Orange Chasing Me for an Alleged Debt

Paul_Varjak

I have a disputed phone bill with Orange - some £419. Orange have chased this alleged bad debt using three debt collectors.

Each time, I write to the debt collectors saying that I am in dispute with Orange and that I believe they owe me about £56 rather than me owing them £419. The debt collectors then refer the debt back to Orange.

Surely, Orange cannot keep using different debt collectors without advising the debt collectors of our dispute? I understand there is a code of practice that disputes should not just be ignored when seeking repayment of an alleged debt.

In addition, I also believe the Code of Practice also requires that I am advised when the matter is passed to a debt collector - Orange do not do this.

And, the current Debt Collector falsely told me on the phone that they can get a judgement against me without a court hearing - claiming this would allow them to come and seize assets! Surely such statements also breaks the same Code of Practice!

I have told Orange (each of these debt collectors) that if they wish to pursue the matter further they should now initiate court action and I will be bound by any decision made in court.

This matter has now been going on for 19 months and I have written a total of 13 letters disputing this alleged debt. Surely enough is enough and, if Orange really want to take further action - they should take me to court!

jobbingmusician

If you believe they owe you £56, why don't YOU take THEM to small claims? I bet that will make them take SOME sort of action to sort matters out....:p

AGB863

jobbingmusician wrote:

If you believe they owe you £56, why don't YOU take THEM to small claims? I bet that will make them take SOME sort of action to sort matters out....:p

If you do threaten to take them to the small claims court, put it in writing that you are going to name the chairperson of the company in the litigation to appear in court.

Paul_Varjak

jobbingmusician wrote:

If you believe they owe you £56, why don't YOU take THEM to small claims? I bet that will make them take SOME sort of action to sort matters out....:p

Yes, I did think of that but if I issue a claim in my local County Court then Orange (as the respondent) can ask for it to be transferred to their local court!

But, if Orange issue a claim, I can get it transferred to my local court and get my counterclaim heard in my local court as well!

Paul_Varjak

AGB863 wrote:

If you do threaten to take them to the small claims court, put it in writing that you are going to name the chairperson of the company in the litigation to appear in court.

What, name the chairperson as the respondent? If I did that the court would throw at my claim as I will be suing the wrong entity. Or do you mean I should name him as a witness for myself?

Either way, I see no point!

AGB863

Paul_Varjak wrote:

What, name the chairperson as the respondent? If I did that the court would throw at my claim as I will be suing the wrong entity. Or do you mean I should name him as a witness for myself?

Either way, I see no point!

As the man in charge of the company, he has overall responsibility of what happens with in the company, therefore if you are not getting the account sorted, you follow up through the small claims court as previoulsy said and name the chairperson who would have to appear in court - but by then I think the account would be sorted.

To get them moving you will need to send a letter stating that you intend to begin legal action with them and give them 14 days to respond, but state that it will be the chairperson of the company that will be charged.

On the other point of the code of practice for debt collection read these points. This is taken from the Office of Fair Traiding guidence on debt collecting - the points in red might be of interest

2 UNFAIR BUSINESS PRACTICES
Communication
2.1 It is unfair to communicate, in whatever form, with consumers in an unclear, inaccurate or misleading manner.
2.2 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:
a. use of official looking documents intended or likely to mislead debtors as to their status, e.g. documents made to resemble court claims.
b. leaving out or presenting information in such a way that it creates a false or misleading impression or exploits debtors' lack of knowledge
c. those contacting debtors not making clear who they are, who they work for, what their role is, what the purpose of the contact is
d. unnecessary and unhelpful use of legal and technical language, e.g. use of Latin phrases
e. failing to provide debtors or creditors with information on status of debts, e.g. not providing requested balance statements when reasonably requested
f. contacting debtors at unreasonable times
g. ignoring or disregarding debtors' legitimate wishes in respect of when and where to contact them, e.g. shift workers who ask not to be telephoned during certain times of the day
h. asking or instructing debtors to make contact on premium rate telephone numbers
False representation of authority and/or legal position

