Should I reply to the Debt Management company

[BoD]

.................. The initials are the same as an item of none passenger coaching stock with a guards compartment.

Did you tell them to first open?

[hayfield]

6 years from the date I last paid, which refers to acknowledgement of debt.

 

One thing just occured to me; they only sent an email, not a letter, not sure that changes things.

 

What really irritates me is the fact that I don't owe the money, I have paid all that I owe and it is because the energy company are incompetent that I am being accused of this debt. I haven't had anything from the energy company since I made the payment, so if I did owe the money I would have had no way of knowing!

 

 

I can understand how annoying and worrying this matter is, what more importantly is what this may be doing to your credit rating, which could have far more implications than the £7.50

 

On reflection as they seem not to be addressing your complaint you should in my opinion write the the ombudsman and complain about the way the company has treated you from day one to now, especially the effect on your mental well being now and the possible consequences it is having on your credit rating, plus your fears of some heavy handed bouncer turning up at your door.

 

Send a copy of this complaint to either the companies chairman or MD, plus a copy to a BBC program (Watch dog)

[chriswright03]

I have been in touch with the supplier, they told me I owed the monies mentioned, I pointed out that I had a letter saying that the £141 odd was full and final. I was told that the £141 was shewn on their system as having been received. I asked for the date, as the offer was only good until half way through November, it appeared on 26th October, so that's not the problem. I really wanted to make sure that by not contacting the debt company, which was my initial instinct, that I wouldn't be not following a proper procedure.

 

I was told the supplier would get back to me within 48 hrs so I will wait until then to see what they come up with.

 

Thanks for all the responses

 

 

I can understand how annoying and worrying this matter is, what more importantly is what this may be doing to your credit rating, which could have far more implications than the £7.50

 

On reflection as they seem not to be addressing your complaint you should in my opinion write the the ombudsman and complain about the way the company has treated you from day one to now, especially the effect on your mental well being now and the possible consequences it is having on your credit rating, plus your fears of some heavy handed bouncer turning up at your door.

 

Send a copy of this complaint to either the companies chairman or MD, plus a copy to a BBC program (Watch dog)

They have said they will get back to the OP within 48 hours so whilst your suggestion is reasonable advice should they not I would suggest he needs to give them chance to come back first.

[hayfield]

They have said they will get back to the OP within 48 hours so whilst your suggestion is reasonable advice should they not I would suggest he needs to give them chance to come back first.

 

Sorry to disagree with you on this one, but the company should have never sent out the demand for money that was never owed in the first place, especially as their industry has a history of these unfortunate errors

 

Secondly having taken the nuclear option without seemingly checking they have upped the stakes. Rather than saying they would get back in 48 hours the OP should have been forwarded immediately to an operator who could check out the facts of the case and immediately cancel the legal action they started. It is totally outrageous that when a company embarks on a course of action like this they do not take immediate action to halt proceedings if an error has been bought to their attention. The anxiety and stress their action causes should not be prolonged a further 48 hours. 

 

Perhaps if they are fined £1000 per hour after the first 2 hours the mistake has been brought to their attention until they rectify it would give them the impetus to take these matters seriously.

Dont forget in this case the situation was caused by the providers incompetence, and has already compensated the OP. There should have been a flag up on this case to take extra care. The only way to stop these abuses is to hit their bottom line

[chriswright03]

I agree with you in principle but also am realistic to know that mistakes are made and believe that as long as they are rectified in a timescale that is practicable then they should have the opportunity to do so.  It doesn't mean that you cannot then ask to be compensated for the anxiety and grief.

 

It is always easier to turn up the tempo then have to climb down from going off on one in the first place.  Whoever the OP was talking to is highly  unlikely to be the person responsible for making the mistake and just a person at work being paid to do a job.  They should be given the opportunity to do that and then if they do not do as promised the complaint can be escalated.

 

Having a go at someone on the end of a phone when they are saying they will sort it and get back to you is counter productive and in no way would affect the real culprits.

[kevinlms]

Sorry to disagree with you on this one, but the company should have never sent out the demand for money that was never owed in the first place, especially as their industry has a history of these unfortunate errors

 

Secondly having taken the nuclear option without seemingly checking they have upped the stakes. Rather than saying they would get back in 48 hours the OP should have been forwarded immediately to an operator who could check out the facts of the case and immediately cancel the legal action they started. It is totally outrageous that when a company embarks on a course of action like this they do not take immediate action to halt proceedings if an error has been bought to their attention. The anxiety and stress their action causes should not be prolonged a further 48 hours. 

