Capquest Shysters

FTW

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

Answers above - or should I say more questions !

Royds TSB tried the falsification route with me - it didn't work.

But the CAG advice is correct - DCAs should never be supplied with any kind of signature for exactly that reason.

And it's as thechippy says - the fact that they're already sending private information to that address negates any need for any further verification.

They don't need it, they're not entitled to see it, and there's absolutely no reason why they should.

Hanky_Panky

FTW wrote: »

Royds TSB tried the falsification route with me - it didn't work. That's scary !

But the CAG advice is correct - DCAs should never be supplied with any kind of signature for exactly that reason.

And it's as thechippy says - the fact that they're already sending private information to that address negates any need for any further verification. What private information is that then ?

They don't need it, they're not entitled to see it, and there's absolutely no reason why they should.

Exactly the sort of nonsense they trot out. Ridiculous.

Hanky_Panky

thechippy wrote: »

It has actually happened - hence the advice.
They are being pedantic - they are quite happy to send delicate / private information to the op at that address, so they are already satisfied they are communicating with the correct person.

..........;)

You say pedantry - I think they are doing the correct thing confirming they are dealing with the correct person. Also please explain how they have already confirmed they are speaking to the correct person as I see no evidence of that yet.

thechippy

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

You say pedantry - I think they are doing the correct thing confirming they are dealing with the correct person. Also please explain how they have already confirmed they are speaking to the correct person as I see no evidence of that yet.

Can you read Mr anti CAG??

The OP has already stated they passed the security check on the phone and they are happy sending letters regarding the debt (sensitive information) to the OP's address.

So, why do they need a signature for further verification?
They are being their usual pedantic idiot selves.

FTW

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

Exactly the sort of nonsense they trot out. Ridiculous.

I'll cover your 'points' one at a time -

1) Royds TSB did try that, and attempted to attribute my signature to a credit card agreement (I've never had, or used, a credit card in my life). And I'd appreciate you not calling me a liar.

2) Information regarding 'personal financial matters'. Therefore, they must already be satisfied they have the right person, so why the need for any further 'verification'?


And exactly what problem do you have with CAG anyway? Did they kick you off there, or something?

Hanky_Panky

FTW wrote: »

I'll cover your 'points' one at a time -

1) Royds TSB did try that, and attempted to attribute my signature to a credit card agreement (I've never had, or used, a credit card in my life). And I'd appreciate you not calling me a liar.

2) Information regarding 'personal financial matters'. Therefore, they must already be satisfied they have the right person, so why the need for any further 'verification'?


And exactly what problem do you have with CAG anyway? Did they kick you off there, or something?

1) Overly sensitive - certainly not calling you a liar. Just the 'advice' the caggers trot out.
2) See above post

My issue with the CAG is that under the guise of 'helping' people they have actually caused significantly more problems that they have solved, given people false hopes and are generally a bunch of chancers.
I help people in genuine difficulty and have first hand witnessed people who are now significantly worse of thanks to the CAG than they would have been a few years ago. As much as I dislike the DCA's of this world that sail close to the wind e.g. Capquest they can't really hold a candle to the damage the caggers do and I most certainly wouldn't join thier site.

FTW

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

1) Overly sensitive - certainly not calling you a liar. Just the 'advice' the caggers trot out.

If their advice mirrors what I would do, then that's how it does come across.

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

2) See above post

If you're talking about thechippy's post about phone security checks and letters, then personally, I wouldn't be talking to them on the phone at all.

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

My issue with the CAG is that under the guise of 'helping' people they have actually caused significantly more problems that they have solved, given people false hopes and are generally a bunch of chancers.

In what way? And what makes your word more valid than theirs? Especially in view of the fact that CAG's made up of multiple people, and you're only one.

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

I help people in genuine difficulty and have first hand witnessed people who are now significantly worse of thanks to the CAG than they would have been a few years ago.

'Worse off', how?

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

As much as I dislike the DCA's of this world that sail close to the wind e.g. Capquest they can't really hold a candle to the damage the caggers do and I most certainly wouldn't join thier site.

Sounds to me like an embittered ex-site member. If you weren't on that site, then how come you're familiar with the damage that the site does?

tentimes

Sometimes you get debt collecting agencies (nasty ones) creating accounts on this forum and giving out information designed to keep people scared and indebted. The debt collection agency subsists on fear, mostly unfounded fear, that a collection company can do bad things to you. Now, in some cases they might be able to do 'bad' things to you, but 99% of the time they are just trying to make you scared, so that you pay them before eating etc. To find out whether one of their threats is true, go to a proper, real life, certified and well know advice agency, preferably government backed (like the CAB) and take their advice.

Don't let trolls on the forum scare you

P.S. Hanky Panky you should back your stuff up with facts.

FTW

Hanky_Panky wrote: »

1) Overly sensitive - certainly not calling you a liar. Just the 'advice' the caggers trot out.
2) See above post

My issue with the CAG is that under the guise of 'helping' people they have actually caused significantly more problems that they have solved, given people false hopes and are generally a bunch of chancers.
I help people in genuine difficulty and have first hand witnessed people who are now significantly worse of thanks to the CAG than they would have been a few years ago. As much as I dislike the DCA's of this world that sail close to the wind e.g. Capquest they can't really hold a candle to the damage the caggers do and I most certainly wouldn't join thier site.

If you're going to reply to points that are posted on threads, then keep them to threads - don't send PMs to me.

ykate1963

hi cap quest called me this morning i do not no what for they asked me for my door number and postcode i refused to give it them i have never heard of this company they said have you not received a letter in post i said no i have not because i have not i dont even no what they want .......so therefore i dont no what to do ...i shall just ignore them i suppose as i dont like the sound of this company from what people are putting on here