PE and DR+

nigelbb

edward123 wrote: »

If they do this as a practice then what could be the consequence for them as it would be an abuse of sorts of the small claims court would it not?

The same as if they bring loads of cases all of which fail i.e. they get classed as vexatious litigants & barred from bring further cases without express permission. Here from a speech by the Master of the Rolls http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/speeches/2006/speech-mor-30062006 is a description of the hallmarks of a vexatious litigant

“The hallmark [of a vexatious litigant] usually is that the plaintiff sues the same party repeatedly in reliance on essentially the same cause of action, perhaps with minor variations, after it has been ruled upon, thereby imposing on defendants the burden of resisting claim after claim; that the claimant relies on essentially the same cause of action, perhaps with minor variations, after it has been ruled upon, in actions against successive parties who if they were to be sued at all should have been joined in the same action; that the claimant automatically challenges every adverse decision on appeal; and that the claimant refuses to take any notice of or give any effect to orders of the court. The essential vice of habitual and persistent litigation is keeping on and on litigating when earlier litigation has been unsuccessful and when on any rational and objective assessment the time has come to stop.

fil_cad

interstellaflyer wrote: »

One thing I would mention about DR+ is that they seem to acidentaly on purpose allow their name to show in the window on the envelope, I had 3 letters from them and all three were clearly identifiable as from DR+, if they are doing the same to your mother then I'm sure this is ilegal as bailiff/Debt Recovery letters are supposed to be confidential,.

Sounds like this is a dirty standard practice from the scummers, all the 3 begging letters i got from them were the same

kittiej

I too am sort of caught up with these people so tonight, and because I was in a foul mood, I emailed DR+ and told them to stand by their threat and get the landowner involved.

I said I would be happy for the case to go before the resident Judge in the local County Court - which I would be because he's luuuurvely and because I have been rather successful in my local County Court, if anyone is watching :whistle:

Come along now, play the game PE, DR+

Half_way

fil_cad wrote: »

Sounds like this is a dirty standard practice from the scummers, all the 3 begging letters i got from them were the same

What offence would this have caused, or what regulation would have been broken if they post stuff out like this? and what action would/could be taken as a result?
( from google image search)

Coupon-mad

I think it's in breach of the Office of Fair Trading's guidance for debt collectors...which may be just 'guidance' but the OFT do have teeth regarding taking action for breaches and complaints. Still waiting for them to bite down on Roxburghe of course...by all accounts the OFT are still chewing that one over but haven't spat them out yet!

interstellaflyer

Coupon-mad wrote: »

I think it's in breach of the Office of Fair Trading's guidance for debt collectors...which may be just 'guidance' but the OFT do have teeth regarding taking action for breaches and complaints. Still waiting for them to bite down on Roxburghe of course...by all accounts the OFT are still chewing that one over but haven't spat them out yet!

I would say that there is a serious breach of Data protection.

interstellaflyer

^^ Sorry quoted wrong post

Half_way wrote: »

What offence would this have caused, or what regulation would have been broken if they post stuff out like this? and what action would/could be taken as a result?
( from google image search)

I would say that there is a serious breach of Data protection.

HO87

It would also seem to represent a breach of CSA guidelines in that the nature of the post will be apparent to others in the household or, potentially, neighbours. Envelopes and their contents (relating to alleged debts) are supposed to be otherwise anonymous.

shaniannie

Thanks guys!

Mum only brought the letter in, and not the envelope so I don't know how hers arrived, but I'll be sure to ask her to keep an eye out if (when) she gets another letter!

ReturnOfTheGoat

pogofish wrote: »

PE do seem to be throwing out a few cases just recently - which was something they virtually never did before.

A great many of these are likely to be dropped when a defence is lodged, or that PE will simply fail to show in court. The likelihood of a case succeeding is very slim indeed, so don't worry, the vast majority of their tickets are still going to go nowhere beyond the letter chain.

What dreadful advice! How the hell do you know what is going to happen if a defence is put in? If this advice is followed I suggest the likely outcome is a CCJ. Why would PE not bother showing up in court?

I assume this thread will be deleted if this person ends up with court papers. Strange how anything other than your biased opinions get removed from this site when your shoddy advice proves to have been just that.