 

Perhaps if they are fined £1000 per hour after the first 2 hours the mistake has been brought to their attention until they rectify it would give them the impetus to take these matters seriously.

Dont forget in this case the situation was caused by the providers incompetence, and has already compensated the OP. There should have been a flag up on this case to take extra care. The only way to stop these abuses is to hit their bottom line

Disagree with that. There is nothing to be gained out of not waiting the 48 hours. The OP will be in an even stronger position, if nothing happens within the 48 hours. Probably a likely scenario, since they've already got a track record of incompetence, wrt the OP.

 

Much better to go to an ombudsman, with yet another example of them not keeping a commitment.

 

I managed to get 2 months free electricity, because my supplier charged me for 3 months, whereas I moved out of the old house after 2 months. They managed to get the gas right (same supplier), so they had no excuse. 3 years it took of their blundering, but the limitation is for 2 years back charging. So the charges got wiped. All they needed to do was provide me with a bill for 2/3rds of the amount and I would have paid.

 

[hayfield]

Disagree with that. There is nothing to be gained out of not waiting the 48 hours. The OP will be in an even stronger position, if nothing happens within the 48 hours. Probably a likely scenario, since they've already got a track record of incompetence, wrt the OP.

 

Much better to go to an ombudsman, with yet another example of them not keeping a commitment.

 

I managed to get 2 months free electricity, because my supplier charged me for 3 months, whereas I moved out of the old house after 2 months. They managed to get the gas right (same supplier), so they had no excuse. 3 years it took of their blundering, but the limitation is for 2 years back charging. So the charges got wiped. All they needed to do was provide me with a bill for 2/3rds of the amount and I would have paid.

 

Kevin

 

We can agree to disagree, I accept waiting 48 hours if it is a normal enquiry/complaint.

 

In this instance it is a continuation of a previous problem which the company has already compensated him for, he then accepted an offer by said company to help them out. The fact is that when a company escalates an issue to this level they should be duty bound to deal with it immediately.

 

What happens if within the 48 hours he gets a knock on the door with 2 heavies outside ? Some on here could handle the situation, others will be very intimidated, scared, humiliated through no fault of their own. Why don't these companies employ 9 stone weaklings, simply they want to intimidate the person into paying, even when there is no debt!! 

[royaloak]

Kevin

 

We can agree to disagree, I accept waiting 48 hours if it is a normal enquiry/complaint.

 

In this instance it is a continuation of a previous problem which the company has already compensated him for, he then accepted an offer by said company to help them out. The fact is that when a company escalates an issue to this level they should be duty bound to deal with it immediately.

 

What happens if within the 48 hours he gets a knock on the door with 2 heavies outside ? Some on here could handle the situation, others will be very intimidated, scared, humiliated through no fault of their own. Why don't these companies employ 9 stone weaklings, simply they want to intimidate the person into paying, even when there is no debt!! 

What happens if a meteor lands on the house?

 

You can bring up all the 'what if' scenarios you like, but dealing in 'actuals' is more productive.

[chriswright03]

I have kept a copy of the webchat, I will wait and see if they come back with proof of debt, which I don't see that they can, as the payment was full and final. Actually getting the supplier to tell the debt company is another matter entirely. I can't tell you how fed up I am with the supplier, they have been nothing but a problem the whole time I was with them and even now when I am no longer with them!

 

As the OP has stated he is happy to wait then perhaps we should be happy to let him.  In respect of what ifs and actuals I think the suggestion below is just pie in the sky and not helpful at all.  In fact I don't even know why I have mentioned it as it is that unrealistic.  Yes the company are in the wrong but comments like this in no way assist the OP.

 

 

Perhaps if they are fined £1000 per hour after the first 2 hours the mistake has been brought to their attention until they rectify it would give them the impetus to take these matters seriously.

[hayfield]

What happens if a meteor lands on the house?

 

You can bring up all the 'what if' scenarios you like, but dealing in 'actuals' is more productive.

 

The energy supply industry has a very bad image in cases like these, agreed they are very small in number. This is however a clear example of companies using call centres and those handling the calls totally untrained to handle this type of issue. What is wrong in taking ownership of the problem they have caused and doing the decent thing and dealing with it straight away ?

