to Andy Lowther at the OFT, full witness statements infact about this company.

 

This company is the worst I have dealt with out of 10 DCAs and the most vidictive and vile.

 

If anyone has any evidence of them placing false information on their credit files or other problems such as, for example:-

 

a) False default dates.

b) Listing debts as "Hire Purchase".

c) Any of their collection tactics.

 

Please contact me by private message as you can help do good and I will keep the OFT informed. Also it will help in my current litigation against these vermin.

 

I might setup a website devoted to problems people are having with this company shortly.

[tifo]

i'm with you ....

 

let me know what we can do .... i've replied to your other posts.

[lookinforinfo]

One way to possibly hurt them is to take action against the companies who

employ them to collect their debts. These companies are responsible too for

1st Credits behaviour and will not take kindly to be hauled into Court for

their transgressions. Once the word gets round that a Court case is a real

possibility, they may begin to lose clients.

The other way is to bring untold heat on to the OFT to get off their a***s

and withdraw their licence. It will take quite a lot of complaints though.

[tifo]

One way to possibly hurt them is to take action against the companies who employ them to collect their debts. These companies are responsible too for 1st Credits behaviour and will not take kindly to be hauled into Court for their transgressions.

 

You mean the banks?

 

When the banks sell the debt what to do?

[isuedlowellandwon]

One way to possibly hurt them is to take

The other way is to bring untold heat on to the OFT to get off their a***s

and withdraw their licence. It will take quite a lot of complaints though.

 

I was thinking that the OFT might be liable as per the Human Rights Act to take action against such companies.

 

I tried a Freedom of Information request on the OFT as to the complaint levels against 1st Credit Ltd but they refused to comply with it.

 

I never asked them for the % of complaints upheld etc, or how they acted in respect of any complaints, just the actual number received. I don't see on what grounds they can reject this request.

[lookinforinfo]

I was thinking more when they collect for the bank than when they buy the debt. However, the original creditor still has a duty of care to ensure that

the company that buys the debt acts within the law.

[JonCris]

They are an appalling company. They will seek interim charging orders without informing the debtor. Then they will apply for a full charging order at very short notice...........& all with the help of Northampton CC of course.

 

There is matter coming to court very soon involving this company. Could you please PM me.

[jamesys]

Agree. They are the worst I have ever dealt with.

Strange really as I believe they work primarily for Lloyds TSB who have such a wonderful reputation for dealing with customers.:o

[JonCris]

Lloyds wonderful!!!!!!!

 

boy are you going to be disillusioned after spending some time on this site

 

Can you PM me I would like you to supply evidence (if possible) for a forthcoming matter involving this company.

 

If you can't please don't feel pressured

[jamesys]

I think i was speaking a little tongue in cheek back there!!!!!!!!!. Lloyds are the pits.

[lookinforinfo]

I was thinking that the OFT might be liable as per the Human Rights Act to take action against such companies.

 

I tried a Freedom of Information request on the OFT as to the complaint levels against 1st Credit Ltd but they refused to comply with it.

 

The OFT is the company to send complaints to-and the more they get, the

greater the chance the OFT wil act. Don't thinkthat the HR Act usually

applies to DCAs.

 

The FOI Act is kind of disappointing as so many government depts. don't

appear to come under it-the OFT and the Courts being two examples.

l

[JOSH_IOU]

A DCA is not a government department.

 

A DCA is normally a limited company and normally only chases you because the client has told them to.

 

This is not there debt so you don't have to deal with the DCA even if you have agreed to pay money to them they cant enforce the agreement.

 

 

If your creditors refuse to accept further payments take them to court.

If they register a default on your account dispute it and ask what information the Credit company has on you relating to that debt.

 

Hope this helps

[tifo]

A DCA is normally a limited company and normally only chases you because the client has told them to.

 

This is not there debt so you don't have to deal with the DCA even if you have agreed to pay money to them they cant enforce the agreement.

 

 

If your creditors refuse to accept further payments take them to court.

If they register a default on your account dispute it and ask what information the Credit company has on you relating to that debt.

