Chased for debts that are not ours

prowla

The problem with just ignoring them is that if they take any further action it could be an effort to unravel afterwards if things come to a head.

I would suggest perhaps writing up a carefully worded pro-forma letter saying that they have made a mistake in attributing the debt to your company, to stop harrassing you with their spurious claims, etc., and responding to every one of their communications with that.

arcon5

prowla wrote: »

The problem with just ignoring them is that if they take any further action it could be an effort to unravel afterwards if things come to a head.

Not really. Ops company would simply file a defence 'No contract present. proceedings incorrectly issued again XXX Ltd, company number YYY rather than the correct company ZZZ Ltd'.
The claim wouldn't get far.

prowla wrote: »

I would suggest perhaps writing up a carefully worded pro-forma letter saying that they have made a mistake in attributing the debt to your company, to stop harrassing you with their spurious claims, etc., and responding to every one of their communications with that.

Read the op, he has already attempted to inform them of their mistake and they are not listening.

There is only so many you can respond to them and go round in circles before all you're left to do is ignore them and await for them to either put-up or shut-up.

prowla

arcon5 wrote: »

Not really. Ops company would simply file a defence 'No contract present. proceedings incorrectly issued again XXX Ltd, company number YYY rather than the correct company ZZZ Ltd'.
The claim wouldn't get far.

But what if they did credit check stuff, got bailiffs, etc. I admit I am not an expert in this area and am really just thinking aloud.

arcon5 wrote: »

Read the op, he has already attempted to inform them of their mistake and they are not listening.

There is only so many you can respond to them and go round in circles before all you're left to do is ignore them and await for them to either put-up or shut-up.

Sure; I was suggesting responding to every one in a quite simplistic manner and essentially telling them to sod off .

(From the claims company's perspective, they've probably heard that one a thousand times, so they are blindly going ahead on that basis.)

arcon5

prowla wrote: »

But what if they did credit check stuff, got bailiffs, etc. I admit I am not an expert in this area and am really just thinking aloud.

They would require a court order, which would be ops opportunity to defend the wrongful claim.

Other than sending field agents to the address (who again have no powers) there isn't really anything they can do (for which they have to right to touch property or enter the property without permission).

(From the claims company's perspective, they've probably heard that one a thousand times, so they are blindly going ahead on that basis.)

Exactly this.

They would have seen every trick in the book so unfortunately genuine errors are ignored.

RobertoMoir

prowla wrote: »

But what if they did credit check stuff, got bailiffs, etc. I admit I am not an expert in this area and am really just thinking aloud.

They can't send bailiffs round without a court order.

If they try to take the OP's company to court to obtain such an order, the OP's company have a pretty much open and shut defence by simply responding "Who's that? Not us."

If the debt collectors try and send "doorstep collectors" round claiming to be bailiffs and attempting to force their way into the building and demand money on that basis then the doorstep collectors are flirting with arrest.

As I say, I advocate one careful reply, noting that the DCA are talking to the wrong people and that further correspondence will be ignored, and then doing just that. The DCA's stupidity is no one else's problem.