 

In cases like these especially like these where the company has already been made to pay compensation for its actions, the account should be flagged up to be handled with special care. OK this one got through so any decent company on receiving a call like this, seeing that they messed up before, been paid in full and sending the debt collectors have a DUTY OF CARE to the customer to investigate it immediately and more importantly insure the customer is put at ease if for what ever reason this cannot be handled and cleared up during the call. No one has the right to demand payments they are not due.

 

In the old days you would phone a company up, be put through to someone who is in the required department and knows what is happening, the matter was usually dealt with there and then. Mow we have these call centres where the handlers read from scripts. In a case like this a reputable company would have transferred this call to a senior administrator/supervisor and dealt with it there and them, its simply called customer service, sadly lacking in so many businesses

[hayfield]

 

As the OP has stated he is happy to wait then perhaps we should be happy to let him.  In respect of what ifs and actuals I think the suggestion below is just pie in the sky and not helpful at all.  In fact I don't even know why I have mentioned it as it is that unrealistic.  Yes the company are in the wrong but comments like this in no way assist the OP.

 

 

Perhaps if they are fined £1000 per hour after the first 2 hours the mistake has been brought to their attention until they rectify it would give them the impetus to take these matters seriously.

 

 

 

Chris

 

The OP has stated he will, not that he is happy to wait, if he does owe the money they should be able in this day and age to bring up the debt and inform him immediately why he owes it.

 

For companies who are persistent offenders, who do not make real efforts to reduce these abuses of their power, the final sanction is to hit them where it hurts, either make the fine large enough that it hurts and they take action, or make the company directors pay from their own pockets meaningful amounts.When its cheaper to pay the odd bit of compensation than preventing the action, nothing will change. It will not stop every mistake, but will insure these are at a minimum and dealt with very quickly

 

The above course of action works in the food industry, the person in charge of the establishment (owner or manager) and if appropriate the person who caused it are liable to prosecution if standards are not adhered to. Result is we are all much safer when buying food in shops and restaurants    

[chriswright03]

John the happy bit is my bad but he has stated he would wait which we should let him do.

 

I don't disagree with you about the way some of these companies work but I am still a firm believer that there is a way to deal with things and the retaliate first option isn't my way. 

 

If the Company are wrong and it certainly appears that they are then they have to sort it out.  They have told the OP they will get back to him in 48 hours and he has a record of that.  If they do not then it just adds more evidence to any complaint he makes and all companies have complaints procedures so he will have good grounds to press forward in his own time.

 

What happens in the food industry while interesting has little relevance here.  I agree that the companies and their procedures are dire but I do not think that going on the offensive from the outset is always the best option and for some doesn't come naturally.

[hayfield]

Chris

 

The 48 hours is up later today, the company certainly is taking this up to the line with their reply. I can accept that act as humans first, but have the energy company correctly? especially when the offer they made was 3/4 months ago, why not write themselves rather than instruct a debt company. 

 

The energy industry has acted against the public interest many times in the past few years, both their regulator and parliament seem to be making noises that changes should happen.

 

I cannot see expecting to be treated fairly especially when the company has already been forced to compensate on this case as being both wrong and retaliating

 

If the regulator has information of wrong doings by these companies they can do something to clean up the industry, why is this retaliating ? If this is an isolated case nothing will happen but if its part of a larger pattern they will act, I would call it in the public interest

 

It is a well known fact that companies will not act unless they are made to, whilst its cheaper to pay compensation and or fines they will not change.

 

As for the comparison with the food industry, it was just an example of when action is taken things change.

 

I do admit we have gone past the initial brief, but hopefully the OP will have plenty of options, especially if the company fails to call/resolve this matter within the 48 hours. 

 

I agree that in the first place it pays to be polite but firm, never take it out with the call centre assistant, but in situations like this always ask/insist for this call to be escalated to a higher level.

 

I would also say that if this is yet again another mistake from the company I would insist on a letter of apology clearly stating the debt has been paid in full, and a form of financial recompense even if you donate it to charity (and tell them what you are doing).

 

Still I think we all have put the world to rights

[chriswright03]

 

Still I think we all have put the world to rights

Without falling out which is refreshing for this place. 

 

I always think the phrase 'Customer Service' is a joke anyway so don't even get me started on that one.

[kevinlms]

Kevin

 

We can agree to disagree, I accept waiting 48 hours if it is a normal enquiry/complaint.