 

if the DCA has legally bought the debt, they are entitled to chase it. Your bank is perfectly entitled to sell the debt within the law.

 

they only have to produce the proper documents, which they do not always have as they buy lots of debts.

[JOSH_IOU]

Ok first point

 

Did you sign an agreement with the DCA?

[JonCris]

1st if a body private or otherwise performs a public function it falls within the HRA.

 

2nd as DCA's who purchase debts use the Property Act 1925 they may not have any legal right to pursue such forced debtors.

[JOSH_IOU]

here here

[Guest The Terminator]

I've got a fued going on with this shower at the moment and the thing that made me roll over with laughter was that they sent me a letter saying that I hadn't replied to them when in fact I'd sent them 2 letters recorded.So now they face their worst nightmare

[JonCris]

Terminator Watch out.

 

Their MO appears to be that with the connivance of Northhampton CC they may apply for an interim charging order without you realising it & which you will only learn of when they apply at short notice (again with what would appear the help of NCC) for a full/final order

[tifo]

Did you sign an agreement with the DCA?

 

You will have agreed with the bank when you signed their agreement that they can pass on your details to debt agencies for collection purposes.

 

Then when a DCA buys the debt they take on all the agreement, but would need to prove to you they actually own it, through a CCA request by you.

 

2nd as DCA's who purchase debts use the Property Act 1925 they may not have any legal right to pursue such forced debtors.

How so?

 

Their MO appears to be that with the connivance of Northhampton CC they may apply for an interim charging order without you realising it & which you will only learn of when they apply at short notice (again with what would appear the help of NCC) for a full/final order

Exactly, the did this with me as well last year. Promised to accept my low payment proposal if they got a charging order, then backed out at court.

[JOSH_IOU]

OK lets put it to you another way.

 

The DCA buy the debt in some case's but cant enforce it because you have not signed an agreement with the DCA it was with the client.

 

The DCA would have to prove you signed a form with themselves. This is where the problem lies They may own the debt now (hard Cheese). However they can not enforce it. You signed the contract/Aplication form I presume with the client not the DCA.

 

It might be worth checking if there client is signed up to the OFT or the data protection commisioner.

[isuedlowellandwon]

The agreements do say they have the right to sell it usually, although I haven't read one recently.

 

As per the HRA I never said anything about using this against a DCA, only the OFT.

 

So is the OFT exempt from the HRA? I read somewhere else someone was considering suing the OFT for "gross negligence" in allowing unlawful penalty charges to go on for 20 years.

[tifo]

The DCA would have to prove you signed a form with themselves. This is where the problem lies They may own the debt now (hard Cheese). However they can not enforce it. You signed the contract/Aplication form I presume with the client not the DCA.

 

The fact is, and shown many times on this site, that the all the terms of the original agreement pass onto the DCA when they buy a debt. When buying, they receive a Deed of Assignment and copy of the original agreement. If they produce this to the debtor, they are legally entitled to ask for money.

 

Problems are occurring because DCA's buy lots and lots of debts and may not always receive, or even ask for, the Deed of Assignment and copy of the original agreement as it would mean a lot of paperwork to look through and archive. Most people do not know the law and do not question them when they chase. Some people ask for documents from the DCA to prove they really do own the debt and this is when they request it from the original creditor. You may be lucky if they then cannot find these, or unlucky if they find them and send them to you. Then you would definately have to pay, even at court.

 

They do not want to keep documents because it is a calculated risk. It's a numbers game. Because they buy lots of debts at a very low price, even if the odd one is written off because of no documents, they still make money on the overall 'batch' they purchased. Plus it is written off against tax so no problem for them.

[tifo]

So is the OFT exempt from the HRA?

 

I've also read this somewhere here. Plus the courts are also exempt.

[JOSH_IOU]

Are you talking about the human rights act?

 

or the european human rights act?

 

The british government can opt out of the european one but have you actually read the act?

