• Welcome to the LegalBeagles Consumer and Legal Forum.
    Please Register to get the most out of the forum. Registration is free and only needs a username and email address.
    REGISTER
    Please do not post your full name, reference numbers or any identifiable details on the forum.

AK/FOS

Collapse
Loading...
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AK/FOS

    Hi all,

    First post on here but have been following the forum for some time. Thought I'd share some experience with you as it may give hope to others.

    Way back in 1996 my wife and I purchased a gas fire for our new home. We made the purchase from a British Gas showroom and, money being tight, bought the fire using their "buy now, pay in six months" (interest free) scheme. The scheme was run by Lombard Tricity Finance. Should the account not be settled within the six month time frame interest would be added and collected by DD over 12 months. We paid the loan off three weeks prior to the end of the interest free period.

    In June 2007, out of the blue, we received a letter from Buchanan Clark & Wells (acting on behalf of AK) who alleged we had an outstanding debt with Lombard Tricity Finance. Being novices at the time we thought a simple call would resolve the issue as, obviously, this was a simple accounting oversight.
    My wife, who keeps everything, still had the OA and receipts which clearly showed the date the loan was settled. Not good enough for BC & W's who continued with their threats etc. Eventually we went to a solicitor and presented our evidence. One letter for the solicitor (and a bill for £150) stopped all contact form BC & W's. End of the matter yes? No!!

    In June 2009, we received a letter form Ultimate Credit Services. Same alledged debt and acting on behalf of AK. No more solicitors letters, dealt with it ourselves. Following several exchanges of letters (during which time we were threatened with varius actions) they agreed the (alledged) debt was statute barred and therefore, not recoverable. End of the matter yes? No!!

    In March this year, 2011, we received a letter from Mackenzie Hall (on behalf of AK) who, yes you've guessed it, were pursuing a debt with Lombard Tricity Finance. Apparantly they had tried to contact us on a number of occasions and we had ignored their letters; lets not get side-tracked by that one. Enough was enough. Had I the opportunity to get my hands on someones throat I would now be doing time at Her Majesty's Plessure. I called Aktiv Kapital direct, yes I know it's a big no no. A young "lady" tried to fob me off by saying that I had to speak to MH. "Well, i could do that however, as it 's AK that will be pusued to court for compensation for harrasment I think it's you, or your manager, that I should be speaking to. Do you have the authority to make that decision?" Young "lady" decided to "consult her manager" and put me on hold. After ten mins on hold, a delaying tactic hopping I'd give up, I hung-upand redialled. This time I was put through to a manager to whom I explained the situation going back to 1996 and that I had in front of me the OA and receipts etc. We discussed AK's conduct and the fact that they ignored solicitors correspondance. An extremely nervous manager decided that they would "recall the account from MH and write off the debt". "How do you write off a debt which never existed?". That question proved a bit too hard for the AK manager.

    If you're still reading I'll bring you upto date. We wrote to AK complaints dept and invited an offer of compensation. After eight weeks we received a response stating they "had conducted the account properly and within debt collection guide lines", however, we "could take the matter further if we wished but any action would be vigorously defended". Well, we do wish and have forwared the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service who have accepted the case. We also reported the matter to the FSA.

    My wife's brother works for a major high street bank in their compliance dept. His information tells us that, should a business be investigated by the Ombudsman Service, that business is charged for cost of the investigation. So if nothing else AK have incurred a cost greater than the alleged debt they were pursuing. I'll keep you informed of the outcome.
    Tags: None

  • #2
    Re: AK/FOS

    Your wifes brother is correct in stating that the DCA will be charged a fee this is currently £500.

    Did you at anytime contact the original lender to get the DCA's of your back, thay are responsable as it was they who instructed them to act and thus it is they who can call them in.

    DCA's think they are a law unto themselves and will not stop there activity until instructed by the lender.
    If you think nobody cares if you're alive, try missing a couple of payments.

    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: AK/FOS

      Hi Pompeyfaith

      Thank's for your interest. The original (alleged) creditor has been taken over a number of times. I did try to follow the route you suggested but came up against brick walls. We also requested copies of the OA (even though we actually had one) from each of the the DCA's but non were able, or refused, to forward one.

      I am well beyond the point of exasperation with these DCA's and am now on a mission to cause them as much hassle as possible. Beware the small dog backed into a corner!!!

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: AK/FOS

        Quick up-date. We are now at the point of the FOS requesting info from AK. Taken a while to get here but, apparently, they are very busy. Must be you lot putting in claims.

        Anyway, it should be interesting to see what AK come up with. We made numerous requests (all documented) for them to supply details etc of this alleged debt but not once did they forward anything, not even to the solicitor we engaged. I'm really quite enjoying this now

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: AK/FOS

          Have you issued them with a SAr? that will make them release all theinfomatio they holD
          on you

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: AK/FOS

            I just spotted the bit about the DCA or Bank being charged £500 by FOS .....does this apply to all complaints that go to the FOS or just the successful ones ?

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: AK/FOS

              This applies to ALL complaints referred to the FOS (I worked at the FOS for a short time).

