Debt collector letter

ziggy81ziggy

Hi All,
I got the same, same Talk Talk letter arriving on Saturday demanding payment by the Sunday.
I called Talk Talk - they'd not heard of PDCS but had heard of the JC people and had a note on their system that letters had been sent out by mistake but not a list of the people sent to.
Sent the prove it letter (as per template found on here, sent recorded and not signed - thank you very much!) one week later which crossed in the post with their new demand and correction letter stating it was the Post Office instead but minus the payment due by date - it still took 8/9 days to arrive according to the date sent printed on the letter.
Second prove it letter sent and got a reply much quicker than it apparently takes the initial demands to work their way through the postal system!
This was a demand for personal details required by them under the Data Protection Act before they can reply to my prove it letter, they want date of birth, confirmtion I had lived at a certain previous address and the dates I entered and left that previous address - the letter wasn't dated, had no reply by date on it and from reading around this website I know I don't have to supply anything as the onus is on them.

The address they provided is my previous address and I had a Post Office account but I closed it correctly. I've no paperwork as it was 6 years ago this summer, my friends moved in when I left (all above board with new tenancy agreements etc) and as I was still visiting the house at least once or twice a week I was picking up any stray post - of which there was never anything from the Post Office for the next 2 years?!

I'm not going to provide them with any personal details but I'm not sure which letter to send next?

I've looked at the link from fatbelly - is it the letter in the last post as the first one is the prove it letter I've already sent?

Thanks for all the help!

TurboTommy

ziggy81ziggy wrote: »

Hi All,
I got the same, same Talk Talk letter arriving on Saturday demanding payment by the Sunday.
I called Talk Talk - they'd not heard of PDCS but had heard of the JC people and had a note on their system that letters had been sent out by mistake but not a list of the people sent to.
Sent the prove it letter (as per template found on here, sent recorded and not signed - thank you very much!) one week later which crossed in the post with their new demand and correction letter stating it was the Post Office instead but minus the payment due by date - it still took 8/9 days to arrive according to the date sent printed on the letter.
Second prove it letter sent and got a reply much quicker than it apparently takes the initial demands to work their way through the postal system!
This was a demand for personal details required by them under the Data Protection Act before they can reply to my prove it letter, they want date of birth, confirmtion I had lived at a certain previous address and the dates I entered and left that previous address - the letter wasn't dated, had no reply by date on it and from reading around this website I know I don't have to supply anything as the onus is on them.

The address they provided is my previous address and I had a Post Office account but I closed it correctly. I've no paperwork as it was 6 years ago this summer, my friends moved in when I left (all above board with new tenancy agreements etc) and as I was still visiting the house at least once or twice a week I was picking up any stray post - of which there was never anything from the Post Office for the next 2 years?!

I'm not going to provide them with any personal details but I'm not sure which letter to send next?

I've looked at the link from fatbelly - is it the letter in the last post as the first one is the prove it letter I've already sent?

Thanks for all the help!

Hi ziggy,

Im sorry that you find yourself wrapped up in this sham also.
It certainly sounds like we have received the same correspondence from this company - the dates on my letter also didn't make too much sense, unless they sent them via outer-Mongolia.
I also had the same letter requesting information for Data Protection. It's a little bit baffling, as this is the third letter(s) that has been sent to me, regarding "my" personal business, and they now wish for me to confirm my identity. Notice how the letter asks for you to call to confirm these details - it seems that they want to get you on the phone to pass your personal details and then wangle some money out of you with their threats. You've done absolutely the right thing by sending letters (given also how long it takes to send one and get another reply, the weeks are just flying by).

The link kindly provided by fatbelly was extremely useful, as it quotes the relevant legislation with regards to the contact that they are making with you and how they should be acting. I used the letter almost in full, but added a few of my own comments to it too.
I used the letter in the first post, as a believe that the letter further down is one to file a formal complaint that you wish them to investigate (i.e. if they keep contacting you, demanding money, when they still haven't proven that the debt is yours). As they have not requested any payment in this most recent correspondence, I found the first letter more useful to "throw the ball back into their court", so to speak.

The first letter specifically states that the onus is on them to establish that the debt is yours under the FCA rules (7.14.4) - for that, they would need evidence. I'm happy to PM you a copy of what I sent so that you can see where I went with it. If you wish me to do so, it's probably best not to send a carbon copy and to add your own bits to it, so that it doesn't look like we've just ripped it from the internet

As a further note - I'm considering reporting TalkTalk to the Ombudsman for this tactic, attempting to exploit previous customers of money, on the grounds that they know most people will no longer have documents from so many years ago to provide evidence to the contrary. If I do so, I think it would be best if we all did the same, to get this investigated.

