Being threatened with court action to pay back commission

InsideInsurance

Keep_pedalling wrote: »

OK I stand corrected, although I don't think refusing to sign for something provides any defence for claiming you did not receive it, because you clearly did but refused to accept it.

But refused means they didnt receive it, they can come up with any silly reason why their office temp didnt feel comfortable signing for something etc plus you are also dependent on how the postman deals with it.

I know with one courier where I refused delivery because the box was bashed to hell they just put it as a failed delivery, returned to depot. Again its easy enough for them to say they just forgot about it, didnt have time to go and collect it etc.

All these issues/ defenses are avoided by sending it with regular post and just ensuring you have the address correct.

Heliflyguy

dunstonh wrote: »

BTW, stop using texts. You will be asked for your evidence and you cannot print off text messages.

I have used phone supplied software to print texts and a Google search gives lots of options.

magic_bloke

Thank you all for taking the time to reply.

I really need to establish if the new company owns the debt. I guess if they issue a breakdown on company stationary they are claiming they do, so that's the next thing. I'll write a letter today to ask for a break down again. Maybe if it does go to court and I can show I've asked for

I have the name & address of the liquidator now and may contact them to see if they can shed any light on this.

Quentin

magic_bloke wrote: »

I'll write a letter today to ask for a break down again. Maybe if it does go to court and I can show I've asked for........

Keep a copy of the letter along with the proof of posting


If you send this request and they ignore it, or reply we'll show you via the court and then go straight to court then even if the court agree you owe the money, the fact that you can show you disputed the charge and requested a breakdown and were ignored should persuade the court to disallow the creditor's add ons to the claim (eg all court fees and any expenses they claim), and you would be left paying just what you are found to owe from the original agreement and no more.

magpiecottage

I am going to bypass the director and write a letter of complaint. My understanding is the company has a strict time limit to respond and they do not comply I can refer my problem onto FOS.

The director would read it anyway. However, I think you can go to FOS now. You have obviously made clear to him that you are dissatisfied that his business has demanded money without explaining why.

You have also asked that he communicate by letter only and he has ignored it.

In addition, he has communicated with you via text during antisocial hours (i.e. after 9 p.m.)

I suggest you go here and complete the form and submit it.


On page 2, say that the firm has given a final written answer (it has sent a text!)

Also say no legal action has started - this is important and why we want to get it before FOS now. Once they start legal action FOS will stand back (although if they have really sold on the debt then they cannot start legal action anyway).

You can upload copies of the letters (and the texts if you can get hold of them)

Page Three The business is Online Financial Solutions Limited, trading as Mortgage and Insurance Professionals. What you are unhappy about is "other", I think. The date of the transaction you are complaining about is the date of the first call. The reference is any reference on the first letter from them.

The date you complained is the date you wrote asking for proof you owed the money. For the record, the final response is the subsequent text. The fact that you asked for communication by letter and it was ignored shows that your request will not be complied with.

Get this submitted tonight if at all possible. That way it will be in the FOS system first thing tomorrow. If he then threatens you further, you can submit that to FOS as well.

They will take even less kindly to a business that attempts to bully a complainant than a court will. It can call into question whether they are fit and proper.

It can also bring the phoenixing to the attention of the regulator.