              This is why banks etc will quite often withdraw charges / make some kind of settlement if you threaten FOS, as they may as well give you an amount up to the FOS levy.

              The FOS process is quite onerous for banks/insurers, they may lose and consumers are quite often additionally warded payments for 'distress and inconvenience', although these are quite modest.

              It is always worth threatening referral to FOS in any relevant dispute, but internal complaints have to be exhausted without satisfaction before FOS will accept the case.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: AK/FOS

                Originally posted by seduraed View Post
                Have you issued them with a SAr? that will make them release all theinfomatio they holD
                on you
                Issued them with everything you can think of including solicitors info request letter, all ignored.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: AK/FOS

                  Well the wheels grind slowly but grind they do. Had a chat with a very helpful lady at the FOS today following an "update" letter received yesterday.

                  Having made her preliminary enquiries with AK it transpires they have only provided her with half the information she requested. The file I provided for the FOS contained everything from the original credit agreement to the "go forth and multiply" letter from AK in response to our compensation request. The FOS wanted to clarify all the dates etc (believe me when I tell you our file was quite thick) so they could challenge AK regarding the missing info; not looking too great for them is it?

                  She did warn this process could take several months, "so long as you come to the right conclusion we have all the time in the world". What a nice lady!!

                  Await the next installment.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: AK/FOS

                    Much faster response than I thought we would get. Had a call From the nice lady at the FOS today. Seems AK weren't aware we were contesting the debt. Also it wasn't their responsibility anyway as it was a) passed to them from the original creditor, b) it was the other DCA which pursued the debt.

                    First things first, nice lady at the FOS has accepted our claim is justified and suggested a compensation amount to AK. The FOS also accept AK, and their pet poodles (DCA's), were/are well aware the debt was contested. They also pointed out to AK the other DCA's were acting upon their instruction.

                    In fairness we can accept that it was the original creditor who passed on a non existant debt, but that's for AK to take-up their own battle. However this does not excuse the behavour of AK & co in their dealings with ourselves. They (AK) have offered a sum of £150 in compensation. Nice FOS lady asked what we thought about the offer. Needless to say we thought their offer should be at least doubled. Strangely thats the exact fiqure she had suggested to AK.

                    At this point the FOS are going back to AK and inviting them to think again. When you take in to account that AK were pursing an alleged debt of under £450 this has cost them a) the original debt purchase price, b) the £500 bill from the FOS and c) possibly upto £300 in compensation. Great way to do business.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: AK/FOS

                      I always enjoy a story with a happy ending - well done you!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: AK/FOS

                        Well it would appear this isn't quite over yet. AK are now resisting paying anything. Had another call from the FOS inquiring as to whether we would like to put this before an ombudsman for their adjudication. Erm.......yes!!!

                        AK are now only making an offer which covers the cost of the solicitors letter (which they ignored anyway) and nothing for the four years of hassle we endured. It seems they want to call our bluff. We are not bound by the ombudsmans decision and still have the option of legal action should we choose. Might just do that anyway to have our day in court and make AK skirm when they attempt to justify their actions.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: AK/FOS

                          I think if you issued proceedings you might get a more realistic offer being put forward.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: AK/FOS

                            You could well be right Springer S, bit frustrating tbh. AK don't mind giving grief to others and then want to wash their hands of it when the tables are turned.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: AK/FOS

                              Received FOS correspondence today which includes the discussion to-date between the FOS and AK. They would like to know if we have anything to add prior to the case going to the Ombudsman.

                              Talk about twisting what we said and wrote, plus attempting to twist the OFT guidelines. AK have tried to shift the blame for all this on to us. We should have told them we had settled this account in 1997 and produced evidence. Also the original creditor had tried to "locate" us before passing the alleged dept to AK in 2004. This is a joke.

                              Firstly, we lived at the same address as detailed on the original credit agreement for a further four years after the purchase. You would think that should be sufficient time for the OC to "locate" us if they had some accounting problem. Second, following the first contact (and subsequent contacts from other DCA) from a DCA we disputed the dept and requested documentation to show to whom the debt was supposed to owed to. As detailed in an earlier post we also requested this info through a solicitor. All requests were ignored and they (the DCA's) carried on with their threats of legal action. Thirdly, AK are in dispute with the FOS as to whether or not the OFT guidlines apply to this case, although they accept we are entitled to "some" compensation.

                              This beggers belief, on the one hand AK claim we should have "proved" to them there was no debt and on the other they say we're entitled to compensation.

                              I now need to calm down before i submit our response.

                              Comment

                              View our Terms and Conditions

                              LegalBeagles Group uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to create a secure and effective website. By using this website, you are consenting to such use.To find out more and learn how to manage cookies please read our Cookie and Privacy Policy.

                              If you would like to opt in, or out, of receiving news and marketing from LegalBeagles Group Ltd you can amend your settings at any time here.


                              If you would like to cancel your registration please Contact Us. We will delete your user details on request, however, any previously posted user content will remain on the site with your username removed and 'Guest' inserted.
                              Working...
                              X