 

In this instance it is a continuation of a previous problem which the company has already compensated him for, he then accepted an offer by said company to help them out. The fact is that when a company escalates an issue to this level they should be duty bound to deal with it immediately.

 

What happens if within the 48 hours he gets a knock on the door with 2 heavies outside ? Some on here could handle the situation, others will be very intimidated, scared, humiliated through no fault of their own. Why don't these companies employ 9 stone weaklings, simply they want to intimidate the person into paying, even when there is no debt!! 

IF the aforesaid 2 heavies turn up (over 7 pound fifty p - really? The new owner of the alleged debt would really need to be certain of his facts, before he got into SERIOUS trouble), within the 48 hours, then the obvious thing to do is call 999.

 

Nothing more to add.

[kevinlms]

The energy supply industry has a very bad image in cases like these, agreed they are very small in number. This is however a clear example of companies using call centres and those handling the calls totally untrained to handle this type of issue. What is wrong in taking ownership of the problem they have caused and doing the decent thing and dealing with it straight away ?

 

In cases like these especially like these where the company has already been made to pay compensation for its actions, the account should be flagged up to be handled with special care. OK this one got through so any decent company on receiving a call like this, seeing that they messed up before, been paid in full and sending the debt collectors have a DUTY OF CARE to the customer to investigate it immediately and more importantly insure the customer is put at ease if for what ever reason this cannot be handled and cleared up during the call. No one has the right to demand payments they are not due.

 

In the old days you would phone a company up, be put through to someone who is in the required department and knows what is happening, the matter was usually dealt with there and then. Mow we have these call centres where the handlers read from scripts. In a case like this a reputable company would have transferred this call to a senior administrator/supervisor and dealt with it there and them, its simply called customer service, sadly lacking in so many businesses

Oh, that would be good, but its all wishful thinking.

 

The 'Call Centre' is king and they have a room full of hopelessly trained people. The company is risking a fair bit to their reputation, when they blatantly challenge very small debts, when according to the OP, he has all the correct evidence, including emails from the company. Agreed I'm taking it at face value.

 

 

I wish it was as easy for small businesses, to collect genuine unpaid invoices, where ultimately the customer just ignores you. For a single debt, its not worth employing debt collectors/selling debts, but if you've got a regular supply of them, a different story!

 

How do i know this to be true?  

[hayfield]

Oh, that would be good, but its all wishful thinking.

 

The 'Call Centre' is king and they have a room full of hopelessly trained people. The company is risking a fair bit to their reputation, when they blatantly challenge very small debts, when according to the OP, he has all the correct evidence, including emails from the company. Agreed I'm taking it at face value.

 

 

I wish it was as easy for small businesses, to collect genuine unpaid invoices, where ultimately the customer just ignores you. For a single debt, its not worth employing debt collectors/selling debts, but if you've got a regular supply of them, a different story!

 

How do i know this to be true?  

 

 

Kevin

 

I think things are getting better, the shop chains that are doing well when you look at them in fact do seem to be taking customer service seriously, call centres are returning to this country and the better companies send a survey on how the agent acted, which keeps them on their toes. There are some companies BT are one where the agent resolved my problem with the WiFi (re)installation instantly. Agreed there are a lot of companies with bad service, but also a lot of good ones.

 

As for small traders, the company doing my extension messed up with the tiles on the roof which had to be replaced, was it worth suing the limited company for the cost of replacement. Would have taken ages, cost even more money with no guarantee the company would pay (after hearing from some of his sub contractors and the building inspector I expect the limited company has/would be bust). In the end I saw it as the cost of breaking the remaining contract. I agree with you people and companies should pay their debts whether big or small

[EddieB]

Utility companies can be some of the worst offenders when it comes to failing to cancel paid debts and selling debts on to these debt management companies.  Confusion often arises - as in this instance - where one operator in the utitity company fails to update their records, or someone in their accounts section fails to read all the notes before taking action.

 

Debt companies buy up a parcel of debts at a fraction of their real value - they pay something like 10% of face value.  They don't expect to recover anything like the full amount, but if (after expenses) they clear what they've paid, then anything else is profit.  Their normal modus operandi is to intimidate any name or address they can trace, who may or may not be the debtor (I've had threats for unpaid bills at addresses I've never visited or even heard of, just because the bill was run up by someone with a similar name).  To some extent this tactic works, as there will be some who will just pay up "for a quiet life" - which is largely where these parasites get their money from

 

Beyond that, they are likely to devote their energies to larger debts and those to which they have a greater chance of success.  If confronted by such demands, the usual course of action is to write a formal letter to their top dog saying that the debt is not accepted and that any further communication from the debt company will be regarded as harassment.

