capquest sending noa themself from creditor

[postggj]

this has prob been touched on before

i have 100% proof that capqest has sent a notice of asignment on orange mobie phone headed paper stating the acount has been sold to them

a second letter on the same day was a letter on capquest headed paper stating that had been sold the acount

now i have confirmed where and when these letters were sent, the date it was received into the royal mail system, and the date uk mail passed it onto royal mail

the letter pretending to be from orange states that the debt has been sold to capqest after it had sold first time round to everything everywhere ltd

BOTH the ENVELOPES WERE FrOM BRISTOL BS4 9DD

i have confirmed this is capquest

so my question is

HOW CAN CAPQEST SEND A NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT PRETENDING IT COMES FROM THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR ON THERE HEADED PAPER WHEN THE LAW OF PROPERTY ACT STATES,

ONE MUST COME FROM THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR AND ONE FROM THE ASSIGNEE, (CAPQUEST)

Ii have no worries with this, i can tie capquest up for months but i just want to exaust there complaints procedure , all for the sake of fifteen quid:tinysmile_grin_t:

[TUTTSI]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

KP, I had exactly the same with CQ with an old Halifax account. It is almost like they have the template to create these assignments as requested. Eventually they stopped chasing me because I had them going round in circles. The one thing that surprised me is that it was a joint account yet they chose to chase only me and not my other half. The scary thing was they were able to print out duplicate bank statements which it looked like they printed out, so perhaps they have access to the records.

They buy up a batch of accounts for peanuts, they chase with their threatograms and if they get the money after all the frightners then they are lucky otherwise they just move on to the next unlucky person.


This is the letter that was received eventually from CAPQUEST....together with my letter of 18/11/07 which did the trick.

Mrs Tuttsi

xxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxx
FAX:- xxxxxxx

Cap Quest Debt Recovery
Fleet 27
Rye Close
Fleet
Hampshire
GU51 2QQ 18TH November 2007

BY RECORDED DELIVERY No:- xxxxxxxxx

Your Ref:- xxxxx

Dear Sir

Debt Purchase from Halifax PLC- Account No:_ xxxxxx

**** PLEASE DO NOT IGNORE THIS LETTER AS REGULATORY ACTION HAS COMMENCED ****

I refer to your letters of 18th September, 30th October and 13th November 2007.

In particular I refer to my letter of 17th September (copy enclosed):-

1. I draw your attention to paragraph 1 of that letter and you have not complied with the CCA request.

2. I draw your attention to paragraph 3 of that letter. You have supplied a copy of a Halifax Current Account Application Form but this is not a true copy of the original signed and executed credit agreement bound under the CCA 1974.

I draw your attention to the additional comments which I have made in that letter and also I have written to you tirelessly about this matter and repeatedly asking you to provide the above information within stipulated time limits as laid down by law, and which you have chosen to abuse. You have not provided me with the required information and you are harassing me for a debt which at law is now unenforceable. I have made no admissions to you regarding your claim, and I do not intend to do so. I view your correspondence and your lack of ability to supply information to me and instead harass me, as a serious breach of your trading licences. It is for these reasons that I have now lodged complaints and I will let your regulators deal with you accordingly. Furthermore and for the record should you ignore this letter, while there is a complaint in force and issue proceedings, I will use this letter and all previous correspondence to be submitted in affidavit form as a defence to any action you contemplate. I will also claim costs.
Yours faithfully


Mrs T


Debt Recovery


Dear Mrs Tuttsi

I write in response to a letter dated 18 November 2007 and can confirm I have completed my
investigation into your account. _ _^
CapQuest Investments Ltd purchased the above referenced account on 22 December 2006 from Halifax Pic. We were not made aware of any dispute or issue with your account on assignment.
We received your initial request in writing on the 05 April 2007 for a copy of agreement and deed of assignment. We contacted Halifax Pic for the relevant documentation. Halifax forwarded over documentation to us on 08 August 2007 which was then issued to you on the same day.
Due to the nature of your complaint a decision has been made to return your account to Halifax Pic in order that they may assist you further in this matter. I can confirm that your account is now closed on our system. You will receive no further communication from CapQuest Debt Recovery regarding this account. Please forward any further communication directly to Halifax Pic.
Should you wish to discuss this matter further please contact me on 0870 084 3626. Yours sincerely


Ms L Slater
Quality and Assurance Officer

[teaboy2]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

Well they sent me the same the other week too. NOA direct from Capquest on orange letter headed paper, claiming the debt was now owned by Capquest but was originally sold to everything everywhere limited (name of orange when T-Mobile became part of them). Same day i get a letter from BPO Debt collectors, who funnily enough had left a message for me the same date of Capquest letter.

They are only chasing £163 for what they claim was a 24 month contract, which seems a very small amount for termination fees, which i assume makes up the majority of the amount they are after as per in most cases of mobile contract debts. But then as i do not recall owing anything to orange then being it is such a small amount, it could well be i saw out the full term of the contract and they are charging me fees for an extended period of the contract after the original term had ended and i have never extend a phone contract beyond its original term. Though they do have a habit of extended the original term without consent.

Anyway below is a copy of a letter i sent on my company letterhead, which i emailed to the managing director (or CEO, one of the two) of BPO Graham Rankin

BPO Collection Limited
199B Kirkintilloch Road
Bishopbriggs
Glasgow
G64 2LS

Date: xxth xxxxxxxx 2011

BPO Reference Number: xxxxxxx

NON ACKNOWELDGEMENT OF ALLEGED DEBT

Dear Mr Graham Rankin

I write to you in response to a letter dated xxth xxxxxx 2011 which was received from your company today (xxxxth xxxxxxx 2011) the contents of which
have been noted. The letter is a demand for payment for an alleged Orange account. No doubt like with all those on the consumer forums that I have help
with similar alleged debts, the account is made up of termination charges, which according to the OFT V Ashbourne Management Service High Court case
are deemed unfair and unlawful where no right to cancellation on a contract lasting for more than 12 months is available to the consumer after the initial
cancellation period. I am also aware of no phone company or debt collection company, to my knowledge, being willing to test the legalities in court.
However as I do not acknowledge this debt then I can confirm this alleged debt is now in serious dispute, and as per OFT Debt Collection Guidelines any
attempt to demand payment or collect payment on an disputed debt is a breach of such said Guidelines.

Now, today I also received a letter from Capquest purporting to say the alleged account was now owned by them and they had used the Orange Logo. Basically
Capquest have used an orange letterhead in breach of oranges intellectual property rights in an attempt to pass of a letter written by their own hands (or
computer in this case) and are attempting to mislead me into thinking this was written by Orange themselves in accordance to the law or property act
1925. Where said legislation makes it clear that such a notice of absolute assignment must be written and sent to the alleged debtor, by the hand of the
assignor, the assignor being orange in this case. The evidence to back up my claim in this paragraph is on the back of the envelope in which capquest
letter arrived it, where the return address given is… Now wait for it… CDR, (i.e. Capquest debt recovery ltd), P.o. Box 2768, Bristol, BS4 9DD.

But it gets even better than that, because not only does capquest purporting letter fail to state it is an Notice of Assignment as a Title/Heading to the main
subject of the letter, but it also claims that Orange originally assigned the ownership of the contract to Everything Everywhere Limited, yet I have never
agreed to any contract with such company. So that being the case, why were capquest using oranges logo, when clearly it was assigned by Everything
Everywhere Limited, to capquest and not from orange to capquest? Answer is, it’s a deliberate flouting of the law designed to mislead myself and no
doubt other consumers in to paying for alleged debts that capquest is not legally entitled to, due to 1 no assignment notice ever being received from
orange stating alleged account has been assigned to Everything Everywhere Ltd (Who I never had a contract or any business with). And 2 the so called
letter of purporting assignment I have now received from capquest, claims to be from orange and not from Everything Everywhere Limited, who if the
account was originally sold to them would have been the legal owners of such alleged account, and therefore such letter of assignment should have come
from Everything Everywhere limited and not from orange. I am therefore of the view that capquest did indeed send the letter, that they did indeed
illegally use Oranges logo and letter head and where therefore indeed committing not just an act of misrepresentation, but also an act of fraud with the
intention of defrauding me via misrepresentation of ownership of alleged account, that I do not acknowledge.