Thanks,
Tommy

TurboTommy

Yesterday I received a response to my last letter (basically the template linked to by Fatbelly, with a few extra bits thrown in).
Well, I say a response, I received the same letter as I received previously, saying that they cannot disclose and information in regards to the account and requesting the same information: If I resided at the address in question, the dates I entered and exited the property and my DOB.
There is also an extra paragraph underneath that states:

"We would like to confirm that under the Data Protection Act, companies and organisations are obliged to take reasonable steps to confirm the identity of a customer before proceeding with a call relating to a personal account or information. They must have safeguards in place to prevent people contacting under a false pretence of acting on behalf of the customer. Companies also have an obligation to their customers to make sure their personal information is handled properly."

They also ask that I call them to confirm the aforementioned points again - which I won't be doing!
So, shall I send another copy of my last letter back, or something else?

Thanks,
Tommy

ziggy81ziggy

Hi Tommy, sorry for the delay in replying when you so kindly replied to me! I travel a lot with work - hope Pastdue don't mind the long delays between letters!

From a National Debtline chat I just had:

Me:
Hi, I'm being chased for a debt (by a collector, not the original company) which I don't believe to be mine. I have sent a 'prove it' letter but they have replied requesting that I confirm personal information about myself including my DoB and previous address history. Do I have to do this? I fear giving personal information, especially when I have read horror stories about this company changing details so that you match what they're looking for!

Them:
Hi XXXX, you are under no legal obligation to provide this type of information. As you have already sent the dispute letter and asked them to prove the debt is yours and they have not provided any evidence to show that it is your debt, I would recommend you now go down the complaints route.

I will send a link for our fact sheet on complaints. Make it in writing and send recorded delivery and keep a copy for your own records. If they do not respond within 8 weeks to the complaint or you are not happy with the reply, escalate this to the Financial Ombudsman.

So as I'm new it won't let me include a link but it was for factsheet 34 complaining about your lender.

Think that answers it?!

rizla_king

TurboTommy wrote: »

Yesterday I received a response to my last letter (basically the template linked to by Fatbelly, with a few extra bits thrown in).
Well, I say a response, I received the same letter as I received previously, saying that they cannot disclose and information in regards to the account and requesting the same information: If I resided at the address in question, the dates I entered and exited the property and my DOB.
There is also an extra paragraph underneath that states:

"We would like to confirm that under the Data Protection Act, companies and organisations are obliged to take reasonable steps to confirm the identity of a customer before proceeding with a call relating to a personal account or information. They must have safeguards in place to prevent people contacting under a false pretence of acting on behalf of the customer. Companies also have an obligation to their customers to make sure their personal information is handled properly."

They also ask that I call them to confirm the aforementioned points again - which I won't be doing!
So, shall I send another copy of my last letter back, or something else?

Thanks,
Tommy

in other words the scammers were never certain they were chasing the right person in the first place

they then try to hide behind the data protection act when found out.

rizla_king

FOS cant deal with these complaints guys as its a phone account

falls outside their remit sadly

FOS can only deal with complaints about collection of certain types

TurboTommy

ziggy81ziggy wrote: »

Hi Tommy, sorry for the delay in replying when you so kindly replied to me! I travel a lot with work - hope Pastdue don't mind the long delays between letters!

From a National Debtline chat I just had:

Me:
Hi, I'm being chased for a debt (by a collector, not the original company) which I don't believe to be mine. I have sent a 'prove it' letter but they have replied requesting that I confirm personal information about myself including my DoB and previous address history. Do I have to do this? I fear giving personal information, especially when I have read horror stories about this company changing details so that you match what they're looking for!

Them:
Hi XXXX, you are under no legal obligation to provide this type of information. As you have already sent the dispute letter and asked them to prove the debt is yours and they have not provided any evidence to show that it is your debt, I would recommend you now go down the complaints route.

I will send a link for our fact sheet on complaints. Make it in writing and send recorded delivery and keep a copy for your own records. If they do not respond within 8 weeks to the complaint or you are not happy with the reply, escalate this to the Financial Ombudsman.

So as I'm new it won't let me include a link but it was for factsheet 34 complaining about your lender.

Think that answers it?!

This no problem at all. I was actually considering the same, but dragging it out another couple of weeks with another reply to them (as I don't know the date that this debt will become statute barred).
What I have written is another stalemate letter, basically, telling them that without evidence of the debt, I won't be giving them any personal information. Likewise, their view on it will be that they are not giving me any information without me passing 'Data Protection' - something which I also bring into question.
I know that this is individual to my case, but use some or all of it if you decide to go down this route. I haven't sent it yet, so it's still a work-in-progress:

Dear Sir or Madam,
I write in response to your most recent correspondence, dated 10th March 2016, received 19th March 2016. I’m unsure as to why the date on your correspondence indicates that it has taken nine days to arrive. It would appear that each letter is being incorrectly pre-dated to make it appear that my responses are taking longer than they actually are. The reason for that, I am not quite sure of.

