Debt Collectors At Door

Do you yourself not need public liability insurance to make a claim against them like car insurance?

Teddy/Pipsaholic, by law that have to identify every "reasonable risk" and reasonable risk is classified by HSE as any risk that can cause harm or injury, if you cut yourself on site now it is reportable and has to be documented in their accident book, anmd it is the employers responsibility to identify them, nobody else's.
They will claim they are self employed, fine, let them do that, but they must be working for someone and under vicarious liability you can claim agaiinst the individual and the employer as they are agents of the employer.

pipsaholic wrote:Do you yourself not need public liability insurance to make a claim against them like car insurance?

No, they are working in an employed capacity and by doing their job they are classed as being in the workplace, it could be at your house or in their vehicles, it doesn't matter as they are carrying out their profession.

You are a private individual not at your place of work if you are at home, you make the claim directly or through a legal representative if you like, if they come to your place of work then they are on your employers premises and not your private premises so the onus falls on your employer to take all reasonable steps to remove them.

Not as bad as I thought was overthinking. Only 1 of them came dressed in all black with an id badge with black folder didn't come with his car on my street parked it somewhere else and walked in. How many visits they usually make until they give up?

How many times can they sell it on?

Yes actually visits from 1 company? They say after 3 phone calls per week constitutes harassment maximum 10 per month unsure about face to face the law does state causing alarm and distress on more than 2 occasions constitutes harassments.

If you write to them as per my original post ,its' very unlikely they will visit again .
Your choice as always.

Could that not just infuriate them to take more action? I rather not.

We annoy them just for sport, everytime they spend an hour working on your case, it costs them money and the more money they spend the less profit they make.

Have you heard of the circle of life? this is the circle of killing thhem off little by little.

I guess you're right they spend time traveling and fuel surely they will give up sooner rather than later. It just you have that little voice in the back of your head they may refer it to the court for recovery action or call police.

Police can do nothing, its a civil matter.

Hi pipsaholic,

Please do not take this reply as anything but well intentioned.Many years ago I would have had the same reservations that you have now. But if you are looking for a one letter template to make this go away ,I regret you are unlikely to find one, With regard that a letter may upset them ,that is exactly what they are trying to do to you by instilling fear,and until you start to lose that fear they will win every time.

Ok, so you do the 3 letter process .A valid process as you ask them 3 times for validation of the debt ,which they are very unlikely to be able to provide.As this method has been used for a long time now they know some folk will be at a complete loss as to what to do if they just ignore the 3 letters.

Myself when i use the 3 letters I create my own and ask additional questions and require additional info from them ie;

" I require a signed statement from a named individual that this alleged account has not been sold or traded in any way"

" I require a signed statement from a named individual that no Insurance claim has been made or will be made in respect of this alleged account"

These are all valid questions which i would require answering if it ever went to court.
What assassin & myself have explained to you is just another weapon in your armory & the more weapons you use the more likely of being successful .

Court is nothing to worry about ,its only you ,the judge & the claimant in a closed room ( i personally find it enjoyable) Should they find against you (and you decide to pay) it can only be a payment plan for what you can afford.
As assassin stated the police can do nothing .
I hope you have not been watching Cant pay we will take it away ,because they admitted to Chrissy Morris on youtube that its all staged for the camera.

https://youtu.be/Gf8Qlu2B07I
https://youtu.be/XR4dXETsq1E

Please just remember all these tactics are to keep it from ever going to court ,the harder you make it for them the greater the chances they will just move to easier targets.

regards dave

Yeah, i remember someone mentioned its a technical error you are looking for to win your battle.

As they lie and cheat us and make multiple profits from us we rely on a technical error to win.

They have just stopped my benefits so I have another battle on my hands. Its like they want us to starve regardless of your situation.

Got a reply after letter 1 guess what they stated that they are not the legal owners! How would that stand if they ever did take me to court? The judge would surely ask to see representatives from the original creditor no? So, I assume case would be dismissed? If it ever got that far?

Usual B/S and deflection techniques to try to undermine any confidence you have.

They admit to NOT being the legal owners and admit they are only agents with the legal owners, they have no contract with you, so they cannot do anything.

They then plead with you "we hope to reach an amicable solution" which means they hopr to contract with you so they can charge their clients for collecting any alleged debt, then charge you for collecting money from you.

I heard these dca's have covered against not picking up their money they make a claim on insurance for their losses and they pay a annual fee as do banks so they get their money either way as well as the original creditor! as they have insurance for their defaulted accounts.

That pip is why the question should be asked as i posted earlier requiring a signed statement that they have not made any insurance claim against this account & if they have its now fraud.

Do you mean public liability insurance or insurance for defaulted accounts?

No its an insurance policy they have which they do not wish you to know about .When you go into default they claim upon this insurance & the debt is then paid .Only being the greedy scum they are they still come after you for payment in full.
That is why one of the things i always put in letters to them is.

"I require a signed statement from a named individual that no Insurance claim has been made in respect of this alleged
account"

So technically they are making double profits? 1 from the insurance company and whatever they can rob you of?

Also, doesn't the original credit make double profits as well? So, we the people are made to profit for them 4 times!

So, in fact the people like us in the know how they companies only get their insurance and not a penny of us. Seems its fair not to give them a penny as they cannot prove it and they get the money from insurance anyway so why should we care.

I was referring to the original creditors who still own your alleged debt .You can of course interact with these DCAs if you wish ,but they have shown in their letter that they are only third party interlopers ,
Personally with third party interlopers I ignore and just ANRRTS their letters & wait until the debt is sold on.

So, I guess each time it is sold on each of the interlopers make a profit don't they? It would seem your alleged debt would be cheaper and cheaper making it more attractive to other interlopers? So, looks like there is a debt market out there with buyers and sellers all insured eh? If people knew the truth they would go mental. As we are!

If the dca is an agent for the alleged OC, why not ANRRTS?

All they're going to do, is send it back to the OC

Its just another tool in your armor to use so they give up pursuing you and claim the insurance and say bye bye to you.

I mean the difference between being an "agent" and the dca having bought the debt. the dca can't take you to court, because they don't own the debt, but if they buy it, then they could potentially.

I wonder if any court action has ever come from a dca acting as "agent"?