...does what it says on the tin. Lying bastards : comments.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|||
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25 |
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
(no subject)
The OFT does have some guidelines on unfair practices of debt collectors:
http://www.oft.gov.uk/advice_and_resources/resource_base/legal/cca/debt-collection
http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf
Which this would seem to fall foul of. 2.2.(c), 2.4.(f), 2.7, 2.8.(a,j,k) frex. Well, the terminology may be a bit loose but I think there's an argument that they've breached *something* in there. Note also that the pdf states that those who hire third parties are liable to sanction themselves for breaches committed by those third parties. Investigating the OFT complaints procedure may be a useful next step.
(no subject)
I've got the Leeds telephone directories here and neither Rapid Forwarding or 1st Locate are in them.
(no subject)
Of course, the debt collection guidelines also apply, but it's a lot easier to nab them for a clear breach of criminal law than a breach of guildelines. On the other hand, the Regulations don't have a body of case law built up around them yet, but if anything that makes them a slightly scarier stick with which to beat asshole debt collectors with, and indeed I use them to this purpose in my professional life.