3 LETTER COCK UP

by hoopoe22 Thu Nov 16, 2017 9:25 am

I recently received a letter from a DC alleging I owed them money relating to a mobile phone account. As the old forum wasn't operating any more I found some template letters posted there by Falijay and sent off the first one. They replied saying that it wasn't a debt under the Bills of Exchange act, they also said they were not acting as agents and that they would attempt to acquire the original phone contract info. So now I started thinking that maybe I'd sent the wrong letter. Anyway This is a month ago and I haven't heard from them again yet. Also I haven't sent the second letter because I can't find their second letter to me and I don't remember the date of it. I felt sure I had put it with all the other correspondence. Any advice?

by petesomething Thu Nov 16, 2017 5:46 pm

HI hoopoe22

its true a mobile account is not a loan and does not come under bills of Exchange act, all they need to show in a court would be a Statment that can show you had a mobile contract,
however the DCA will need to show they legally own the debt , have a mobile contract or statments , to show you broke the agreement, in this case its good the DCA brought this debt , and not just acting as a agent.

i would wait and see ,

by hoopoe22 Fri Nov 17, 2017 8:45 am

that's great thanks.

by hoopoe22 Fri Dec 08, 2017 10:34 am

I have received a letter from DC saying they have enclosed the documentation from my original creditor. However, it is just a list of dates and figures the final balance of which is zero. They explain this by saying that is when they bought the debt from the creditor. There is a FAQ on the back of the letter and one of the FAQ's is "Where are these statements from?" And their answer is, "The enclosed statements are from the original creditor from whom we bought the debt".
The so called statement has nothing on it identifying myself or the creditor.
Should I just carry on with the 3 letters do you think?

by **LionsShare** Fri Dec 08, 2017 3:10 pm

Afternoon,

hope this is of interest:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Vict/45-46/61/section/59

in your own words "from the original creditor from whom we bought the debt"

subsections 1, 3 are what you possibly need.

59 Payment in due course.

(1)A bill is discharged by payment in due course by or on behalf of the drawee or acceptor.

“Payment in due course” means payment made at or after the maturity of the bill to the holder thereof in good faith and without notice that his title to the bill is defective.

(2)Subject to the provisions herein-after contained, when a bill is paid by the drawer or an indorser it is not discharged; but

(a)Where a bill payable to, or to the order of, a third party is paid by the drawer, the drawer may enforce payment thereof against the acceptor, but may not re-issue the bill.

(b)Where a bill is paid by an indorser, or where a bill payable to drawer’s order is paid by the drawer, the party paying it is remitted to his former rights as regards the acceptor or antecedent parties, and he may, if he thinks fit, strike out his own subsequent indorsements, and again negotiate the bill.

(3)Where an accommodation bill is paid in due course by the party accommodated the bill is discharged.

any doubts you may have then read this thread - start to finish:

https://goodf.forumotion.com/t1513-assignment

by petesomething Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:35 pm

Just send the next letter , then see what they do or send next , you just want them to give up .

by hoopoe22 Sat Dec 09, 2017 12:06 pm

Thanks Lionshare. I'm sure that's useful if you understand the language, which I don't unfortunately. Although I read the thread and understand from that what it all means. However I wouldn't have the confidence to try and create my own letter of response around that.
I will send letter two and see what happens then. Thanks to you both for responding to my post.

by hoopoe22 Tue Jan 02, 2018 2:22 pm

I sent the 2nd letter and got the expected reply. Saying that they had sent the requested information, that the alleged debt doesn't come under the bills of exchange act and that they would not be responding to any further letters. I thought I might send the 3rd letter with the relevant bits highlighted i.e the bits that say they are a 3rd party interloper and they should prove I owe their company anything. I thought I might include copies of the first two letters with those bits highlighted too just so they get the message.

by Sponsored content

3 LETTER COCK UP

3 LETTER COCK UP

Re: 3 LETTER COCK UP

Re: 3 LETTER COCK UP

Re: 3 LETTER COCK UP

Re: 3 LETTER COCK UP

Re: 3 LETTER COCK UP

Re: 3 LETTER COCK UP

Re: 3 LETTER COCK UP

Re: 3 LETTER COCK UP