Given the above, I now therefore refer you to the following - Arkell v. Pressdram (1971) – If you are unsure as to the meaning of this case reference and to
why I am referring you to it, I would suggest you Google it. As am certain once you have Googled it, the meaning of my referring you to it will become
unquestionable clear to you.

And just so there is no doubt, yes I am financially capable of fighting this matter all the way even taking it to the Supreme Court if need be, though given
case law mentioned above in regards to the OFT High Court Case, the chance of yourselves being able to successfully enforce this alleged debt or indeed
have any proof the debt was actually mine, is highly unlikely. Now please pass on my compliments to Capquest and tell them I said they can go sit and swivel
and that hell will freeze over before they get any money of mine for any debt whatsoever and that of course I would be more than happy to fight
them in court. But the question is, would they, now knowing exactly who I am, be willing to risk their license and the burden of such massive costs
awarded should they lose as they likely will do? In fact I dare them to take me on!

Yours Sincerely and Without Prejudice

Mr Teaboy (AKA Teaboy2 of Legal Beagles and formerly of Consumer Action Group)
Managing Director/and Owner
XXXXXX XXXXX Limited.

Now i would not recommend the use of such agressive stance as i used in my letter above. Only reason i use it is because i have the finances to back it up whether i won or lost in court - But the majority of people here don't. Though i do find inviting them and making it clear you have a solid defence deters them from risking legal action, and of course making them well aware as to who i am Aka Teaboy2, tends to put the frighteners up them too.

Now Graham and BPO to there credit did respond within 2-3 hours stating they had put an immediate stop on the account and my contact details would not be past on to capquest (the letter head contained my company phone details). Though i suspect in times past, that they maywell have continued chasing and likely backed off due to the fact (or atleast according to the Public record of credit licensed companies) BPO's credit license expired 1st april 2011 and they have pretained it only whilst the oft decide whether to renew it or not, as the oft is minded to refuse the renewal. So i very much doubt i would have been someone they would have wanted on their backs whilst trying to secure the renewal of their credit license, as i could have made that very difficult for them indeed.

Anyway i hope some of the court cases and info in my letter will help you when you write your letter in response to capquest lol.

[postggj]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

JUST AN UPDATE

SEEMS CRAPPYQUEST DO NOT LIKE ME FOR IGNORING THEM, SHAME THAT

SECOND THREATOGRAM INSTALLMENT FROM THE CHAIR NEXT DOOR

NOTICE ALL THE IMPLIED LEAGAL SPEAK (SO SCARED)
MIGHT THE ACTUALLY READ RELEVANT CPR FOR A START BEFORE PREACHING IT

[labman]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

so my question is

HOW CAN CAPQEST SEND A NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT PRETENDING IT COMES FROM THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR ON THERE HEADED PAPER WHEN THE LA OF PROPERTY ACT STATES,

ONE MUST COME FROM THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR AND ONE FROM THE ASSIGNEE, (CAPQUEST)

Because the EU Directives have superceded this. No NOA HAS to be issued any more depending on the circumstances.

[postggj]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

can you give a link please to that eu directive

many thanks

[labman]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

Here you are:

http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore...e-guidance.pdf

As I said - depending on the circumstances!:tinysmile_grin_t:

[red12345]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

The same thing has happened to me this morning. I had a T-Mobile account about 3 years ago which I cancelled. I have not heard anything about it from T-Mobile since. This morning I received 2 letters - one claiming to be from T-Mobile and the other from CapQuest saying that I owe a debt of £231.26. These two letters are the first information I have about any supposed debt. I have not kept anything details about the old contract - I don't even remember the start and end dates. The only reference I have is the account number on the Capquest documentation. Both letters came in separate envelopes but were obviously from Capquest debt recovery as the "undelivered" return addresses are Capquest's. The letter from T-Mobile says that another company Everything Everywhere has assigned the debt to Capquest and I must contact Capquest and not T-Mobile about it. Is this a scam?

