Debt Collectors phoning neighbours.

Tootsie_Roll

For God's sake - stop taking things out of context. :rolleyes:

Bunnyinthelights

Tootsie Roll,
Can you please explain why I had a DCA do this to me when I had been in contact with them by both phone and letters AND CCCS had contacted them as well (as they acknowledged to me as well) AND they had been receiving regular payments that were on par with my minimum payments before my DMP? Hardly the actions of someone trying to 'run away' from my debt?

This forum does not have regular members trying to figure out ways to NOT pay their debt, in fact, we actively encourage people to NOT run away and repay the debt they owe.

This is hardly the place to play the jaded card.

Bunny

Tootsie_Roll

Bunnyinthelights wrote: »

Tootsie Roll,
Can you please explain why I had a DCA do this to me when I had been in contact with them by both phone and letters AND CCCS had contacted them as well (as they acknowledged to me as well) AND they had been receiving regular payments that were on par with my minimum payments before my DMP? Hardly the actions of someone trying to 'run away' from my debt?

No - have no idea. As I said though 'In the main (in other words for the majority of cases) it will be to locate absconding debtors'.

Bunnyinthelights wrote: »

This forum does not have regular members trying to figure out ways to NOT pay their debt, in fact, we actively encourage people to NOT run away and repay the debt they owe.

Please point out where I have made any reference to anybody posting on this site about this matter

Bunnyinthelights wrote: »

This is hardly the place to play the jaded card.

Bunny

Really ! :rolleyes:

LewisC_2

Tootsie_Roll wrote: »

For God's sake - stop taking things out of context. :rolleyes:

Example please? You can't just go throwing accusations around.

Kevicho

Hey people, website name purchased and the layout is pretty much done.

If anyone can help me fill it up with content, such as sample letters, tactics for dealing on the phone etc then please pm me.

As for tootsie roll, obviously you work for one of these companies or have some dealings with them, and i understand your point of view, i mean everyone should repay what they have borrowed.

However the tactics used by these companies is simply unnaceptable.

They do not contribute in any way to society, buying a debt on the cheap then harrasing someone, sometimes illegally, to pay up, to me doesnt constitute a great business plan.

CFC

Tootsie_Roll wrote: »

I completely understand why a 'normal minded person' such as yourself has this view. Any person looking from the outside in probably holds the same view. Spend a few weeks/months working for a lender listening to the lies and deceipt that occurs at every level and you will have a better understanding of why actions like this occur. Please remember that in the main we are talking about people who are deliberately trying to avoid repaying what they owe by moving address without informing the lender where they have gone. Why do these people deserve to get away with it ? When they take these sort of actions why do they deserve special treatment ?

It's all very well taking a moral stand point but please be aware of the facts behind the scenes before making a judgement.

This is exactly what I mean. As one of the people WITH a normal point of view, I consider that normal people outside a circle of 'debt collectors' and 'debt avoiders' (of which I believe there are very few on this forum, to be honest - have you not noticed how the odd one who posts to that effect gets jumped all over by the other posters?) have the right to pass judgement on those of you who involve us in your little games. And I can see that you understand exactly what I mean about having no axe of any kind to grind.

For me, the question is not, why should these people get away with it(assuming that they are trying to get away with it) but it is - why should outsiders be deliberately deceived or misled or inconvienced by companies who are trying to make some money and involved in a situation which is nothing to do with them so that a company can make a profit???

In other words - I do not care what potential lies or deceit that you say a debtor has spun to a business, I care about the lies and deceit that a business is spinning to an innocent, uninvolved, third party. And the question is not:
When they take these sort of actions why do they deserve special treatment ? It is - why should debt collecting companies, or any company, or any industry, be allowed special treatment in terms of lieing to or misleading members of the public????

Kevicho, in reply to your post - buying bad debt cheaply and then using completely underhanded and immoral tactics, involving outsiders in your quest to do your work for you (all it costs is a phone book and the price of a phone call) - it strikes me as a perfect business plan for making money for a company ( as companies will do pretty much anything to make money if permitted to - they care not a jot about society, companies are purely money driven organisations). It's just that it's disgraceful, unethical and very probably illegal, and this industry very clearly needs to be more heavily controlled.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feux Verts
Well surely if they have "absconded" then there is no point whatsoever in telephoning the neighbour of the address where the debtor has "absconded" from?

This sentence just proves how limited your understanding is.

I pass no judgement on you as a person, Tootsie, but I think that one moment's thought would have led you to recognise that it's not somebody's limited understanding, but their innocence in terms of recognising tactics that an 'debt-refusee' might use. And if they are innocent of recognition of such tactics, then perhaps you could understand that it appears to one such as myself, that you need to take off your 'debt collecting' hat more regularly as it is clearly vitiating any tendency to see the best in people and to be kind to others.

There's an old saying - touch tar and be defiled. I think that your work appears to be clinging to you. Personally I think you need to either stay off the forum threads or try to see it from a different perspective to the one that you have to take at work. It's not pleasant to see you unkindly poking at people who already feel somewhat thin skinned. I have no idea who FV is but I quote:

Good old FV - nothing like posting a bit of misinformation to further the debt avoidance cause of you and your fellow DHUK and DQ 'ers.

Bearing in mind that during these calls no information about the debtors circumstances will be discussed please explain exactly how it contravenes any law ?

Nice try though and over 2 pages of replies before I rained on your parade

mrbadexample

looby75 wrote: »

They would get a shock if they tried getting me to do that. I'd tell them exactly where they could shove their note in graphic detail :eek:

They'd get a shock from me too - namely an invoice for doing their work for them, and I don't come cheap!

Tootsie_Roll

CFC

I would be tempted to say something like 'bless you - for your faith in humanity' but that would probably be condescending.

I take you point about not matching fire with fire however I do believe very strongly that your very moralistic viewpoint is completely out of step with this reality. For example, I am opposed to arming the police in general but I recognise that it is an unfortunate necessity at times. Similarly in the debt collection world (which I have not belonged to for some time) it is necessary to take this type of action against someone who is deliberately trying to avoid repaying back what they owe. Would you be so gracious if someone owed you thousands and thousands of pounds and did everything they possibly could to avoid repaying you? Please also remember that in my experience nothing illegal happens at all (that's certainly not to say that occasionally someone steps over the line).

As I have also already pointed out I make no accusations against anyone on this site about this matter - yes I have rubbished FV's comments but perhaps you should know that we have corresponded on this type of forum for around 3 years and whilst he may have cleared his debts he has in the past actively encouraged people to avoid repaying their debts by whatever means necessary. They now use all their pent up anger and frustration to encourage other people who are experiencing financial difficulty to rail against the lenders, often leading to very poor advice for people who really need it and often quoting legislation such as the OFT guidlines completely incorrectly. This is dangerous for the people who come to this site looking for sound advice - the likes of FV will never be able to do this with the rather large chips on their shoulders and their axes to grind.

I don't work in debt collection but I did once, I have also been in very serious financial difficulty so can see perfectly well from both sides of the fence.

Feux_Verts

Tootsie_Roll wrote: »

yes I have rubbished FV's comments but perhaps you should know that we have corresponded on this type of forum for around 3 years and whilst he may have cleared his debts he has in the past actively encouraged people to avoid repaying their debts by whatever means necessary.

Unfortunately T.Roll cannot corroborate that statement - I'm sure, however, there are others on here who have been on other forums who can confirm that I have always encouraged folk to deal with their debt - but to not allow themselves to be bullied by Debt Collecting Companies. I've never encouraged debt avoidance. Why should I? I don't profit from it, DCA's are purely profit motivated - no regard whatsoever for anything or anyone else.

I'll ask the moderators to end this thread now - as that is what Tootsie wants to achieve. This is how he operates wherever he goes. People give good sound advice and he railroads the thread into a personal slanging match.

I've made my point and I'll let the good people of this forum to make up their own minds - I take my leave. I've sent my thanks to those who found my comments useful and who replied with their comments.

CFC

Tootsie_Roll wrote: »

CFC

I would be tempted to say something like 'bless you - for your faith in humanity' but that would probably be condescending.

I take you point about not matching fire with fire however I do believe very strongly that your very moralistic viewpoint is completely out of step with this reality. For example, I am opposed to arming the police in general but I recognise that it is an unfortunate necessity at times. possibly could to avoid repaying you? Please also remember that in my experience nothing illegal happens at all (that's certainly not to say that occasionally someone steps over the line).

Tootsie, thank you for the courtesy of your reply.

I employ over 100 people, in an environment which means that for most of them it is not a long term job. Many of them young and most of them fairly !!!!less and I don't think that there is any lie or distortion of the truth under the sun that I haven't heard for poor work, idleness or absence. However, those experiences just make me more careful not to translate the cynicism necessary at work on occasion into every situation that I come across.

I feel that you still genuinely don't get the point that I am trying to make - we have here debtors who owe companies, not owe individual private people, money. Although I am on occasion astonished at some people's inability to demonstrate deferred gratification in relation to spending and credit, I am also on occasion astonished at the profligacy which companies show in lending large amounts of money to people who often already owe money. On occasion I am also very thankful that I have not had difficult experiences in life which have pushed me into debt, as there are some genuinely very sad stories around.

We have here on the other hand also evidenced dubious tactics by said companies who want to make money. They often have bought a debt very cheaply, and so the individual does not owe thousands of pounds to them. The debt has been bought, when bought, as a speculative gamble. There is thus no moral imperative here - this is simply a company looking to make a profit.

Your analogy of arming the police does not hold water - the police are armed by the implicit consent of the public to avoid worse results that might arise from them not being armed. Debt collectors do not have an implicit mandate from society to behave in just any way they like, in prevention of some other possible worse consequence if they did not, as they serve no other function in society than simply to make employment for some people and profit for others, and/or to provide a service to other companies.

Now, I am sure that not all debt collecting agencies act in the same way, pushing the boundaries of acceptable behaviour in furtherance of their goal of obtaining profit. But it is quite clear that some do, and in that case it is quite clear to me that the industry needs more regulation.

I understand that you say you can see both sides of the fence, as one who was in debt, as well as by being one who was in the industry. What I think you don't appear to see fully is the view from outside the whole 'debt universe'.