FOS - complaints about debt-collecting businesses

[frisp]

issue 81 - recent complaints involving debt-collecting businesses Some interesting case studies.

[Curlyben]

Re: FOS - complaints about debt-collecting businesses

Good piece and well worth a read.

[natweststaffmember]

Re: FOS - complaints about debt-collecting businesses

"81/04
consumer complains of harassment by debt-collecting business
A debt-collecting business rang Mr D and asked how he proposed to settle his credit card debt. He told the business that he would consider the matter once it had sent him a copy of the consumer credit agreement for the credit card. Mr D also said that he did not wish to have any contact with the business by phone, so it should only communicate in writing.
Some weeks later, Mr D wrote to the business. He noted that it had still not sent him the copy of the agreement he had asked for. And he complained that it was continuing to ‘harass’ him by phoning him. He believed he was therefore entitled to have the entire debt written-off. He also asked the business to compensate him for the ‘harassment’ and to remove all adverse credit reference information that it had registered in relation to the debt. When the business refused, Mr D brought his complaint to us.
complaint upheld in part
There was no dispute about the size of the debt. And we noted that the business had been prepared to accept regular monthly repayments, rather than expecting Mr D to pay off the entire amount immediately. So we did not agree with Mr D that it would be fair and reasonable for the business to write-off the debt. Similarly, we saw no reason why the business should remove the credit reference information registered about the debt, as this was an accurate record of the situation.
The business sent us the recordings of its phone calls to Mr D. Each call was very short, because Mr D had put the phone down as soon as he realised who was calling. Mr D told us he had been advised by someone on an internet forum that his loan was probably unenforceable and that he should ignore any requests to repay it. Mr D accepted that he had not helped matters by following this advice. He also accepted that he needed to agree a repayment plan with the business and start paying off the loan.
We told the business it should have respected Mr D’s request not to contact him by phone. The fact that Mr D had continued to receive regular phone calls appeared mainly to have resulted from poor internal communication at the business. However, it was also clear that the business was frustrated by Mr D’s failure to respond to any of its attempts to communicate with him, whether by phone or by letter.
We pointed out to Mr D that the business had not spoken to him in an improper manner or attempted to put any pressure on him to pay the debt. It had offered to pay him £50 for the inconvenience caused by its continuing phone calls. We told him we thought this was fair.
When he brought his complaint to us, Mr D asked us to provide a legal determination on the correct meaning of certain technical provisions of the Consumer Credit Act (as amended in 2006), which had not yet been tested in the courts. We explained why we were unable to do this. Our role, as an informal dispute-resolution service, is to decide cases on the basis of what is fair and reasonable. It is not part of our role to provide general opinions on legal matters – or to answer hypothetical questions on the meaning of parts of the law."