2.3 Those contacting debtors must not be deceitful by misrepresenting their authority and/or the correct legal position.
2.4 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:
a. falsely implying or claiming authority, e.g. claiming to work on instructions from the courts, claiming to be bailiffs or, in Scotland, sheriff officers or messenger-at-arms.
b. falsely implying or stating that action can or will be taken when it legally
cannot, e.g. referring to bankruptcy or sequestration proceedings when the balance is too low to qualify for such proceedings or claiming a right of entry when no court order to this effect has been granted.
c. misrepresenting status or backing, such as
• using a logo which falsely implies government backing
• using a business name which implies public body status, or
• falsely claiming trade body membership.
d. falsely implying or stating that action has been taken when it has not, e.g. that civil action has been taken or that a court judgment has already been obtained.
e. falsely implying or stating that failure to pay a debt is a criminal offence or that criminal proceedings will be brought.
f. pursuing third parties for payment when they are not liable.
g. taking or threatening to take court action in the wrong jurisdiction, e.g. taking action against a Scottish debtor in an English court unless legally justified.
Office of Fair Trading 15
Physical/psychological harassment
2.5 Putting pressure on debtors or third parties is considered to be oppressive.
2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:
a. contacting debtors at unreasonable times and at unreasonable intervals
b. pressurising debtors to sell property, to raise funds by further borrowing or to extend their borrowing
c. using more than one debt collection business at the same time resulting in repetitive and/or frequent contact by different parties
d. not ensuring that an adequate history of the debt is passed on as appropriate resulting in repetitive and/or frequent contact by different parties
e. not informing the debtor when their case has been passed on to a different debt collector
f. pressurising debtors to pay in full, in unreasonably large instalments, or to increase payments when they are unable to do so
g. making threatening statements or gestures or taking actions which suggest harm to debtors
h. ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment
i. disclosing or threatening to disclose debt details to third parties unless legally entitled to do so
j. acting in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor either deliberately or through lack of care, e.g. by not putting correspondence in a sealed envelope and putting it through a letterbox, thereby running the risk that it could be read by third parties.
16 Debt collection guidance July 2003
Deceptive and/or unfair methods
2.7 Dealings with debtors are not to be deceitful and/or unfair.
2.8 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:
a. sending demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question, e.g. threatening debt recovery action to 'the occupier' or sending a payment demand to all people sharing the same name/date of birth as a debtor in the hope that contact with the correct debtor will be made.
b. disclosing debt details to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question, e.g. disclosing details to 'the occupier' of an address.
c. refusing to deal with appointed or authorised third parties, such as Citizens Advice Bureaux, independent advice centres or money advisers
d. contacting debtors directly and bypassing their appointed representatives
e. operating a policy, without reason, of refusing to negotiate with debt management companies
f. passing on debtor details to debt management companies without the debtors' informed prior consent
g. failing to refer on to the creditor reasonable offers to pay by instalments
h. not passing on payments received within a reasonable time resulting in delays that adversely affect a debtor's financial position.
i. failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued
j. requiring an individual to supply information to prove they are not the debtor in question, e.g. driving licences, passports, full name, date of birth, signatures
k. not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt.

Paul_Varjak

So, who do I name as the respondent? The chairman or Orange?

If I name the chairman and it comes to court, legal counsel for the chairman will say to the judge: "Paul Varjak is suing the wrong person".

The judge will agree, throw out my claim, and I will have to pay the other party's costs!

You seem to forget that that Orange Communications plc, as a limited company, is a legal 'person' in its own right that is separate from any officals of the company. I can only sue Orange - not the chairman!

Dazzler

Paul,

I had a disputed phone bill with Orange, over £600.

My dispute arose because I upgraded the phone and changed the tarriff. I never had confirmation of the new tarriff, and in fact, it wasn't changed from the old tarriff. Many calls to CS resulted in tarriff changes, etc, but never to the correct tarriff. In the end, they denied that the tarriff I had originally agreed to had never existed. I cancelled the direct debit (to try to force their hand to deal with it), they cut me off and the whole thing escalated.

I had many communications from Moorcroft debt recovery in Stockport to try to recover the "debt". They weren't really interested in me being in dispute over the bill.

In the end, after reading the Code of Practice, etc, I applied for Arbitration. It was easy to do online. You should be able to get the details from CS or I think it's in the Code of Practice ? If not, let me know, I'll try to dig them out.

My arbitration application asked for the debt to be cancelled, due to the stress, worry, and problems which were all of Orange's own making, and for Orange to be made to confirm tarriff changes in writing, and to offer 14 days get out on upgrades, as they do on new customer contracts.

The result of the arbitration application was that I started receiving calls from "The Executive Office" of Orange, who said they'd recalculated the bill, which worked out at something like £240. I asked about the stress, worry, harrassment, etc and he said that he couldn't wipe the "debt" out entirely, so what did I propose ? "Meet me half way ?" - "OK". So a £600+ "debt" was cut to £120, just like that.

He wanted payment there and then. I declined and asked him to confirm the details of the agreement in writing. He never did. After another couple of weeks, with the deadline for Orange to respond to the arbitration people looming, I got a letter from the "Regulatory Compliance Officer" (or something) of Orange, saying the full amount was cancelled and Orange regarded the matter as closed.

The arbitration people also called and wrote to confirm that I agreed that an agreement had been reached and the matter was closed.

In the terms of their licence to operate the network, Orange are obliged to offer arbitration and to be bound by it's decision. You are NOT bound by it and can still go to court if you like.

Good luck with Orange and the whole matter.

Hope this helps !

Daz.
:beer:

Dazzler

Found the website...

http://www.arbitrators.org/cisas/index.asp

Paul_Varjak

Thank you all.

I spoke to the Arbitration Service who put me in touch with the Executive Office at Orange.

A few days later I received a phone call from Orange saying that they had recalculated the bill and that they now owed me money. I did not bother asking any money for the distress but they did offer payment for the £2 I paid to Experian for a credit report plus another £4 so I could order further reports from Experian and Equifax to confirm that my credit history no longer had any black marks.

The executive office want their customers to ring them on a dreaded 0870 number but you can ring them (free) on 0800 079 0134.