Aggressive Debt-Chasing – npower

mike216

A little over six months ago in early-April 2009 I moved flat and as I was effectively tied into a year-long loyalty-style discount tariff with npower for power and gas, decided to ‘take them with me’ as I moved, so that I would still get the £100 discount after one year. Notwithstanding the seemingly disjointed and endlessly frustrating process of transferring suppliers, which is an issue worthy of another rant, I have experienced what I feel is an unsatisfactory level of aggressive level of debt-chasing as I shall now outline.


In mid-Oct I returned from a holiday to find a letter from npower on the doormat; it turned out to be a fairly pink-shaded final demand for the sum of c.£40 relating to ‘gas services’ at my previous address. I found this odd as I seem to recall receiving at least one ‘final bill’ for the accounts at my old address, and as I say I had moved six months prior. I could not recall receiving an initial online bill or letter requesting this payment – had I done so I would have paid promptly as I always do. This letter quoted a seven-day period of grace after which they clearly threatened court action and the possibility of debt recovery agents to collect the debt. The letter was dated ten days prior and thus due to being on holiday I had missed the initial seven-day window.
I phoned npower the next day and explained the situation, and was reassured that although an initial bill had been sent out in early Sept, the debt-recovery process would not start for a period of several weeks and that as long as I paid the bill, which I did that evening, I would not hear anything about the matter again. This was just a heavy-handed tactic to scare customers into paying bills they may have sat on for a few weeks, the customer adviser effectively admitted to me.
However on getting home from work that evening I found what appeared to be a hand-delivered letter from a debt-collection agency (no reference to npower on the envelope or letter) stating that account # (gas a/c from previous address) was overdue and I should take steps to pay the debt or they would seek to recover the debt by other means etc. I was a little perturbed by the speed with which this follow-up demand had been sent and the impersonal nature however I put it down to the 10-day delay due to my holiday and at any rate I paid the bill that evening.


Then the postal strikes hit, and about a week to ten days later I received another letter, this one clearly from a debt collection agency relating to this same ‘unpaid’ bill (which I had of course now paid) saying that they had called and I wasn’t in, and that they had the power to enforce the debt by confiscation of property to cover it. Having sent the letter, regardless of whether it was read or not, was sufficient notice to enter my home to do so, should I not pay.


I appreciate that the timings of various events here have transpired against me however I believe that the above communiqu!s from npower and their ‘thugs’ are grossly disproportionate to the actual sum owed, and for someone with no history of missed or late payment. I will be voting with my mouse, so to speak, when the opportunity comes and switching away from npower and will make it clear why I am doing so.


Has anyone else experienced such heavy-handed treatment from one of the ‘big-six’ utilities?

kippen_noedel

mike216 wrote: »

that they had the power to enforce the debt by confiscation of property to cover it.

Possibility I am out of date on legislation but I thought the only people who could seize/confiscate property were Bailiffs whom had a court order giving them permission to do so.

Inform them in writing. recorded delivery that the bill has been paid and you dispute their claim.

Then point them to the nearest cliff

KimYeovil

Nothing remotely aggressive or heavy-handed. If it works it works. Surely cheaper prices for you are preferable to treating those who do not pay their bills on time with kid gloves? If an automatically generated letter from a computer scares scum in to paying more promptly surely that is good? Of course, in your case you are innocent - but surely you just shrug and are happy that nPower are on the cases of those who just don't bother their backsides?

I really do not understand your complaint.

DVardysShadow

KimYeovil wrote: »

Nothing remotely aggressive or heavy-handed. If it works it works. Surely cheaper prices for you are preferable to treating those who do not pay their bills on time with kid gloves? If an automatically generated letter from a computer scares scum in to paying more promptly surely that is good? Of course, in your case you are innocent - but surely you just shrug and are happy that nPower are on the cases of those who just don't bother their backsides?

I really do not understand your complaint.

That really takes the biscuit. If it scares scum, what does it do to decent people who pay their way? The fact that you don't understand the complaint says more about you!

markharding557

KimYeovil wrote: »

Nothing remotely aggressive or heavy-handed. If it works it works. Surely cheaper prices for you are preferable to treating those who do not pay their bills on time with kid gloves? If an automatically generated letter from a computer scares scum in to paying more promptly surely that is good? Of course, in your case you are innocent - but surely you just shrug and are happy that nPower are on the cases of those who just don't bother their backsides?

