Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

[Angry Cat]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

For your information:
http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2009/58-09

[CleverClogs]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

For your information:
http://www.oft.gov.uk/news-and-updates/press/2009/58-09

Nearly two years ago, the Office of Faffing and Twaddling declared:

The OFT is calling on businesses in the sector to take positive steps to address these concerns. If businesses continue to use these tactics, the OFT will look to take swift enforcement action.

Swift enforcement action?

By the OFT? :

[The Debt Star]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

the Office of Faffing and Twaddling

The Office of Fooking Twots more like

[CleverClogs]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

The Office of [misspelt profanities] more like

I really cannot concur as, despite the misspelling, that designation suggests some physical functionality whereas the available evidence does not shew any cause for such optimism.

[MIKE770]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

I really cannot concur as, despite the misspelling, that designation suggests some physical functionality whereas the available evidence does not shew any cause for such optimism.

Oh!!!!

[michelle2011]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

That is sad! What is the world coming to? You would think that would be an invasion of one's privacy!

[Garlok]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

I have explained the real issues before. However there is a very simple way out of this. Go to CAB, CCCCs, National debt Helpline or a specialist solicitor.

(by the way I would not normally recommend any of the above except the solicitor route)

However once apporached thes bodies or your sol become your Appointed Representatives and these cannot be bypassed in any shape or form under section 2.8 paras c and d of the guidelines. It strikes at the very heart of their fitness to hold a credit licence.

DCAs and creditors will ignore this but it doesn't half give you good ammunition to kick up a stink with the OFT and of course should the worst happen and you end up in court. A very dim view can be taken by the court of this sort of behaviour.

As to stopping it dead in its tracks, not a chance unless you have legal reps.

regards
Garlok

[CleverClogs]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

As to stopping it dead in its tracks, not a chance unless you have legal reps.

Quite.

Some DCAs even demand to speak to the alleged debtor after they have been sent a death certificate.

[Markyy83]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

If your having problems with constant Creditors, here is some advice to deal with it.



Dear Creditor I would like to outline my concerns about your company’s unreasonable behaviour. I believe you are acting unfairly towards me with regards the outstanding debt and would like to remind you that I am familiar with the Consumer Protection Regulations 2008 and the debt collection guidance issued by the Office Of The Fair Trading which states:

Creditors are to be warned by the Office of Fair Trading under the Debt Collection Guidance that the following practices are "considered unfair.

IT IS UNFAIR TO COMMUNICATE, IN WHATEVER FORM, WITH CONSUMERS IN AN UNCLEAR, INACCURATE OR MISLEADING MANNER.”


This includes:

Letters that look like court claims

Not making it clear who the company is or what their role is

Unhelpful legal language

Not giving balance statements about the debt when asked

Contacting you at unreasonable times even when asked not to

Asking you to contact them on premium rate phone numbers.

THOSE CONTACTING DEBTORS MUST NOT BE DECEITFUL BY MISREPRESENTING THEIR AUTHORITY AND/OR THE CORRECT LEGAL POSITION.”

This includes:

Claiming to work for the court or be a bailiff

Implying action can be taken that is not legally possible such as implying they could take your property

Using a business name or logo that implies they are a government body

Implying that court action has been taken against you when it hasn’t

Implying not paying your debt is a criminal offence

Threatening to take court action in England if you live in Scotland or the other way round.

“ PUTTING PRESSURE ON DEBTORS OR THIRD PARTIES IS CONSIDERED TO BE OPPRESSIVE.”

This includes:

Contacting you too frequently

Pressurising you to sell property or take out more debt

Using more than one collection company at the same time or not telling you when your debt has been passed to another company

Pressurising you to pay in full or in large instalments you cannot afford

Making threatening gestures or statements

Ignoring disputes about whether you owe the money

Trying to embarrass you in public or threatening to tell a third party about your debts such as a neighbour or your family.

“ DEALINGS WITH DEBTORS ARE NOT TO BE DECEITFUL AND/OR UNFAIR.”

Examples include:

Sending letters addressed to “the occupier” or discussing the debt with someone without knowing if they are you

Refusing to deal with an adviser acting on your behalf

Not accepting reasonable offers or passing on payments you make

Refusing to freeze action if you dispute the debt.

“ CHARGES SHOULD NOT BE LEVIED UNFAIRLY”.

Examples include:

Claiming collection costs when the original credit agreement didn’t allow this to happen and making you think you are legally liable for the costs

Not putting the specific amounts that can be added for collection costs in the original credit agreement

Adding unreasonable charges.



