Suing DCA for harrassment etc

Computersaysno

Fosterdog wrote: »

it is a criminal not civil matter so up to the police to deal with.

Definitely wrong.

Civil remedy.E+W
(1)An actual or apprehended breach of section 1 may be the subject of a claim in civil proceedings by the person who is or may be the victim of the course of conduct in question.
(2)On such a claim, damages may be awarded for (among other things) any anxiety caused by the harassment and any financial loss resulting from the harassment.
(3)Where—
(a)in such proceedings the High Court or a county court grants an injunction for the purpose of restraining the defendant from pursuing any conduct which amounts to harassment, and
(b)the plaintiff considers that the defendant has done anything which he is prohibited from doing by the injunction,
the plaintiff may apply for the issue of a warrant for the arrest of the defendant.
(4)An application under subsection (3) may be made—
(a)where the injunction was granted by the High Court, to a judge of that court, and
(b)where the injunction was granted by a county court, to a judge or district judge of that or any other county court.
(5)The judge or district judge to whom an application under subsection (3) is made may only issue a warrant if—
(a)the application is substantiated on oath, and
(b)the judge or district judge has reasonable grounds for believing that the defendant has done anything which he is prohibited from doing by the injunction.
(6)Where—
(a)the High Court or a county court grants an injunction for the purpose mentioned in subsection (3)(a), and
(b)without reasonable excuse the defendant does anything which he is prohibited from doing by the injunction,
he is guilty of an offence.
(7)Where a person is convicted of an offence under subsection (6) in respect of any conduct, that conduct is not punishable as a contempt of court.
(8)A person cannot be convicted of an offence under subsection (6) in respect of any conduct which has been punished as a contempt of court.
(9)A person guilty of an offence under subsection (6) is liable—
(a)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, or a fine, or both, or
(b)on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, or a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or both.

Money-Saving-King

This doesn't really seem to be about harassment, it more seems to be a way of thinking will suing a DCA be able to raise some money so the op can buy a Motorbike!

fermi

Google:

Roberts v Bank of Scotland

Lisa Ferguson v British Gas

Harrison v MBNA/Link

to name a few.

Each case would be very specific and the burden of proof high, so not for the faint hearted.

Computersaysno

Thanks.

Not as simple as as I thought.

tinkerbell28

Computersaysno wrote: »

Thanks.

Not as simple as as I thought.

I did say...

fermi

May be useful --> http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/showthread.php?42656-Protection-from-Harassment-Act-1997-Damages-NEW-TEMPLATE-Roberts-v-BoS-2013&p=369772#post369772

arcon5

Computersaysno wrote: »

Who said I was experiencing a problem?

For the record I am not being harassed by DCA's and don't need any advice on how to deal with them or with debt etc.

I am simply looking for what I asked for in my first post.

Let me rephrase then!

So what exactly is the problem [STRIKE]you[/STRIKE] the person being harassed is [STRIKE]are [/STRIKE]experiencing? And what steps have [STRIKE]you[/STRIKE] they taken so far?

ThumbRemote

tinkerbell28 wrote: »

I did say...

Really?

I thought you claimed "You won't get any compo if you don't have losses you can quantify" ie no compensation.

As opposed to the later comment "the burden of proof high, so not for the faint hearted" ie possible compensation.

mo786uk

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2013/882.html

The above case telsl you everythign you need to know

You do NOT need to have suffered a financial loss.

But as suggested what happened will need to be worse than just everyday activity -the DCA will have had to have overstepped the mark somwwhat - in the case above they made 500+ phone calls and sometimes said they would keep calling until the debtor complied.

Computersaysno

arcon5 wrote: »

Let me rephrase then!

So what exactly is the problem [STRIKE]you[/STRIKE] the person being harassed is [STRIKE]are [/STRIKE]experiencing? And what steps have [STRIKE]you[/STRIKE] they taken so far?

I'll try to be clearer.

I don't have a problem with harassment from a DCA.