Debt collector letter

fatbelly

So it was the Post Office account.

Did they sell their business to Talk Talk at some point? Maybe the Talk Talk rep could tell us.

Did they say when it was that you last made a payment?

You should write to ask the Post Office for a copy of their records - they can make a £10 charge if you do this as a formal Subject Access Request but may do it free if you send a polite letter.

I'm thinking this is going to be a case of blocking the creditor until this thing goes statute barred.

TurboTommy

It would certainly seem that way. The amount that the PO call-handler told me was 'outstanding' certainly matches.

I've done a quick Google and it certainly seems like TalkTalk and PO are now one in the same: I don't think that they were when I was a customer though.

They didn't mention when I made the last payment, unfortunately. It appeared that the lady only had notes on her system that related to them "trying to contact me", and not of my payments etc.

I'll draft a letter for the Post Office, and make the request. I'm hoping that they will provide me with some evidence of the 'zero-balance' statement that I received, or the correspondence between them and the Telecoms Ombudsman that led to them contacting me to say that it was PO's mistake and that I actually owe them nothing. Here's to hoping. Otherwise, I'm sure I'll be asking for some advice on how best to buy myself a little time.

Thanks,
Tommy

sourcrates

Classic case unfortunatly where a letter confirming the account was settled, and the remaining balance will not be chased, is worth its weight in gold.

Quiet common for creditors to do this, just to boost profits even more, unless you have the correct paperwork.

A very common tale from a largely unregulated industry.

TurboTommy

sourcrates wrote: »

Classic case unfortunatly where a letter confirming the account was settled, and the remaining balance will not be chased, is worth its weight in gold.

Quiet common for creditors to do this, just to boost profits even more, unless you have the correct paperwork.

A very common tale from a largely unregulated industry.

Unfortunately, this is seeming more and more likely.
Dependent upon what the Subject Access Request returns, I may be able to argue the case. Likewise, they may not have the relevant documents to support a case that I do indeed owe this amount.
Can the debt collection agency also gain access to these documents that I am requesting? (i.e. copies of bills from PO that state how much is owed, to back up their case?)

I suppose I can always go down the Ombudsman route again, and get them to investigate this further - they said that this would be something that they would do whilst on the phone to them earlier. I'm not too sure how that works, though, when the account is no longer in the hands of the PO.

Thanks,
Tommy

TurboTommy

Just to keep anyone who is following the thread updated, I decided not to send the Subject Access Request - for now, anyway.
I'm going to await a response from the Debt Collection Agency, to see what proof they provide, prior to requesting information from the PO. I have the email drafted and ready to send, but I noticed that they have up to 40 days to respond to this request (which may take longer if payment is required), so I thought it may well be worth it for me to not rush things - I may want those 40 days, where I can just bounce any correspondence from the Debt Collection agency back to them, with a letter stating that I am awaiting my documents from the Subject Access Request.

I'll keep the thread updated with any further developments.
Tommy

TurboTommy

A quick update:

On Saturday, I received two letters.
The first, notified me of an "administrative error" with regards to the first letter that I received, stating that they had been assigned my account from 'TalkTalk Telecom LTD'. This letter states that it was in fact 'Post Office Telecoms' that assigned my account to them, and they have attached a revised version of the initial letter, notifying me of the debt, with the correct company name on it.

The second letter that I received was a response to my "prove-it" letter.
They ask that I confirm the following:

• That I owned or occupied the address in question (which I did)
• The date that I entered and left the premesis (Which I cant remember. I know roughly, but have no documents to check this)
• That I confirm my date of birth

It states that this information if required to adhere to compliance of the Data Protection Act 1998.

Should I oblige with this information? I don't see what the dates that I lived in a premises has to do with the Data Protection Act...
Any advice on my next step would be much appreciated.

sourcrates

Hi Tommy,

It looks like you have reached an impass here.

They won't provide further proof without you confirming certain details, which suggests to me they are unsure as to weather you are the person of interest, or not.

You don't have to provide them with any further details, in fact I would advise against doing so.
Best response from you would be to write back stating you are under no obligation to provide them with any further personal information, and that if they are so unsure they have the right person, they should either produce evidence of your liability, or not contact you again about this matter.

That's what I'd do.

TurboTommy

Hi there Sourcrates,
That sounds like a good plan. I can understand name, address and DOB for Data Protection, but asking when I entered and left the premises strikes me as being a dig for information regarding whether or not this 'debt' (I use the term loosely) is mine. I'm yet to be told by them what this debt is concerning, I'm only presuming. As you say, I think its sensible to throw the ball back to them - they know exactly who I am, they managed to find me and my current address, after all.

Great advice, thank you. I'll draft something up.
By the end of all this, I'll have spent more on sending recorded delivery letters than what the bill was actually worth.

fatbelly

I agree. Do not give them any information that they do not already have.

They have already said that you owe them £180 (Purchased Post Office Telecoms) and that it is important that you repay this balance before 21st February 2016. They have not evidenced their position in the slightest.

There is a possible follow-up letter in this thread if they continue to demand payment

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/2607247

TurboTommy

fatbelly wrote: »

I agree. Do not give them any information that they do not already have.

They have already said that you owe them £180 (Purchased Post Office Telecoms) and that it is important that you repay this balance before 21st February 2016. They have not evidenced their position in the slightest.

There is a possible follow-up letter in this thread if they continue to demand payment

That link is super, thanks 'fatbelly'!
I've already drafted a letter that I'm going to sit on for a few days before sending - I'm in no rush eh.
I've cherry-picked all of the FCA rules to back up my point, which is exactly as it states in the template. I've given them nothing, thrown the ball back in their court.

Thanks again, your time is very much appreciated.
Tommy