Within my previous response letter, dated 6th March 2016, I explained to you that I am under no obligation to provide you with any of my personal details; allow me to explain. It is Pastdue Credit Solutions Limited that have sent a letter to my address, suggesting that I owe a sum of moneys. I have advised you that I am not aware of any such debt and presume that you are in fact contacting me in error. I have requested details of the debt in question, so that I can research for myself as to whether I have any link to this debt, which has so far gone unheeded. As per the Consumer Credit Sourcebook of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA):

"Where a customer disputes a debt on valid grounds or what may be valid grounds, the firm must investigate the dispute and provide details of the debt to the customer in a timely manner." 7.14.3

"Where there is a dispute as to the identity of the borrower or hirer or as to the amount of the debt, it is for the firm (and not the customer) to establish, as the case may be, that the customer is the correct person in relation to the debt or that the amount is the correct amount owed under the agreement." 7.14.4

As evidenced above, section 7.14.4 states that is in fact the firm’s responsibility to establish and confirm the identity of the correct debtor. This also evidences the point that I am under no obligation to provide you with any personal details.

In sending correspondence which demands a sum of moneys for a debt owed, one would be inclined to believe that Pastdue Credit Solutions Limited have confidence that it is indeed being sent to the correct individual. One would also presume that such account information and sufficient checks would evidence the fact that they are making contact with the correct individual as debtor. As your previous correspondence makes reference to the Data Protection Act, I would like to point out that through contact in the form of a letter, you are not ‘proceeding with a call relating to a personal account or information’ as stated in your letter. You are in fact engaging in written dialogue with an individual at a registered address, to which you have initiated correspondence, so the Data Protection Act (1998) holds no relevance. In asking for details of what the debt relates to, and from when it relates, there is no such request of personal information, also meaning that the Data Protection Act holds no relevance.

I will reiterate that I refute your claims that I owe any sum of money. By your refusal to provide me any evidence to the contrary, I will presume that you have indeed contacted the wrong person with regard to this debt and will consider the matter now closed. Any further requests for personal information will not be responded to, as I believe that I have made my point very clear both in this, and my previous letter.

Please consider this a final warning that any further requests for payment of moneys owed, or for personal information, without evidence being supplied, will be considered harassment and will result in a formal complaint being made to Trading Standards and the OFT informed of your actions.


Yours faithfully,

In this, I'm trying to create a stalemate position where they cannot provide me with evidence, but also cannot confirm my identity, leaving them without a course of action.
In my previous letters I have threatened to report them to Trading Standards and OFT, so I thought that a final warning prior to doing so would be in order.
I've written this with the possibility of it ending up in court very much in mind, so here I've tried to iron out my position, their legal position and also their tactics.

Whether this is right to do or not, I have no idea. I'm doing this off my own back, as to what I think would be a logical next step. I'm sure that one of experienced debt advisors could offer advice on this, but as I need to respond to them in one way or another, this is where I'm at.

TurboTommy

rizla_king wrote: »

in other words the scammers were never certain they were chasing the right person in the first place

they then try to hide behind the data protection act when found out.

My thought exactly! Do you think that my post above is a logical next step?

rizla_king wrote: »

FOS cant deal with these complaints guys as its a phone account

falls outside their remit sadly

FOS can only deal with complaints about collection of certain types

FOS = Financial Ombudsman Service?
How about the Telecoms Ombudsman Service? That's who I've been in contact with and they seem quite interested in the case.

ziggy81ziggy

rizla_king wrote: »

FOS cant deal with these complaints guys as its a phone account

falls outside their remit sadly

FOS can only deal with complaints about collection of certain types

Landlines are outside of the FOS remit? Who would cover it then - do you know?

I thought the FOS can deal with debt collectors which this is despite it originally being for a phone line?

TurboTommy

ziggy81ziggy wrote: »

Landlines are outside of the FOS remit? Who would cover it then - do you know?

I thought the FOS can deal with debt collectors which this is despite it originally being for a phone line?

See my post above, mate.
Telecoms Ombudsman seemed very interested when I spoke to them regarding this. I'd called them to see if they had any previous correspondence about my complaint re. PO, but they only keep records for 12 months. They asked me to explain the issue and said if I don't get anywhere with PO (now TalkTalk), or any answers from the debt collectors, then they will be happy to take it on for me.