 

section 21 of the act (Orders etc. under this Act.) clearly states

 

21. - (1) In this Act-

"amend" includes repeal and apply (with or without modifications);

"the appropriate Minister" means the Minister of the Crown having charge of the appropriate authorised government department (within the meaning of the Crown Proceedings Act 1947);

"the Commission" means the European Commission of Human Rights;

"the Convention" means the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, agreed by the Council of Europe at Rome on 4th November 1950 as it has effect for the time being in relation to the United Kingdom;

"declaration of incompatibility" means a declaration under section 4;

"Minister of the Crown" has the same meaning as in the Ministers of the Crown Act 1975;

"Northern Ireland Minister" includes the First Minister and the deputy First Minister in Northern Ireland;

"primary legislation" means any-

(a) public general Act;

(b) local and personal Act;

© private Act;

(d) Measure of the Church Assembly;

(e) Measure of the General Synod of the Church of England;

(f) Order in Council-

(i) made in exercise of Her Majesty's Royal Prerogative;

(ii) made under section 38(1)(a) of the Northern Ireland Constitution Act 1973 or the corresponding provision of the Northern Ireland Act 1998; or

(iii) amending an Act of a kind mentioned in paragraph (a), (b) or ©;

and includes an order or other instrument made under primary legislation (otherwise than by the National Assembly for Wales, a member of the Scottish Executive, a Northern Ireland Minister or a Northern Ireland department) to the extent to which it operates to bring one or more provisions of that legislation into force or amends any primary legislation;

"the First Protocol" means the protocol to the Convention agreed at Paris on 20th March 1952;

"the Sixth Protocol" means the protocol to the Convention agreed at Strasbourg on 28th April 1983;

"the Eleventh Protocol" means the protocol to the Convention (restructuring the control machinery established by the Convention) agreed at Strasbourg on 11th May 1994;

"remedial order" means an order under section 10;

"subordinate legislation" means any-

(a) Order in Council other than one-

(i) made in exercise of Her Majesty's Royal Prerogative;

(ii) made under section 38(1)(a) of the Northern Ireland Constitution Act 1973 or the corresponding provision of the Northern Ireland Act 1998; or

(iii) amending an Act of a kind mentioned in the definition of primary legislation;

(b) Act of the Scottish Parliament;

© Act of the Parliament of Northern Ireland;

(d) Measure of the Assembly established under section 1 of the Northern Ireland Assembly Act 1973;

(e) Act of the Northern Ireland Assembly;

(f) order, rules, regulations, scheme, warrant, byelaw or other instrument made under primary legislation (except to the extent to which it operates to bring one or more provisions of that legislation into force or amends any primary legislation);

(g) order, rules, regulations, scheme, warrant, byelaw or other instrument made under legislation mentioned in paragraph (b), ©, (d) or (e) or made under an Order in Council applying only to Northern Ireland;

(h) order, rules, regulations, scheme, warrant, byelaw or other instrument made by a member of the Scottish Executive, a Northern Ireland Minister or a Northern Ireland department in exercise of prerogative or other executive functions of Her Majesty which are exercisable by such a person on behalf of Her Majesty;

"transferred matters" has the same meaning as in the Northern Ireland Act 1998; and

"tribunal" means any tribunal in which legal proceedings may be brought.

(2) The references in paragraphs (b) and © of section 2(1) to Articles are to Articles of the Convention as they had effect immediately before the coming into force of the Eleventh Protocol.

(3) The reference in paragraph (d) of section 2(1) to Article 46 includes a reference to Articles 32 and 54 of the Convention as they had effect immediately before the coming into force of the Eleventh Protocol.

(4) The references in section 2(1) to a report or decision of the Commission or a decision of the Committee of Ministers include references to a report or decision made as provided by paragraphs 3, 4 and 6 of Article 5 of the Eleventh Protocol (transitional provisions).

(5) Any liability under the Army Act 1955, the Air Force Act 1955 or the Naval Discipline Act 1957 to suffer death for an offence is replaced by a liability to imprisonment for life or any less punishment authorised by those Acts; and those Acts shall accordingly have effect with the necessary modifications

[tifo]

isuedlowellandwon, please have a look at my thread http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collectors-debt-collection/61207-lowell-group-2-defaults.html and let me know what you think of the letter i am sending them.

 

thanks,.