Also Furthermore to be stipulated are the terms of Section 40 of the Administration of Justice Act which state:

A person commits an offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under a contract he-

Harasses the other with demands for payment which, in respect of their frequency, or the manner or occasion of making any such demand, or of any threat or publicity by which any demand is accompanied, are calculated to subject him or members of his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation;

Falsely represents, in relation to the money claimed, that criminal proceedings lie for failure to pay it;

Falsely represents himself to be authorised in some official capacity to claim or enforce payment; or

Utters a document falsely represented by him to have some official character, or purporting to have some official character which he know it has not.

A person may be guilty of an offence by virtue of sub-section (1) (a) above if he concerts with others in the taking of such actions as is described in that paragraph, notwithstanding that his own course of conduct does not by itself amount to harassment.

I make the suggestion that I would like to be contacted by paper mail form only and would ask you to confirm this aggreement in writing to the above address.

Regards xxxxxxx

[basharun]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

I don't think it does, because they don't actually embarass you or reveal anything about you, they just ask if you still live there. You can't claim telephone harassment as they're not harassing you, they're harassing your neighbours.

I agree totally that it is appalling and should be illegal, but I have not yet seen anything that states it is illegal. Also, really playing Devil's Advocate, Guidance is just that, it is not legislation. This may mean it is bad practice, but not illegal / unlawful.

I hope somebody can post something which proves me wrong. As I said it happened to me and it is an intrusion. It is also highly embarassingwhen a neighbour says, "I had a phone call for you earlier. They wouldn't say who they were, but wanted to know if I knew you" or something similar.

When they call your neighbours then it most probably means that they're trying to trace you. DCA's generally have to first trace an account (ie. confirm where you currently live) when they've got info that the address they have for you is incorrect (eg. someone told them, or they had their mail returned).

I think it's true that it isn't illegal for someone to call your neighbours (or relatives, colleagues etc) to find out where you live, but it depends on exactly what they say.
I'm not sure what other DCA's do, but I used to be a tracer at Capquest so I'll tell you what they do, and what law I think it breaches.

By the way, when Capquest tracers calls your neighbours, they are trained not to give out information that would breach Data Protection. Eg. They'd say something like "I've got mail for John Smith at nr. 12". They won't say "John Smith of 12 Oxford Street, London NE354JT" because that is enough info to uniquely identify you, which breaches DPA. Tracers also generally won't tell your neighbours which company they're calling from because many DCAs are well known, and giving this info will announce to your neighbours that you have debt, which also breaches DPA (of course the other reason is because saying I'm calling from Capquest makes it harder to get info from a neighbour). So, it doesn't seem to be common for DCAs to be breaking any laws regarding giving out your private info to neighbours, and I wouldn't suggest trying to get them on that.

However, there ARE other questionable practices you can take them to task for, particularly Capquest. These practices relate to the DPA, and HOW the DCA obtains private info about you from your neighbours.
I'll list Capquest's practices as an example:
1. "Fishing" letters sent to unconfirmed addresses of "debtors" (eg. known previous or last known addresses, family addresses, etc.) purport to be from DVSL (Data Verification Services Limited), and state words to the effect of "We act on behalf of our client, who is trying to re-establish contact with ..., whose previous address was ..."
2. A Trace agent attempting to trace a "debtor" will phone any and all numbers for the "debtor" at any and all known addresses for the debtor, as well as neighbours at these addresses, family, associates, etc. During these calls the agent will say something along the lines of "I'm calling from DVSL and we're trying to send some correspondence we're holding for "debtor's name". I'm just trying to confirm the correct address to send it to. Do you know if he still lives at ..." the agent also asks for other information about the "debtor", such as "how long ago did he move away?", "do you know his new address?", "do you have his phone number?", "Do you know where he works?" (ie. ANY and as much information as possible that the 3rd party can give).
3. When speaking to the actual "debtor" the agent says the same as above (ie. "calling from DVSL, we have correspondence for you", and also try to obtain as much information from the "debtor" as possible.
4. When asked what DVSL is, and what it does, the standard answer by the agent is "we send out correspondence on behalf of our clients", and does NOT give any further information about this. From Capquest's perspective the idea here is that DVSL will be sending collections letters to the "debtor" on behalf of DVSL's client, Capquest, and hence the statement is true.

