Direct Collection Bailiffs Ltd

fisherjim

Looking at your other thread more power to your elbow.

I think the lack of specifics in your opening post got regulars confused, I understand you might disagree with the forum approach, but the majority of people landing here won't have your robustness.

LDast

So when can we expect to read your expose on DCBL and all the other vermin that infest the unregulated private parking industry?  How wide an exposure do you expect to get with your article?

As I have already said, good luck with it.

patient_dream

The only way to look at DCBL with their "bailiff" and "can't pay" rubbish and junk .... is Lord Haw Haw Haw IN ww2 ... AKA William Joyce

OldWilliam

I've received three letters from Direct Collection Bailiffs Ltd. over the last few months, each demanding payment of a CCJ for over £300: and no, I'm not worried, because I don't have any CCJs.  The paperwork identifies an address where I've never lived and a vehicle that I've never owned so it's simply a case of mistaken identity.  But the letters that they've sent are each non-compliant with the requirements of Part 6 of The Company, Limited Liability Partnership and Business (Names and Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2015, made under Section 82 of the Companies Act 2006, which is a criminal offence contrary to Regulation 28.

But here's the interesting part... the unusual thing about the Regulation 28 offence is that it is not just committed by the company: Regulation 28(1) states:

   Where a company fails, without reasonable excuse, to comply with any requirement in regulations 20 to 27, an

   offence is committed by—

      (a) the company; and
      (b) every officer of the company who is in default.

So my request to the Insolvency Service (the part of the DBIS with responsibility for prosecuting these offences) and to Halton Trading Standards is that they investigate and, if appropriate, prosecute in Halton Magistrates' Court these Regulation 28 offences by Direct Collection Bailiffs Ltd., Darren John Connor, Gary Robinson, and Lee Samuels-Camozzi, the last three being on Companies House records as directors when the correspondence demanding payment was sent.

And, of course, I've filed a County Court claim against the company as it's processing my personal data unlawfully.  I can't see it getting to Court but one never knows how much resolve they have, so we will see.

Coupon-mad

But the letters that they've sent are each non-compliant with the requirements of Part 6 of The Company, Limited Liability Partnership and Business (Names and Trading Disclosures) Regulations 2015, made under Section 82 of the Companies Act 2006, which is a criminal offence contrary to Regulation 28.

Ooh, show us how?

Looks like the wheels are falling off at DCB Legal due to the LSA 2007 (per Mazur & ors v Russell Speechlys) so to pull some wings off the other hornet known as DCB Ltd would be great!

OldWilliam

Coupon-mad said:

Ooh, show us how?
Looks like the wheels are falling off at DCB Legal due to the LSA 2007 (per Mazur & ors v Russell Speechlys) so to pull some wings off the other hornet known as DCB Ltd would be great!

The first two letters don't comply with the requirements of Regulation 25 (they both omit the part of the UK in which the company is registered) and the most recent one also doesn't comply with Reg. 25 in the same way but it also shows the company name under the logo with a spelling error: "Direct Collections Bailiffs Ltd."  It also spells "enforcement" as "enforcment" in the letter title! 

OldWilliam

OldWilliam said:

... and the most recent one also doesn't comply with Reg. 25 in the same way but it also shows the company name under the logo with a spelling error: "Direct Collections Bailiffs Ltd."

Sorry Coupon-mad, to answer your response fully, I should have also added that disclosure of the company name on letters is a requirement of Regulation 24(1).

Coupon-mad

OldWilliam said:

OldWilliam said:

... and the most recent one also doesn't comply with Reg. 25 in the same way but it also shows the company name under the logo with a spelling error: "Direct Collections Bailiffs Ltd."

Sorry Coupon-mad, to answer your response fully, I should have also added that disclosure of the company name on letters is a requirement of Regulation 24(1).

I wonder if their reasonable excuse will be 'let us off, it's a typo'?

Then you can charge them a £20 admin fee.

  

MothballsWallet

patient_dream said:

The only way to look at DCBL with their "bailiff" and "can't pay" rubbish and junk .... is Lord Haw Haw Haw IN ww2 ... AKA William Joyce

And we know what happened to Lord Haw Haw.