Sky - Debt Collector error

trickky33

Shadow- Just want to point out that if SKY were foolish enough to take me to court, they would have no evidence of an engineer connecting a modem at my property nor would they have any evidence of any data/info (not sure what the technical name would be) passing down my line. the modem they sent is still in a box waiting to be connected. I haven't mentioned court to SKY but I did ask when I officialy become a billable broadband customer and they told me it was when the engineer has connected their equiptment and I sign his hand held PDA, I am not certain but I believe that this would be the crucial evidence needed for SKY to achieve a win at small claims.

To put the "court" issue to bed once and for all, SKY do not have one piece of evidence with which to obtain a win in court. I have more than enough evidence, not even SKY deny this, which is why I am so confident that I won't have to go to court to get my administrative costs paid.

Any more talk of court and I might just have a stroke :rotfl:

DVardysShadow

trickky33 wrote: »

I think maybe I may be asking in the wrong place.

I think you are asking the wrong question. As I read your opening, sky failed to deliver and you cut the money supply.

OK, you seem to be on top of your evidence, although overall, I think your approach does leave you vulnerable. There s a very good reason for talking about how these things may play out in court. It is more or less the final authority, which will ultimately govern how Sky deal with you, even if the matter never goes there.

There is a lot of waste of time and effort in howw you are looking at this. Whether it is lawful for Sky to involve a debt collector - it is if they believe you to have a debt to them. So convince them you are not in debt to them. Billing them for time and effort on your part - good luck with that.

trickky33

DVardysShadow wrote: »

Whether it is lawful for Sky to involve a debt collector - it is if they believe you to have a debt to them. So convince them you are not in debt to them. Billing them for time and effort on your part - good luck with that.

Thank you for sticking with it, so it is lawful for them to involve a debt collector if they believe I have a debt to them. I am still searching for the relevant legislation that says so, so if you could give me any tips on where to find it I would be very grateful.

As for billing them, my administrative costs are far less than what SKY would have to pay in solicitors fees alone, should they wish a day out in court, but they more than cover the time and effort I put in for them (I'm not just doing it for the giggles) As I said earlier this won't be the first time I have billed a company for my having to correct their faults, and I always make sure I get an admission of fault before I send my NOTICES and that's the bit that is vital, admission of fault, it's impossible for them to retract this admission without evidence to rebut it. The threatening debt collectors "notices" I have endured due to SKY'S error will obviously push my fees up a little this time, but in my experience as long as my costs are not spurious or frivolous I should get a call from someone "authorised" to pay long before I have to consider issuing a claim. This is I believe because once I get their admission it isn't a case of who wins it's merely a case of how much the person admitting fault/dishonor ends up paying.

Again, thank you for sticking with me and for your answer to my original question.

Rich.