[labman]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

It's not a scam, it's the DCA's being totally inefficient and not being up to date with the law (which they don't generally feel they need to abide by anyway)

[postggj]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

i have ignored crappyquest and not a peep from them since they set those letters

[labman]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

What a surprise! lol

[Guest]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

this has prob been touched on before

i have 100% proof that capqest has sent a notice of asignment on orange mobie phone headed paper stating the acount has been sold to them

a second letter on the same day was a letter on capquest headed paper stating that had been sold the acount

now i have confirmed where and when these letters were sent, the date it was received into the royal mail system, and the date uk mail passed it onto royal mail

the letter pretending to be from orange states that the debt has been sold to capqest after it had sold first time round to everything everywhere ltd

BOTH the ENVELOPES WERE FrOM BRISTOL BS4 9DD

i have confirmed this is capquest

so my question is

HOW CAN CAPQEST SEND A NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT PRETENDING IT COMES FROM THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR ON THERE HEADED PAPER WHEN THE LAW OF PROPERTY ACT STATES,

ONE MUST COME FROM THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR AND ONE FROM THE ASSIGNEE, (CAPQUEST)

Ii have no worries with this, i can tie capquest up for months but i just want to exaust there complaints procedure , all for the sake of fifteen quid:tinysmile_grin_t:

Hi
JUust come accross this thread.

THere is nothing in the LPA that i am aware of which states any requirement for the creditor to send a notification, i think all it says is that it must be under the hand of the assignee and a notification must be sent that is all, so i am not sure where you are coming from here.

Unless there is an ammendment i am unaware of, of course
Peter
------------------------------- merged -------------------------------

Here you are:

http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/biscore...e-guidance.pdf

As I said - depending on the circumstances!:tinysmile_grin_t:

HI

This wont apply to a phone contract of course because they are not covered by the CCA not being credit agreements. They are generally covered by the distance selling regs.

Peter

[Guest]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

For reference

136. Legal assignments of things in action.
— (1) Any absolute assignment by writing under the hand of the assignor (not purporting to be by way of charge only) of any debt or other legal thing in action, of which express notice in writing has been given to the debtor, trustee or other person from whom the assignor would have been entitled to claim such debt or thing in action, is effectual in law (subject to equities having priority over the right of the assignee) to pass and transfer from the date of such notice—

Peter

[labman]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

From the horse's mouth and clear as mud!

The view the OFT has taken is that “line rental” (i.e., network access charges) as well as inclusive minutes, texts, data allowance, and so on are considered regulated credit if the consumer cannot terminate the contract early without paying the balance of recurring charges up the amount which would have been paid were the contract to run its usual course. For example, if your contract costs you £25 per month, and you have 10 months to run, and your operator tells you it will cost you £250 to terminate early, you effectively took out a loan without knowing it.
In terms of the SIM and handset, the OFT says:

The provision of the handset and SIM card […] may be considered to be regulated hire or hire purchase agreement under the CCA depending on whether they remain the property of the mobile phone provider or whether they transfer to the hirer (consumer).

The SIM itself usually has a notice printed on the full-sized card it snaps out of stating that it remains property of the operator, thus—unless I’m mistaken—the OFT considers it to be “hired”. The handset itself may vary: you’d have to check your contract.
The issue here is twofold:

• If the recurring charges on a mobile contract are partially repayments on a loan, hire, or hire-purchase agreement, what proportion of the charges relate to each?
• If there are loans, or similar, what’s the effective APR?

Were these normal loans, the companies would be obliged to hand over this information—not just hand over, in fact, but readily present it. If you have a mobile phone contract, do you know the answers? I bet you don’t.
Today I thanked the OFT for their most helpful response, and asked them whether mobile phone companies should be obliged to present this information to consumers, and whether we should be able to sign up for a mobile phone contract without any credit being involved (not that this would necessarily be cheaper, but we have no way of knowing at present). I am, as they say, eagerly awaiting their reply.

[ODC]

Re: capquest sending noa themself from creditor

I too have been chased by Crapquest for an alleged Orange debt. Rather than get involved in letter ping pong with them I just ignore their increasingly daft letters, the most recent of which was from Mr Crapquest himself offering to pay a percentage of it under some hair brained scheme dreamt up by some mentally defective