Re: Full Disclosure & DCA - Help!

by flyingfish Sat Sep 25, 2021 9:29 am

Hard to be sure as you have obscured almost everything on that invoice. What does SSCL stand for, what is the actual organisation? And was the invoice made payable to them, or was the original payment demand from someone else? I suspect that the Police would not sell on a debt, I don't think I've ever seen a public body do so. They may be using this organisation as a debt collector subcontracted by the Police.

by 123 Sun Sep 26, 2021 4:22 pm

flyingfish wrote:What does SSCL stand for, what is the actual organisation?

Shared Services Connected Ltd - evidently not a public body - hence contractually they cannot be the original creditor.

Correct me if I'm wrong - even if subcontracted, they cannot present themselves as the original creditor as they are clearly a different organisation/entity?!

by flyingfish Sun Sep 26, 2021 5:01 pm

Not sure to be honest as this is an unusual situation. As I see it the court ordered that you should be liable for these charges, but the charge is in fact a commercial invoice rather than a court ordered payment like a fine. Whether this organisation is or is not the original creditor will depend on whether they sent the original invoice, in my opinion at least. Clearly it's distinct from the debt purchaser arrangement that we more often deal with, where the original liability was to one organisation, but the whole interest was then sold on. This is more like a subcontractor or an outsourcing organisation. It might be worth challenging their right to make the demand, but you'll have to re-work any template based on normal consumer credit and debt purchase.

by 123 Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:28 pm

flyingfish wrote:Whether this organisation is or is not the original creditor will depend on whether they sent the original invoice, in my opinion at least.

Interesting point - as said, oddly, after 2 initial payment reminders without having recd. an invoice, they then sent an alleged copy of the original invoice - notably one thing is also odd:

The layout and the design of their letters and alleged invoice looks quite DIY to say the least, if they are supposed to operate under such 'corporate' umbrella.

RE original invoice - as said, so far, this has only ever been sent as a PDF-attachment to an email after the initial payment reminders, NO signature, no printed copy ever received - does that suffice for their claim?

flyingfish wrote:It might be worth challenging their right to make the demand, but you'll have to re-work any template based on normal consumer credit and debt purchase.

Thanks, - so what has to be changed - having used the 'old' 3 letter process templates as is so far - does that invalidate them?

by 123 Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:44 pm

Mrblue2015 wrote:Just ignore whatever they come back with. Again, this is stated in the old and new approaches.

Thanks again - so far sent 3rd letter recorded 10+ days back which includes reference to the charges etc and they still came back with another email -
now sent estoppel and counter-invoice for ignoring non-contact?

Also given the potential subcontractor SSCL operate as a commercial entity i.e. LTD isn't their use of the pol. logo (i.e. public body) in their letter head - is that likely fraud by misrepresentation??

by flyingfish Thu Oct 07, 2021 2:55 pm

123 wrote:
flyingfish wrote:It might be worth challenging their right to make the demand, but you'll have to re-work any template based on normal consumer credit and debt purchase.
Thanks, - so what has to be changed - having used the 'old' 3 letter process templates as is so far - does that invalidate them?

I'm no expert on the "three letters" or their templates but my take is .. firstly don't worry if what you've sent before may be imperfect, whatever you send now will take precedence. As for what to change, you do need to understand the content of any template yourself. However as an example any reference to "default notice" should come out as that's only applicable to a regulated credit agreement. But if you're unclear then just ask about any particular part of the document. Hopefully you'll get an answer from one of those who have worked on the letters as well.

by 123 Thu Oct 07, 2021 4:07 pm

by **Mrblue2015** Thu Oct 07, 2021 4:22 pm

Personally, I don't bother with all of that. But if you wish to use that, just copy the layout exactly as per the Estoppel template or any other templates you come across.

by 123 Thu Oct 07, 2021 4:48 pm

Mrblue2015 wrote:Personally, I don't bother with all of that. But if you wish to use that, just copy the layout exactly as per the Estoppel template or any other templates you come across.

That's an interesting aspect - so that implies one might rather be discredited for using the FoL salutation....just asking as on another forum s.o. mentioned it and they particularly picked on this recognisable salutation...??

by **Mrblue2015** Thu Oct 07, 2021 6:05 pm

From personal experience it makes no difference. Honestly if / when you come to deal with debt purchasers, you’ll be lucky if they even answer any of the most simplest of your questions… Wink

by 123 Thu Oct 07, 2021 6:54 pm

Just found - Faljay posted this version on the old forum:

Faljay wrote:Estoppel Notice
NON-NEGOTIABLE
[FIRSTNAME ] [SURNAME]
c/o [YOUR ADDRESS]
[YOUR ADDRESS]
[YOUR ADDRESS]
[YOUR ADDRESS]

by **daveiron** Thu Oct 07, 2021 7:42 pm

I also have never used Trademark or Copywrite, & have not heard of any
success's with it.

by **LionsShare** Thu Oct 07, 2021 8:25 pm

right justified,

yours faithfully

:Christian-Name(s):SURNAME.

if I have it correct, note the use of caps & lower case, colons, hyphens (if required), & lastly full stop.

by **Mrblue2015** Fri Oct 08, 2021 6:58 am

So the choice is yours 123.

by 123 Fri Oct 08, 2021 8:33 pm

LionsShare wrote:
right justified,

yours faithfully

:Christian-Name(s):SURNAME.

if I have it correct, note the use of caps & lower case, colons, hyphens (if required), & lastly full stop.

Thanks - legal relevance of full stop??

by 123 Fri Oct 08, 2021 9:22 pm

Mrblue2015 wrote:So the choice is yours 123.

Thanks -

Why sending the estoppel 30 rather than 10 days after 3rd ltr - any legal requirements?

by **LionsShare** Fri Oct 08, 2021 10:00 pm

123 wrote:
LionsShare wrote:
right justified,

yours faithfully

:Christian-Name(s):SURNAME.

if I have it correct, note the use of caps & lower case, colons, hyphens (if required), & lastly full stop.

Thanks - legal relevance of full stop??

off the top - can't remember; but it IS important! Shocked

by **Mrblue2015** Sat Oct 09, 2021 7:13 am

123 wrote: Why sending the estoppel 30 rather than 10 days after 3rd ltr - any legal requirements?

May I ask why you seem to be questioning the relevance of every part of the (now old) process, from formatting the letters to any respective legal relevancies?

by Sponsored content