The practices above breach the 1st Principle of the Data Protection Act (they are misleading, deceptive and unfair because:
1. While DVSL (Data Verification Services Limited) is a registered company (at Companies House), and is a registered data controller at the ICO, and is registered at any other official/legal authority, it essentially exists only on paper. Capquest owns DVSL. The SOLE reason why Capquest created DVSL was so that it's agents can tell people that they are calling from DVSL, rather than Capquest. It is, therefore, misleading to purport that letters are from DVSL because DVSL and Capquest are essentially the same company.
2. The name "DVSL" was deliberately chosen because it can easily be confused with the DVLA. Prior to 2011 the name was "Telogram", a name also deliberately chosen in order to be confused with the "telegram" service. this indicates a deliberate attempt to mislead people.
3. Trace Agents calling people are employed by Capquest Debt Recovery Ltd, and NOT by DVSL. They are also calling from the premises of Capquest Debt Recovery Ltd, and not from the premises of DVSL. DVSL does NOT have ANY employees or premises. The statement that "I'm calling from DVSL" is, therefore, a clear and deliberate misrepresentation.
4. DVSL does NOT hold or send any correspondence on behalf of Capquest, or any other "clients". It is NOT a mail/correspondence company in any way (or, at least, in the way that is deliberately implied to people).
5. Capquest is NOT a client of DVSL, and in fact, DVSL does NOT have ANY clients. The statement that "we send out correspondence on behalf of clients" is, therefore, also a deliberate misrepresentation.

Schedule 1 to the Data protection Act states that the 1st data protection principle is that "personal data shall be processed fairly and lawfully". Under the Act "Processing" means "obtaining, recording, holding, etc.".
The website of the Information Commissioners Office further states that the 1st principle means that data controllers (like Capquest) "must be transparent about how they intend to use the data, and give individuals appropriate privacy notices when collecting their personal data." The website further states that "Assessing whether information is being processed fairly depends partly on how it is obtained. In particular, if ANYONE is deceived or misled when the information is obtained, then this is unlikely to be fair", and "The Data protection Act says that information should be treated as being obtained fairly if it is provided by a person who is legally authorised, or required, to provide it."

Now because the methods used by Capquest to obtain information about you from neighbours etc. are misleading, deceptive and unfair, and since the people providing this information (ie. 3rd party neighbours, family etc.) are not legally authorised, or required, to provide it, you can clearly argue that they've breached DPA.

Here's some guidelines about other DCAs obtaining info from neighbours:
- The caller must say where he's calling from. If not then possible breach of DPA.
- The caller must not lie or be deceptive or misleading about where he's calling from, otherwise it's a breach of DPA 1st Principle.
- The caller must NOT say where he's calling from if it's a well known DCA, otherwise it's a possible breach of DPA. (yes, this does imply a catch 22 situation for them).
- the caller must say why he wants your info (what he wants to do with it).
- the caller must not lie, or be deceptive or misleading about what he wants to do with that info.
- the caller must NOT tell your neighbour what he wants to do with the info (ie. to trace you so they can collect debt from you), because that breaches DPA.
- the neighbour must be legally authorized or required to give your private info to the caller.

Obviously then, it's almost impossible for a DCA calling your neighbours NOT to breach DPA.

[wales01man]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

What if the dca calls the last adress of the debtor and speaks to the new occupant do they have to say who they are when asked iv had several on my phone witheld numbers wont say who they are

[bluebottle]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

One way of dealing with this is to speak to your telecom provider about call interception. This entails calls being intercepted by the operator, who asks the caller to identify themselves and checking with the customer, first, as to whether they wish to speak to the caller, before putting the call through. There may be a charge made for this. If it is becoming a problem, you may need to speak to the police, especiallly if callers are refusing to identify themselves.

[basharun]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

What if the dca calls the last adress of the debtor and speaks to the new occupant do they have to say who they are when asked iv had several on my phone witheld numbers wont say who they are

Yes they have to say who they are, but some of them don't, especially the less reputable ones (if that makes sense), who aren't members of the industry bodies. The reason why they don't is probably because it means telling people its a DCA, which is likely a breach of DPA, and also most people won't help a DCA. That's the catch 22 situation the DCA is in. If you can, get your neighbours and occupants at the old address etc. to get as much info as possible to figure out who they are, eg. the phone number etc. Then, you can do something about it regarding DPA breach, harrassment, OFCOM, etc. If the number is withheld, and they refuse to say who they are then there's not much you can do, except hang up. Most people they call will do the same.

[bluebottle]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

The DCA is bound by the conditions of its licence which it should abide by to the spirit and letter of the law. As we know, many don't. It doesn't make any difference if a DCA belongs to a trade body or not. The law is the law and they are bound by it, whatever. However, if your number is ex-directory or TPS-registered, that is another matter. Ringing either of these numbers without prior authorisation from the person who the line is allocated to is a clear breach of the law and the ICO can take action against the caller.

[valeriej43]

Re: Debt collectors ringing my neighbours

I am getting several calls a day to my home phone and my mobile phone, also texts,from Debt managers,when i dont answer,[never do] i immediately get a call from unknown, no,s,so can only assume it is them trying another tactic,but today i got a call which came up on my landline as "out of area" i cant trace it on who calls me,as there is no actual no
Has anyone else had this strange call?