HFO Services - Letters Re Non-Existent Debt?!

concernicus

Hi! Hope I'm posting this in the right place...

I'm looking for some advice/opinions.

I've received letters from HFO Services with reference to an unpaid account with Barclaycard amounting to almost £3000.

The letters are threatening the usual bailiffs and court proceedings and have come completely out of the blue. The first letter is dated 31st March and there are two letters following, one from 11th April and the latest is 20th April (I only opened them this weekend as I have been away).

I have NEVER had a Barclaycard account, and this is the first communication I have had from anyone regarding this.

I have checked my credit report with Experian, and no reference to Barclaycard on there at all (as expected since I have never even applied for a Barclaycard account).

What should I do? Send a letter to HFO asking them to prove the debt?

Culex

concernicus wrote: »

HI've received letters from HFO Services with reference to an unpaid account with Barclaycard amounting to almost £3000.

The letters are threatening the usual bailiffs and court proceedings and have come completely out of the blue. The first letter is dated 31st March and there are two letters following, one from 11th April and the latest is 20th April (I only opened them this weekend as I have been away).

I have NEVER had a Barclaycard account, and this is the first communication I have had from anyone regarding this.

I have checked my credit report with Experian, and no reference to Barclaycard on there at all (as expected since I have never even applied for a Barclaycard account).

What should I do? Send a letter to HFO asking them to prove the debt?

Some may suggest that, but I'd suggest merely keeping the letters safely to one side.

For all their threats, HFO are not really daft enough to sue someone whom they cannot prove incurred that debt.

concernicus

Culex wrote: »

Some may suggest that, but I'd suggest merely keeping the letters safely to one side.

For all their threats, HFO are not really daft enough to sue someone whom they cannot prove incurred that debt.

I'm just a little wary of leaving it not dealt with in any way.

It all seems really odd - having never had anything to do with Barclaycard!

fermi

Likely that HFO have mis-traced the account to you.

They seem to have taken over a big batch of these, and they are sending out letters to a lot of people who have nothing at all to do with the debts being chased.

However, did you ever have a Morgan Stanley/Goldifsh card, or some other that hasn't been paid?

Barclaycard have taken over accounts from some other providers over the years.

If you want to reply then there is a standard letter in this link.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=11570893&postcount=2

You can tweak it slightly to state categorically that you have never had a Barclaycard or owed anything to them.

concernicus

fermi wrote: »

Likely that HFO have mis-traced the account to you.

They seem to have taken over a big batch of these, and they are sending out letters to a lot of people who have nothing at all to do with the debts being chased.

However, did you ever have a Morgan Stanley/Goldifsh card, or some other that hasn't been paid?

Barclaycard have taken over accounts from some other providers over the years.

If you want to reply then there is a standard letter in this link.

You can tweak it slightly to state categorically that you have never had a Barclaycard or owed anything to them.

Thanks for the reply! Nope, no cards other than an Egg and a Halifax, both of which are current and almost clear.

The only other possibility is that it relates to my mother who has had debt problems. However, she has only had an Egg card and an HSBC card, both of which she now has payment arrangements for (with the latter having been problematic but touch wood, now going ok).

It has been suggested on another forum that I give Barclaycard Recoveries a call and see if they have any record of my details, in case of ID fraud.

Seems really odd that I've never had any contact prior to these three letters, that were all sent within the last few weeks.

Thank you for the reply - it's at least good to know that I'm not alone!

mo786uk

Hi

I think its very poor advice from various forums about not contacting debt collectors when you are not the debtor.

Remember, if the debt is not yours there is no way they can ever recover any money from you.

Granted, it is upto THEM to prove you (or any debtor) owes the money and take the debtor to court but not telling them you are not the debtor will only mean they will keep contating you.

As someone else has said, they have probably traced you incorrectly but the chances are there will be somesort of valid reason as to why they have contacted you.

If you refuse to answer them the chances are they will think it is you and further hound you. The other thing to bear in mind is that debts get sold to various companies so if this company fails in contacting you another company may get the same debt and then start contacting you as well further down the line.

These people that say they don't owe the debt collectors any money, refuse to contact them and then whinge when they get lots of contacts could resolve things much quicker themselves. Yes it is unfortunate that you are bothered with someone elses debt but there is not better system in place unfortunatley.

Culex

mo786uk wrote: »

Granted, it is upto THEM to prove you (or any debtor) owes the money and take the debtor to court but not telling them you are not the debtor will only mean they will keep contating you.

As someone else has said, they have probably traced you incorrectly but the chances are there will be some sort of valid reason as to why they have contacted you.

If you refuse to answer them the chances are they will think it is you and further hound you. The other thing to bear in mind is that debts get sold to various companies so if this company fails in contacting you another company may get the same debt and then start contacting you as well further down the line.

These people that say they don't owe the debt collectors any money, refuse to contact them and then whinge when they get lots of contacts could resolve things much quicker themselves. Yes it is unfortunate that you are bothered with someone elses debt but there is not better system in place unfortunatley.

