We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
IMPORTANT: Please make sure your posts do not contain any personally identifiable information (both your own and that of others). When uploading images, please take care that you have redacted all personal information including number plates, reference numbers and QR codes (which may reveal vehicle information when scanned).
CSA uphold complaint against Trace Debt Recovery

Cardriver45
Posts: 256 Forumite

I thought I would post this reply to my complaint to the Credit Services Agency about Trace Debt Recovery and their dodgy dealings for anyone else who is being harassed by Debt collectors for parking charges. I've now had confirmation from the PPC that they will not be pursuing the charge after I threatened to sue them. It just goes to show that it is worth complaining and not just accepting their bully boy tactics.
Thank you for your email. In reference to the complaint response from Trace, my understanding is that this has been issued in the post to you and so you should expect to receive that in the coming days. With regards to the eight week timeframe, whilst ordinarily we would raise this issue with the member as part of our outcomes, in this instance there was a delay from our end in providing a response to Trace when they approached us for some information and that ultimately led to them not being able to provide their final response. As such I cannot say that they have acted outside of our guidelines.
When considering the complaint as a whole, whilst I cannot agree with all of the assertions of Trace acting in breach of the Code of Practice, I will uphold the complaint for the areas of failing that have been identified.
Firstly in the letter of demand dated 24 September 2021 wording was included that inferred if the case proceeded to litigation then a CCJ would be issued. From our standpoint the language used should have resented the CCJ as a possible consequence of the legal action, not a formality, and so on those grounds that area of the complaint has been upheld.
Furthermore I am not satisfied that the complaint response dated 17 November 2021 provided an adequate explanation as to the investigation and reasoning for the outcome reached, and so did not meet our expectations. As such that area of the complaint has been upheld also.
In light of the failings identified we will record the complaint as upheld and provide feedback to our member. As part of that dialogue we discuss our expectations of appropriate remedial action, which I note has been addressed as Trace have provided evidence of a new letter template with amended wording included.
We will continue to monitor Trace through our formal complaints procedure. Should we receive complaints of a similar nature, your complaint will be given due regard when determining whether further action is required.
I would like to thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. All complaint feedback regarding our members is greatly appreciated, as it is key to monitoring member companies’ adherence to our Code of Practice.
Yours sincerely
Thank you for your email. In reference to the complaint response from Trace, my understanding is that this has been issued in the post to you and so you should expect to receive that in the coming days. With regards to the eight week timeframe, whilst ordinarily we would raise this issue with the member as part of our outcomes, in this instance there was a delay from our end in providing a response to Trace when they approached us for some information and that ultimately led to them not being able to provide their final response. As such I cannot say that they have acted outside of our guidelines.
When considering the complaint as a whole, whilst I cannot agree with all of the assertions of Trace acting in breach of the Code of Practice, I will uphold the complaint for the areas of failing that have been identified.
Firstly in the letter of demand dated 24 September 2021 wording was included that inferred if the case proceeded to litigation then a CCJ would be issued. From our standpoint the language used should have resented the CCJ as a possible consequence of the legal action, not a formality, and so on those grounds that area of the complaint has been upheld.
Furthermore I am not satisfied that the complaint response dated 17 November 2021 provided an adequate explanation as to the investigation and reasoning for the outcome reached, and so did not meet our expectations. As such that area of the complaint has been upheld also.
In light of the failings identified we will record the complaint as upheld and provide feedback to our member. As part of that dialogue we discuss our expectations of appropriate remedial action, which I note has been addressed as Trace have provided evidence of a new letter template with amended wording included.
We will continue to monitor Trace through our formal complaints procedure. Should we receive complaints of a similar nature, your complaint will be given due regard when determining whether further action is required.
I would like to thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. All complaint feedback regarding our members is greatly appreciated, as it is key to monitoring member companies’ adherence to our Code of Practice.
Yours sincerely
6
Comments
-
Thanks for posting this separately so people see it. Well worth the time taken to report any CSA member DRA who gets involved in the murky world of scam parking charges and misleads consumers.PRIVATE 'PCN'? DON'T PAY BUT DON'T IGNORE IT (except N.Ireland).
CLICK at the top or bottom of any page where it says:
Home»Motoring»Parking Tickets Fines & Parking - read the NEWBIES THREAD2
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 252.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.1K Spending & Discounts
- 243.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 597.5K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.5K Life & Family
- 256.1K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards