DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

[Galahad]

Having to repost this thread as I was accidentally banned after reporting a spammer! :tinysmile_cry_t:

Obviously as I had no idea this was going to happen, I didn't get a chance to save the relevant details that Happy Contrails and someone else posted with regards OFT guidelines as to excessive DCA involvement for one debt, so if anyone could repost those details, would be much obliged.

The summary of the original thread is DVLA is trying it on with a mate of mine, he sent the SORN in time, they claim he didn't, so i've told them to prove it because as far as the law is concerned, the act of correct postage, in a correctly addressed envelope and inserted into a Post Office box means its 'sent' and thats all that anyone has to do to comply.

So, i'm challenging this for him as i'm a bit more articulate than him, but I also want to hit them with a harrassment angle, because in a short space of time, THREE DCA's are sending threatograms in regards this one 'fine', and two people quoted OFT guidelines that stated this wasn't allowed.

[Sparkie1723]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

Having to repost this thread as I was accidentally banned after reporting a spammer! :tinysmile_cry_t:

Obviously as I had no idea this was going to happen, I didn't get a chance to save the relevant details that Happy Contrails and someone else posted with regards OFT guidelines as to excessive DCA involvement for one debt, so if anyone could repost those details, would be much obliged.

The summary of the original thread is DVLA is trying it on with a mate of mine, he sent the SORN in time, they claim he didn't, so i've told them to prove it because as far as the law is concerned, the act of correct postage, in a correctly addressed envelope and inserted into a Post Office box means its 'sent' and thats all that anyone has to do to comply.

So, i'm challenging this for him as i'm a bit more articulate than him, but I also want to hit them with a harrassment angle, because in a short space of time, THREE DCA's are sending threatograms in regards this one 'fine', and two people quoted OFT guidelines that stated this wasn't allowed.

Mornin "G",

Do you want the OFT Guidelines posted again?

Sparkie

[Galahad]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

Mornin "G",

Do you want the OFT Guidelines posted again?

Sparkie

Aha, you were the 'tother one!

Yes please if you could, just want to make sure I get the wording right to hopefully head them off before they contemplate going to court as my friend is a wuss!

[bluebottle]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

Here's the up to date OFT Guidelines. Please remember that DVLA have a court judgment against them regarding posting and receipt of correspondence between them and motorists. It's worth mentioning that in any correspondence. They probably won't like being reminded of it, but that's their own fault and their problem. Also, the oaf who masquerades as the CEO of DVLA needs to be sent a Special Delivery letter marked "STRICTLY PRIVATE & CONFIDENTIAL - TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY", pointing out the legality of his organisation's actions. It might not be a bad idea to send a copy to his bosses, the Permanent Secretary at the DfT and the Secretary of State for Transport.

The postal address for the Dft is:-

Department for Transport
Great Minster House
33 Horseferry Road
LONDON SW1P 4DR

[Sparkie1723]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

Aha, you were the 'tother one!

Yes please if you could, just want to make sure I get the wording right to hopefully head them off before they contemplate going to court as my friend is a wuss!

Hi G,
Here is a list that could be considered as Harassment.

Sparkie.

If the creditor tries to do any of the following things to try and get you to pay back the money you owe, this could be considered harassment. They include:

• contacting you several times a day, or early in the morning or late at night
• pursuing you on social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook
• putting pressure on you to sell your home or take out more credit
• using more than one debt collector at a time to chase you for payment
• not telling you if the debt has been passed on to a debt collection agency
• using paperwork or business logos that appear to be official when they’re not, for example sending you letters that look like court forms
• putting pressure on you to pay all the money off, or in larger instalments when you can't afford to
• threatening you physically or verbally
• ignoring you if you say you don't owe the money
• trying to embarrass you in public
• telling someone else about your debts or using another person to pass on messages, such as a neighbour or family member
• falsely claiming to work for the court or be a bailiff
• implying that legal action can be taken when it can't. For example, implying that your home can be taken from you without a court order
• giving the impression that court action has been taken against you when it hasn't
• giving the impression that not paying the debt is a criminal offence. For most debts, it is not a criminal offence if you don't pay them.

[Galahad]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

thanks for that folks, spot on

[Streety]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

Don't think theres anything against a few dcas chasing one debt though. it may cause harassment, but there's nothing stopping the oc appointing 6 dcas if they want.

[Sparkie1723]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

Don't think theres anything against a few dcas chasing one debt though. it may cause harassment, but there's nothing stopping the oc appointing 6 dcas if they want.

Sorry to disagree with yiu but you are Wrong in that view ....Harassment is a criminal offence.

Sparkie

[bluebottle]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

Full marks SpringerSpaniel and Sparkie. Harassment is, indeed, a criminal offence under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The maximum penalty, under the criminal provisions, is a £20K fine, or 6 months imprisonment or both. The civil provisions, which police forces advise victims to use, enables an injunction to be obtained which carries a maximum penalty of an unlimited fine, or 5 years' imprisonment or both for non-compliance. The provisions of Section 40, Administration of Justice Act 1970 are rarely used, due to the penalties prescribed being of little deterrent value. The statutory provisions and case law attached to the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 are very effective deterrents, especially as companies are liable for the actions of their employees and civil damages payable to victims are unlimited.

[Streety]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

Sorry to disagree with yiu but you are Wrong in that view ....Harassment is a criminal offence.

Sparkie

I agree Sparkie, but the offence is committed by the DCA not the OC. The OC can have as many DCA's chasing as they wish. The DCA's must not harass.

[shell]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

I agree Sparkie, but the offence is committed by the DCA not the OC. The OC can have as many DCA's chasing as they wish. The DCA's must not harass.

Ah, but is the OC not vicariously responsible for the actions of DCA's as the DCA's are acting as their agents?

[bluebottle]

Re: DVLA - 3 DCA's chasing one 'fine'

Okay. The Protection from Harassment Act 1997 deals with ANY course of conduct that amounts to harassment, which, basically, means anything. Where a debt is involved, the creditor has a duty to ensure that any debt collector they engage to pursue a debt does so within the law.

The OFT Debt Collection Guidelines lay out, very clearly, what the OFT consider to be oppressive behaviour and Section 40, Administration of Justice Act 1970 makes it clear what debt collectors can and cannot do.

Sending letters and/or making telephone calls that are threatening and/or intimidating, not only breach the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, they breach the Malicious Communications Act 1988 also. Furthermore, making statements about a person, either directly or indirectly, that are defamatory, false or malicious, are sufficient to warrant action under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

Section 7, Protection from Harassment Act 1997 makes it clear that anyone who aids, abets, counsels or procures another or others to engage in any course of conduct against another which amounts to harassment shall be regarded as having committed an offence under Section 2 of the Act, which creates the offence. Remember that the onus of proof that a course of conduct does not amount to harassment lies on the Defendant, not the Complainant.

So, to answer the question, "Does the DCA or OC commit the offence?", the answer is "both" because the OC can be held vicariously liable for the actions of the DCA.