However, as you might have learned if you'd read the postings here and elsewhere, the DCAs tend not to go away to bother someone else - and they certainly do not pass on information about who the debtor is not when the debt is sold on.

Perhaps something could be said for phoning the momzers using a PAYG phone that you reserve for such a purpose, or dialling 141 before their number so they cannot call you back and bother you interminably, but the DCAs will not believe that you are not their correct victim no matter what you might say to them.

The OFT should have acted to stop the harassment by DCAs, but it didn't do so effectively.

mo786uk

The debts will probably be of 2 types. 1 where the DCA has bought the debt, therefore if you show that you are not the debtor then they will probably leave you alone as it is not in their inetersts to chase the wrong person. The other type is when they are acting as a collections agent for the original creditor - if they don't collect the debt then it may well go back to the original creditor who may assign another DCA. The original DCA may or may not pass the information on that X people are not debtors but even if they don't it may take the heat off the person whilst the DCA is in charge of that account.

DCAs probably don't believe people are not the debtors because of all the game playing debtors (I have some sympathy for them) but chasing non debtors is unnacceptable.

With regards to regulation, its a tough job. Not made easier by all the questionable advice given on forums. For example, if a non debtor takes positive action to say they are not the debtor and the company keeps contacting them then the person has a valid complaint. If on the other hand the person just ignores 4 letters and claims harassment then the regulators quite frankly won't care because the DCAs defence will be that they had strong information to suggest the person was a debtor and that the person did not reply to them therefore suggesting either no one was getting the letter or they did have the correct person and were being ignored. In such a case the DCA may be going against the OFTs debt collection guidance on putting the onus of a non debtor to prove their innocent but they cannot possibly ever be found guilty of an offence of harassment.

Culex

mo786uk wrote: »

The debts will probably be of 2 types. 1 where the DCA has bought the debt, therefore if you show that you are not the debtor then they will probably leave you alone as it is not in their inetersts to chase the wrong person. The other type is when they are acting as a collections agent for the original creditor - if they don't collect the debt then it may well go back to the original creditor who may assign another DCA. The original DCA may or may not pass the information on that X people are not debtors but even if they don't it may take the heat off the person whilst the DCA is in charge of that account.

Yes, it may temporarily take the heat off the DCA's victim.

The staff at the DCA may all be revealed to have been the spawn of Satan.

The latter possibility may, by some, be considered to be the more probable.

DCAs probably don't believe people are not the debtors because of all the game playing debtors (I have some sympathy for them) but chasing non debtors is unnacceptable.

Indeed it is, but would not a determined, "won't pay" debtor also claim not to be the person sought by the DCA?

With regards to regulation, its a tough job. Not made easier by all the questionable advice given on forums. For example, if a non debtor takes positive action to say they are not the debtor and the company keeps contacting them then the person has a valid complaint.

See above.

If on the other hand the person just ignores 4 letters and claims harassment then the regulators quite frankly won't care because the DCAs defence will be that they had strong information to suggest the person was a debtor and that the person did not reply to them therefore suggesting either no one was getting the letter or they did have the correct person and were being ignored. In such a case the DCA may be going against the OFTs debt collection guidance on putting the onus of a non debtor to prove their innocent but they cannot possibly ever be found guilty of an offence of harassment.

They can be and should be convicted of that offence, if not also for one or more offences contrary to the Malicious Communications Act 1988, as sending threats to someone whom they do not know to be their intended target shews such deliberate, wanton and reckless indifference to the effect such threats could have on a non-debtor that it hardly seems necessary to prove the mens rea of such offences.

Moreover, it may be quite impossible for a non-debtor to "prove their innocent" (sic) to the delta-minuses who seem to run DCAs.

mo786uk

If there is a chance someone will get less contact from a DCA by contacting them then your suggestion to ignore them is deeply flawed and poor advice for the consumer.

If the DCA is extremley aggresive then it won't make a difference but in some cases it may do.

Your bitterness is noted though.

----

When DCAs trace people they use a number of methods. If they have contacted you incorrectly and you can show that then they may reaslise you are the wrong person and desist. If you really can show you are not the debtor then why would they pursue you?

----

I very much doubt the legislation you linked to would be used against a debt collection company (not least because there are 2 forms of regulation that may be more suitable).

Unfortunatley for regulators they need facts and real life examples to take action against these companies. Advising innocent people to ignore them doesn't help matters because from a regulatory point of views its more handy if the DCA has been told to get lost but still persists - they will then start breaching more and more rules.

If someone is just ignoring letters then to the outsider it appears they are just not that bothered about it. And as I said before, just ignoring letters will cause the DCA to send more - and they will probably have a defence of reasonably thining they had their man.

concernicus

This morning I have telephoned BarclayCard Recoveries. They confirmed that the details held for the account referenced in the letters do not match either myself or my mother.

So, I'm taking the standard letter linked above and tweaking it to state that I have never had a BarclayCard and also to add in the fact that I have spoken with BarclayCard and confirmed that the details do not match.