Refusing to refund eBay for their decision

dannny_2

RFW wrote: »

"Harassment is harassment.", is it?

Yes.

RFW wrote: »

Surely there are differences within and without the law depending how you define the word?

"Although harassment is not specifically defined it can include repeated attempts to impose unwanted communications and contacts upon a victim in a manner that could be expected to cause distress or fear in any reasonable person."

That includes debt collectors. See also CAB advice

http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/wales/debt_w/debt_action_your_creditor_can_take_e/harassment_by_creditors.htm#what_counts_as_harassment_by_a_creditor

RFW wrote: »

I'm sure some people consider that their mother calling them 3 or 4 times a day is harassment but she's not going to end up doing chokey for seeing what you had for your tea, is she?

She could do. If you told your mother not to contact you, and she did.

RFW wrote: »

I'd assume the law is also open to interpretation.

Not in this case

RFW wrote: »

One call a day from a debt collector is probably not considered harassment legally, 20 calls a day most definitely will.

A "course of conduct" is in this case at least 2 occasions. So if they call you twice when you have told them not to, then they're breaking the law. Doesn't matter if that's on the same day or the same year.

RFW wrote: »

Not sure how this turned into the 'pick on RFW' thread, I need a hug:D

Not getting at you at all.

mojos.revenge

RFW wrote: »

"Harassment is harassment.", is it? Surely there are differences within and without the law depending how you define the word? I'm sure some people consider that their mother calling them 3 or 4 times a day is harassment but she's not going to end up doing chokey for seeing what you had for your tea, is she?
I'd assume the law is also open to interpretation. One call a day from a debt collector is probably not considered harassment legally, 20 calls a day most definitely will.
Not sure how this turned into the 'pick on RFW' thread, I need a hug:D

They can harass all they like, but if you don't have the money they can't have it. Providing you follow the advice from the official agencies to the letter, use the templates they give you then you will be fine. Strangely enough the law is actually on the side of the debtor, which is just as well considering the amount of people struggling these days.

Wanderingpomm

They'll threaten you with debt collection but that's it.
I had the same problem with something i sold and i just closed my paypal account and ignored it.
You can reopen in a few months

RFW

mojos.revenge wrote: »

Why is my information incorrect, ask and debt advice centre and they will tell you the same thing. I was only being picky about the spelling. because you were saying I was giving incorrect information which I wasn't. If you have worked with bailiffs then you must be aware of the rules around debt.

You implied that anyone can offer £1 per month on any debt and they then couldn't be taken to court. That is obviously nonsense, it always depends on the circumstances of the debtor. Have a look at your original posts.

RFW

mojos.revenge wrote: »

They can harass all they like, but if you don't have the money they can't have it.

I know, I have also said that.

Rotor

Irn-Bru-Kid wrote: »

But my son has advise people owing around £30k to a credit card


Should that be advised?

It always amuses me when someone pulls a poster up on their grammar/vocabulary and then makes an !!! of themselves in their own post.

Bet you checked this a few times before you posted it.:D

RFW

dannny wrote: »

"Although harassment is not specifically defined it can include repeated attempts to impose unwanted communications and contacts upon a victim in a manner that could be expected to cause distress or fear in any reasonable person."

That was the original point, I do take the point that "they can harass you" was a poor choice of word. "They can mildly irritate you to the point of harassment within the law" would maybe be a better way of putting it.

I didn't think you were getting at me particularly, just seems to have descended into people arguing over semantics and spelling mistakes whilst mostly agreeing with each other.

To drag it back on topic

Widelats wrote:

I am refusing to refund eBay for their bad decision, what can eBay do about that?

Send you a couple of letters, maybe get a debt collection agency to call and then write it off, is what they will probably do. Other companies will have different approaches depending on the debt and the debtor.

skitler

theonlywayisup wrote: »

I think your font problem may be worse than any Paypal dispute!

some folk eh!! don't like change;)

Rotor

RFW wrote: »

That was the original point, I do take the point that "they can harass you" was a poor choice of word. "They can mildly irritate you to the point of harassment within the law" would maybe be a better way of putting it.

I didn't think you were getting at me particularly, just seems to have descended into people arguing over semantics and spelling mistakes whilst mostly agreeing with each other.

To drag it back on topic




Send you a couple of letters, maybe get a debt collection agency to call and then write it off, is what they will probably do. Other companies will have different approaches depending on the debt and the debtor.

No ,i think you were right all along. Dannny is defining 'harassment' strictly within the legal framework but, in effect, it has two meanings - one within the 'english dictionary' sense and the other in the legal sense.
You're both at cross purposes

sam.4000

I really can't believe the OP has refused to refund based in a cardboard divide missing from a phone box.

The original thread https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4771576