Chased for a debt thats not mine

[lisa82]

Hi there

I have received a letter from IQOR debt collection agency saying they have been passed my debt from paypal. I have never had a paypal account or ever paid anything through them. The debt relates to a premium account which is used by people will small businesses so I have definitely never had anything like this.

After receiving 2 letters from IQOR I replied with a template letter stating that I did not acknowledge the debt and that they should provide evidence. This was on 27th July.

I havent heard anything from IQOR since then, but today I have received a letter from GPB Solicitors stating if I don't pay IQOR within 10 days they will begin legal proceedings. It also says I should not enter into correspondence with them.

I am so annoyed at having to waste my time with this as I have never had anything to do with paypal. Should I sent the first letter again to IQOR? or just ignore the letters. Its a bit worrying when the solictors state they will start legal proceedings. I thought IQOR would have had to respond to my first letter.

Anyone got any advice?

Thanks
Lisa

[Guest]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

Hi

I have heard of this before with this company and payplan, I think if you go over the road to CAG and type IQOR in the search you will find one or two.

I would file it in the bin if it were me.

[legalese]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

Send a letter back to them stating, that if they issue proceedings in this matter, they will be disputed. You will apply for proceedings to be struck out as an abuse of process and that you will seek costs against them on an indemnity basis.

Over to you davyb

[Guest]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

I think you would just be wasting your time replying, if they are going to litigate, they will no matter what you say. If you don't owe the money you have nothing to worry about either way.

As for seeking cost on an" indemnity basis" I am afraid i do not know what that means in this context.

Only my opinion of course .

D

[bluebottle]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

Send a letter back to them stating, that if they issue proceedings in this matter, they will be disputed. You will apply for proceedings to be struck out as an abuse of process and that you will seek costs against them on an indemnity basis.

Over to you davyb

I would agree with the application to strike-out on the grounds of proceedings being an abuse of the legal process, because that is what I would do. However, if the dozy pillocks ignored any threat to strike-out and carried on, then I would be inclined to send a warning letter, citing that attempting to obtain money that is not owed by means of threats is Attempted Blackmail (Section 21, Theft Act 1968) and that they continued in that knowledge and at their risk.

[miliitant]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

GPB

i take it thats geofrey parker bourne

they have been keeping very quiet up to now after being once very active in the DCA circle

they moved into a buliding in stratford that activ kapital were the previous tennants

[bluebottle]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

I think you would just be wasting your time replying, if they are going to litigate, they will no matter what you say. If you don't owe the money you have nothing to worry about either way.

As for seeking cost on an" indemnity basis" I am afraid i do not know what that means in this context.

Only my opinion of course .

D

In layman's terms, "indemnity basis" can be interpreted as "you reimburse my costs in full".

[Guest]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

In layman's terms, "indemnity basis" can be interpreted as "you reimburse my costs in full".

My understanding of the term is to indemnify against risk, ie one party reimburses the other contingent on the assertions quantified in a contract

ndemnities
Terminology
In this briefing, ‘risk’ is used to mean the chance of something happening
that may have an impact on objectives and potential costs. Risk is often
specified in terms of events and consequences, and the magnitude of risk is
normally determined by the combination of the consequences of an event
and the likelihood of that event occurring.2
Another term for the consequence of a risk occurring is ‘damage’, which goes
hand in hand with the legal responsibility for the damage, or ‘liability’.3 Legal
agreements such as contracts and deeds assign the liability for damage to
one or more parties in the event that a specified risk occurs. An indemnity
is a particular type of contractual clause that allocates liability between
parties and is normally expressed in the form of one party ‘indemnifying’
another for a particular class or classes of liability.

D

[bluebottle]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

My understanding of the term is to indemnify against risk, ie one party reimburses the other contingent on the assertions quantified in a contract

ndemnities
Terminology
In this briefing, ‘risk’ is used to mean the chance of something happening
that may have an impact on objectives and potential costs. Risk is often
specified in terms of events and consequences, and the magnitude of risk is
normally determined by the combination of the consequences of an event
and the likelihood of that event occurring.2
Another term for the consequence of a risk occurring is ‘damage’, which goes
hand in hand with the legal responsibility for the damage, or ‘liability’.3 Legal
agreements such as contracts and deeds assign the liability for damage to
one or more parties in the event that a specified risk occurs. An indemnity
is a particular type of contractual clause that allocates liability between
parties and is normally expressed in the form of one party ‘indemnifying’
another for a particular class or classes of liability.

D

That sounds like indemnity in the insurance sense. I think what Legalese is getting at is that if the firm is idiotic enough to go ahead with legal action, they indemnify the defendant, i.e. pay their costs as well as their own, regardless of outcome. Is that correct, Legalese?

[legalese]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

Yes that is correct bluebottle and not just costs but also compensation for the other person.

[Guest]

Re: Chased for a debt thats not mine

That sounds like indemnity in the insurance sense. I think what Legalese is getting at is that if the firm is idiotic enough to go ahead with legal action, they indemnify the defendant, i.e. pay their costs as well as their own, regardless of outcome. Is that correct, Legalese?

I am not sure that the term can be used in this context, i believe that an indemnity must be agreed between the parties, what the OP is telling the creditor is that he will be liable for his costs. If the claimant was to indemnify his losses he would make arrangement to cover them in the event of him loosing, claiming restitution in dispute from the other side is not the same thing. Anyway what is in a word.

D