 

In this instance, I would ignore their communication.  You've contacted the energy company and it is their problem to sort out.  If (ridiculously) the debt company wanted to take it further, they would need to take it through the small claims court.  They have no right to threaten, certainly not to "send the boys round".  To initiate legal action they would first have to file a claim, and pay an initial fee (larger than the amount "owed" in this instance).  You are then required to respond to the claim - and your evidence would destroy their case entirely.  End of story (unless you decide to counter-claim).  Should it ever get to be heard in court, you would simply turn up with the evidence already presented, win the case and ask for your not inconsiderable costs of attendance to be paid (judges take a very dim view of these debt companies, but don't push it too far with an OTT counter-claim)...

Edited January 24, 2018 by EddieB

[hayfield]

Eddie

 

Interesting, if they have sold off a so called debt to a third party and in fact said debt is fictitious, who would this sit with the data protection commissioner? Certainly well worth following up if the energy provider plays up 

[kevinlms]

Eddie

 

Interesting, if they have sold off a so called debt to a third party and in fact said debt is fictitious, who would this sit with the data protection commissioner? Certainly well worth following up if the energy provider plays up 

Possibly it was sold off in a parcel of debts, but since then the utility has been in contact with the customer and is reviewing it (in the remaining few hours of the 48). Presumably, the utility would have to pay some 'compensation' to a debt collector, if they actually revoke the alleged debt. After all, they wouldn't want to upset their own debt collector!

 

[hayfield]

Kevin

 

Back in the 70's I worked for a famous high street retailer, we sold items on hire purchase, if the customer stopped paying they got a letter from a company called Blunstone and Fitzpatric , doubt if the company existed other than in name only, but gave the impression of two burly Irishmen. No idea if the letters had too much impact, but quite a few customers came in with these letters and paid up. 

 

But if said non debt was sold off in a parcel of debts, does it not infringe the OP's data protection rights ?

[Tony Davis]

I had an email last night, saying the complaint was being looked at, and I would get a response in due course, I'm guessing that, in their eyes, it constitutes  a response within 48 hrs. 08:45 this morning the 'phone rings, when I pick it up the caller has hung up, so I google the number and, lo and behold, it is the debt collectors. I rang the utility company and complain, now it has been "escalated" to a "dedicated complaints manager" and I will get a response within 5 days - or so they said. When I complained about the debt collectors calling I was told that the debt company would be advised that the collection was now "on hold".

 

Having read all the responsed here, my own personal feeling range between all of them. As I have previously said, dealing with this particular company has been an absolute nightmare, to the point that I feel like a character in a Kafka novel. With regards to involving the Ombudsman, there is a statutory waiting time from the start of the complaint to submitting a complaint to the ombudsman.

 

Thanks for all the advice offered, they say a problem shared is a problem halved and, hearing of similar experiences on here, and the expresing of similar feelings to my own is a great help.

 

I will post when further updates are available.

[hayfield]

Good luck, now they have escalated it further and not only replied late but shifted the goal posts delaying an answer I would be on to their CEO (far easier to ski down hill) and compose /compile your complaint to the ombudsman and send it as soon as you can irrespective of the outcome, could even send a copy to said CEO. stating the stress and anguish (especially as you have now received a call from the debt collectors) they have/are causing by making yet another error and failing to deal with it within a reasonable time frame.

[EddieB]

08:45 this morning the 'phone rings, when I pick it up the caller has hung up, so I google the number and, lo and behold, it is the debt collectors. 

 

An unsolicited, silent nuisance call?  Is your phone registered with the Telephone Preference Service?  If so, you might want to report them.

[BoD]

When you compose a letter of complaint to the utility company don't forget to make a formal list of things you would like them to do.

 

Some examples off the top of my head;

 

please confirm that you have notified the debt company that the debt was posted in error and that they have consequently harassed a person who was innocent of debt.

confirm, with proof, that my credit rating has not been affected in any way.

acknowledge the totally unnecessary stress and inconvenience caused to me (and my family?)

 

I'm sure you could improve this and think of others but you get the general gist of it.