I really do not understand your complaint.

you might be happy to be treated like crap by these companies,dosen't mean we all have to.

KimYeovil

DVardysShadow wrote: »

That really takes the biscuit. If it scares scum, what does it do to decent people who pay their way? The fact that you don't understand the complaint says more about you!

markharding557 wrote: »

you might be happy to be treated like crap by these companies,dosen't mean we all have to.

Decent customers are wryly bemused.

I am happy to be treated to cheaper bills. You want more expensive bills? <shrug> Strange boy.

My point remains that for every one unjust foul-up between the cracks there will be literally hundreds, if not thousands, of cases where the demands are just (and effective). I would be content to sort the tiresome confusion up without resorting to self-defeating and contrary to my self-interest (and the interest of other customers) rhinoplasty.

DVardysShadow

KimYeovil wrote: »

My point remains that for every one unjust foul-up between the cracks there will be literally hundreds, if not thousands, of cases where the demands are just (and effective)

Hundreds? Thousands? Probably just dozens.

But putting in threats involving illegal acts such as confiscation of property as the OP states "and that they had the power to enforce the debt by confiscation of property to cover it" is totally unacceptable. You diminish yourself by attempting to justify it.

Premier_2

KimYeovil wrote: »

...I really do not understand your complaint.

I think the OP is upset that someone has the cheek to demand money they believe they are owed?

I think the OP is further upset that as they have failed to pay or dispute the money demanded, the letters become more threatening. This obviously has the effect on some recipients to make them pay up for little cost or effort to the creditor (but more than they should have to pay).

But this newbie obviously knows his rights and knows that some of the threats are meaningless without a valid court order ... which ultimately the creditor will probably have to obtain and add those costs to the paltry amount currently owed and not paid or disputed.

Looks like the newbie has some supporters too jumping in. :rolleyes:

Why doesn't this surprise me? :cool:

Mynewt

Npower have done absolutely nothing wrong (in this particular case), and i'm sorry to say that you're simply over-reacting.

For every one custoemr that cannot or simply does not pay a bill everyone else's bill increases to meet the bad debt. Now should Npower simply continue to let this happen? or should they take steps to attempt to prevent or reduce this?

I'm assuming everyone with a sensible head upon their shoulders will have chosen the latter. With a custoemr base in the millions it is impossible for an human being to review each account to make unqiue descions for that it.

So everyone is treated excactly the same, when an account reaches a checkpoint, for example outstanding balance on account exceeding 14 days letter one is queued for printing, 14 days later letter 2 and so on. You account is no differnet than any other.

The only difference is between letter 1 and letter 2 in thsi example you have sent payment whcih did not arrive until after letter 2 has been sent. I'm assuming since then you have heard nothing more?

In addition to just sending letter after letter Npower employ an in-house debt collection service that they'll advertise as being completely seperate from Npower, its a common practise in the financial market, as sometimes seeing a letter from an unfamilar company will be enough to draw the attention of a consumer to something they may have been throwing away beleiving it to be junk mail

Yes I understand you feel perosnally aggrieved, but deal with it, Npower are securing payments for services provided and ensureing that as far as possible other people are not paying for someone else's problem. YOu know you've paid the bill, I assume Npower now know also so what's the problem? (also bear in mind that extra leniancy would have been provided before any of the actions described on their letters would have been taken, due to postal delays they amy say in 10 days time x, y and z will happen bu tthey'll wait 10 to 14 before starting the ball rolling.)

kippen_noedel

DVardysShadow wrote: »

That really takes the biscuit. If it scares scum, what does it do to decent people who pay their way? The fact that you don't understand the complaint says more about you!

Possibly she missed the bit where he said he had already paid the bill but was receiving continued unwarranted demands for monies and actually illegal threats of confiscation over monies which were not in fact due.

If you read her posts, she does that a lot. doesn't come across as a very nice person but sometimes she does get it right, only sometimes though.

DVardysShadow

kippen_noedel wrote: »

Possibly she missed the bit where he said he had already paid the bill but was receiving continued unwarranted demands for monies and actually illegal threats of confiscation over monies which were not in fact due.

If you read her posts, she does that a lot. doesn't come across as a very nice person but sometimes she does get it right, only sometimes though.

I have read her posts. I think it is actually the illegal threats of confiscation which she is all in favour of.