CapQuest Debt Recovery

smcaul

Tootsie_Roll wrote:

What a load of tosh some people write on here.

Of course you have to justify the payment you offer - as Conor mentioned you either do it now and amicably with the dca or lender or later with CCCS/CAB/Payplan or even later at court !

Your choice - remember that you want them to accept a lower payment, why wouldn't you work with them to achieve that ? Some of these 'armchair experts' are out to cause as much disruption as possible for dca's - this does you no service what so ever.

Just a question to you TR, Have you ever had the misfortune to be on the receiving end of a DCA phone call? In the past (distant I am glad to say) I had quite a few calling me, not one of them was polite - all were rude, all gave untrue information and some I feel were even illegal. Your constant spouting of how people should comply with these parasites (of which, by your own admission, you are one) goes to serve no purpose. People come here for advice on how they can get their finances back in order - they also are entitled to live whilst doing this, so over stretching themselves by paying the loudest shouting DCA money they can not afford will do them no good at all. As for your quote about "Armchair" experts, many of us have been through hell and back to sort ourselves out and pay off what we owe, and as a result probably know far more then parasitical DCA's or their staff.

Tootsie_Roll

smcaul wrote:

Just a question to you TR, Have you ever had the misfortune to be on the receiving end of a DCA phone call? In the past (distant I am glad to say) I had quite a few calling me, not one of them was polite - all were rude, all gave untrue information and some I feel were even illegal. Your constant spouting of how people should comply with these parasites (of which, by your own admission, you are one) goes to serve no purpose. People come here for advice on how they can get their finances back in order - they also are entitled to live whilst doing this, so over stretching themselves by paying the loudest shouting DCA money they can not afford will do them no good at all. As for your quote about "Armchair" experts, many of us have been through hell and back to sort ourselves out and pay off what we owe, and as a result probably know far more then parasitical DCA's or their staff.

To answer your first question - yes, it was a difficult time, caused the breakup of a long term relationship and took me 5 years with 3 jobs at the same time to sort out.

Where have I ever mentioned to pay the dca who shouts loudest ? My advice is sound as it will help you resolve your (or anyone elses) problems in the quickest way possible. I can confidently state this from being in the same position as you and working in the industry.

smcaul

Tootsie_Roll wrote:

Where have I ever mentioned to pay the dca who shouts loudest ? My advice is sound as it will help you resolve your (or anyone elses) problems in the quickest way possible. I can confidently state this from being in the same position as you and working in the industry.

The OP stated that they wrote asking for x amount, yet when they called the DCA they wanted double, hardly the best way to reslove the issue is it - hence why most of us advocate written communication only. Therfore I do not believe your advice is sound, it would only be sound if the DCA's were fair - which it is evident by the amount of posts and people expierances - most are not.

Tootsie_Roll

smcaul wrote:

The OP stated that they wrote asking for x amount, yet when they called the DCA they wanted double, hardly the best way to reslove the issue is it - hence why most of us advocate written communication only. Therfore I do not believe your advice is sound, it would only be sound if the DCA's were fair - which it is evident by the amount of posts and people expierances - most are not.

If the offer was backed up with a full SOA then yes it was fair, however in this case it wasn't so it was correct for the dca to challenge the amount offered - we would be failing in our responsibility to our clients if we didn't do this.

serena

Reading the OP again, it seems that the DCA originally asked for £70, and it was when the poster rang to make arrangements to send the first payment that the DCA more than doubled the amount on the phone. I think most people would have refused to agree to this.This is not at all the same thing as the debtor offering a smaller amount than was asked for.

smcaul

Tootsie_Roll wrote:

If the offer was backed up with a full SOA then yes it was fair, however in this case it wasn't so it was correct for the dca to challenge the amount offered - we would be failing in our responsibility to our clients if we didn't do this.

But there is no requirement for them to show a SOA to the DCA, If the OP is satisfied that they have offered an amount that is affordable then that is that, it is not for the DCA to decide if or if not they are paying an amount that can be afforded - DCA's are not Judges or Courts - even though many seem to think they are!!!

Tootsie_Roll

serena wrote:

Reading the OP again, it seems that the DCA originally asked for £70, and it was when the poster rang to make arrangements to send the first payment that the DCA more than doubled the amount on the phone. I think most people would have refused to agree to this.This is not at all the same thing as the debtor offering a smaller amount than was asked for.

A very fair point - I do not understand their logic.

Tootsie_Roll

smcaul wrote:

But there is no requirement for them to show a SOA to the DCA, If the OP is satisfied that they have offered an amount that is affordable then that is that, it is not for the DCA to decide if or if not they are paying an amount that can be afforded - DCA's are not Judges or Courts - even though many seem to think they are!!!

You are quite correct that legally someone does not have to provide us with details of thier finances. Equally so we are not legally obliged to accept instalment payments from an individual - unless ordered to do so by the court. This is about compromise and an open approach on both sides - not strictly about what each side must do or not do.

Verbatim

I smiled at TR's suggestion that the DCA was attempting an 'amicable' method of solution/repayment.

smcaul

Tootsie_Roll wrote:

You are quite correct that legally someone does not have to provide us with details of thier finances. Equally so we are not legally obliged to accept instalment payments from an individual - unless ordered to do so by the court. This is about compromise and an open approach on both sides - not strictly about what each side must do or not do.

"Unless ordered to do so by the court" - now that is a great sentence, You know as well as most of us that if it went as far as the court in 99% of cases you would get far less then the amount that people normally prepose to pay. Yet DCA's still use bullying tactics to try and get people to cough up more then they may be able to afford. You only need to read some of the many comments on here about what has been said by DCA agents to people, the threats the lies and the general intimidation. There is no need for it, people are far more likely to be cooperative with people that they feel they can trust. I am assuming the tactics that they use are such beacuse they are on some sort of perfrmance realted pay scheme - please orrect me if I am wrong!