Sneaky Debt collection Letter - Ruthbridge

djheath

Hi,

I just came home to find a letter on my doorstep which is addressed to the occupier of my flat. When I opened it, just had the words RuthBridge limited printed on the top and then the words:
"Please contact immediately 0800 6888 310 quoting ref xxxx"
And that was it!!

I haven't phoned and did a quick search or Ruthbridge and found an interesting article about the company on BBC Watchdog website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/watchdog/2009/02/ruthbridge_chasing_debts_1.html
It seems they are a cheeky debt collection agency trying to get debts paid no matter what course!! Well I don't have any debts at all. I only have a mortgage. I know a tenant of my flat who lived in it before I bought it had massive debts, because for a time I was receiving real debt collection letters before I simple spoke to the company and they were stopped. Obviously they still owe money I expect!!

I plan to ignore the letter, but am I right in thinking this company can do nothing to chase me for someone else's debt (if it really exists)? For starters they don't know my name since they sent the letter to the occupier.
Is there anything I should do to report this practice to the OFT or anyone?
Thanks,
David

DarkConvict

They can only pursue the debtor. They may not talk to 3rd parties without the debtor permission, and thy can never pursue anyone else but the debtor for the money.

Sending letters to the occupier is also against OFT standards - http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

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:
j. acting in a way likely to be publicly embarrassing to the debtor either
deliberately or through lack of care, for example, 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.
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, for example, 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, for example, disclosing details to 'the occupier' of
an address.

djheath

DarkConvict wrote: »

They can only pursue the debtor. They may not talk to 3rd parties without the debtor permission, and thy can never pursue anyone else but the debtor for the money.

Sending letters to the occupier is also against OFT standards - http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

Brilliant! That's the kind of stuff I like to know!
I've just done a search on the forum and it seems these guys are quite prolific at being really bad at obeying the rules!

DarkConvict

Unless they get fined significantly they will keep on doing it because it gets in the money. If you ring a DCA up, they often will assume your the debtor and start asking you to pay up and such, or prove you are not the debtor but still keep sending letters. I just ignore them

djheath

Just for an update: I received another letter today from the same company saying that I hadn't responded to the last letter so they will be sending someone round in the next 5 days. This letter was actually addressed to someone though rather than just "the occupier". It was addressed to a person who used to rent my flat out before I bought it 2 and half years ago. No idea who or where this bloke is now.

Just out of interest if someone does come round, do I have to prove to them who I am as I am worried they will just take my name and then start sending me letters and chasing me for the other persons debt, like they have done to other people according to the watchdog report. Can I just tell them to sling their hook?

DarkConvict

Doubtful they will turn up, but they can Sling their hook. You do not have to prove who you are. These agents have no more rights than a person coming to ask for directions, any abusive, aggressive behaviour should be reported to the police. I.e. If they are threatening you to pay money, they are committing a crime, can't remember the name something to do with demanding money with menace.

It is not your debt, so do not fear them, tell them you are not the person they are looking for, you have written back already stating this fact. And close the door.

savingmummy

My mum had debt letters coming to her address and they were not in her name (she has lived there 39 years).
She went through the hassels of writing and calling only to be told politely to `shut up and pay`. In the end she went to CAB, the kind fella there contacted the debt collections offices and sorted it out - took him a good hr to sort it!
My mum paid £20 voluntary as if the CAB hadn`t of done this she would still be getting them now.

planning_ahead_2

djheath wrote: »

Just for an update: I received another letter today from the same company saying that I hadn't responded to the last letter so they will be sending someone round in the next 5 days. This letter was actually addressed to someone though rather than just "the occupier". It was addressed to a person who used to rent my flat out before I bought it 2 and half years ago. No idea who or where this bloke is now.

Just out of interest if someone does come round, do I have to prove to them who I am as I am worried they will just take my name and then start sending me letters and chasing me for the other persons debt, like they have done to other people according to the watchdog report. Can I just tell them to sling their hook?

If the letter wasn't addressed to you then you really shouldn't have opened it. You should have just marked it - no longer at this address - or - not known at this address - and returned it to the sender. It is against the law to open mail which is not addressed to you and this is set out in The Post Office Act 1953

DarkConvict

I always believe that was the case, actually the law on the matter is you should not open mail with intent to cause detriment to the intended recipient. So opening mail for a previous tenant isnt illegal. If it contained £200 cash and you took it then it would, the fact they were planning/saying to send someone round is actually of interest to the current occupier.

DVardysShadow

planning_ahead wrote: »

If the letter wasn't addressed to you then you really shouldn't have opened it. You should have just marked it - no longer at this address - or - not known at this address - and returned it to the sender. It is against the law to open mail which is not addressed to you and this is set out in The Post Office Act 1953

Sorry, you are mistaken. Once the mail has been delivered to the address on it, it is only an offence to open it if it is to the detriment of the person addressed. Effectively, if it comes through your door, you can open it as long as you deal with it honestly.

It would be intolerable not to be able to open such mail which may convey threats to your peace and security.

planning_ahead_2

I stand corrected - honestly believed that was the case though.

However I still think the OP would have been better off sending it back return to sender (possibly after opening it as it's not against the law....but sending it back so they know it didn't reach it's intended recipient)