Harrasment by debt collectors

alanfa

I was in dispute with an Internet provider , the dispute went on for about 6 months and eventually I got the regulator to intervene and the dispute was settled .

About a month ago I received a letter from a Debt Collection Agency trying to recover an outstanding balance from me with regard to this dispute . I have contacted the Internet provider and they have assured me in writing that no such balance exists , I have since received one more letter , a solicitors letter and two nasty phone calls seeking payment by this Debt Collector .

As this debt does not exist and I have all the documentary evidence to prove such , what if any recourse in law do I have in dealing with this matter ?

Any advice would be appreciated

seamus

You have no obligation to the debt collector in any case. Contact the Garda and report the debt collector's behaviour.

alanfa

seamus wrote: »

You have no obligation to the debt collector in any case. Contact the Garda and report the debt collector's behaviour.

The thing is if the debt had been real these people would have worried me out of my mind , so I'd like them to pay, surely its defamatory to harass me over a debt that I dont owe, I have the sneaky feeling that the Internet provider sold on the debt to this crowd in bad faith .

I know specific advise is not allowed on this forum and I'm a rule abiding soul , I would just like to know if its worth contacting a Solicitor about .

I have little respect for these parasites who prey off people in such difficulty

seamus

alanfa wrote: »

I would just like to know if its worth contacting a Solicitor about .

Not until they've done something specifically illegal. I would say you should report it to the Gardai. The Gardai should contact them and tell them to back off. If it continues after that, contact a solicitor.

It's worth noting that whether debt exists or not, you are only obliged to deal with the debtor. You are not required to deal with debt collectors as you have no debt to them.

I think the financial regulator should create a serious education campaign to inform people of this, cos you're right; they are just blood suckers preying on people's fear and ignorance.

Our man in Havana

Just ignore them. They have no more standing to collect money than you or I.

alanfa

seamus wrote: »

Not until they've done something specifically illegal. I would say you should report it to the Gardai. The Gardai should contact them and tell them to back off. If it continues after that, contact a solicitor.

It's worth noting that whether debt exists or not, you are only obliged to deal with the debtor. You are not required to deal with debt collectors as you have no debt to them.

Thanks Seamus and I get what your saying , and I do understand that standards in this country have slipped . But its just not right that I should get 2 letters , a solicitors letter and 2 calls , over a debt I dont owe .

I think you have to actually talk to these scumbags to realise how unpleasant they are to deal with , its not like we're living in Lybia

listermint

alanfa wrote: »

Thanks Seamus and I get what your saying , and I do understand that standards in this country have slipped . But its just not right that I should get 2 letters , a solicitors letter and 2 calls , over a debt I dont owe .

I think you have to actually talk to these scumbags to realise how unpleasant they are to deal with , its not like we're living in Lybia

I had the same, We got letters when I moved into new apartment there was some bill electricity bill outstanding from previous tenant, They said it was for me. Called them up and in a matter of fact way explained all of the detail to them and cleared the matter up.

That was the end of it. Dont get stressed out when speaking to them explain the facts in detail.

Our man in Havana

Debt collectors don't listen. They only want money.

pirelli

alanfa wrote: »

The thing is if the debt had been real these people would have worried me out of my mind , so I'd like them to pay, surely its defamatory to harass me over a debt that I dont owe, I have the sneaky feeling that the Internet provider sold on the debt to this crowd in bad faith .

I know specific advise is not allowed on this forum and I'm a rule abiding soul , I would just like to know if its worth contacting a Solicitor about .

I have little respect for these parasites who prey off people in such difficulty

Who would you sue for defamation.The internet provider or the debt collection agency.

alanfa

pirelli wrote: »

Who would you sue for defamation.The internet provider or the debt collection agency.

The debt collectors are on the hook for that one , but if the other lot have passed the debt on it bad faith , well that'd be between the two of them.

Dont misunderstand me I'm not looking for the money, however I dont think these people should be allowed to act in this fashion , surely you cant treat people in such a shoddy way and get away with it .

source

I would imagine a stern (but polite) letter from you explaining the facts should suffice. (keep a copy, along with the date of when it was written and posted and register it, so they have to sign for it). If that doesn't work, then get a solicitor's letter sent. Debts are a civil matter and not a criminal one, as such AGS have no real power to deal with them. If the debt collector is being threatening, abusive or harassing you then AGS can deal with this aspect of the situation.

Victor

Make sure you are in the right and have complied with whatever agreement was reached.

---

Write to the internet provider, telling them that they have incorrectly passed the issue to a debt collector. Enclose a copy of whatever reference number / correspondence / agreement you had with them and ComReg. Copy the letter to ComReg and the debt collector.

Mention that you would like to be compensated for you time being wasted with the multiple extra letters and phone calls and that if a prompt resolution and apology isn't forthcoming that you may have to involve your solicitor and you will be holding them responsible for costs.

pirelli

alanfa wrote: »

The debt

collectors are on the hook for that one , but if the other lot have passed the debt on it bad faith , well that'd be between the two of them.

Dont misunderstand me I'm not looking for the money, however I dont think these people should be allowed to act in this fashion , surely you cant treat people in such a shoddy way and get away with it .

Could you sue for defamation and what chance of winning would you have.

234

pirelli wrote: »

[/INDENT]
Could you sue for defamation and what chance of winning would you have.

The problem is the extent of the "publication" in question. Conveying something with a defamatory meaning just to the OP would neven constitute defamation; you need to lowed him in the eyes of a section of the community. If his neighbours were all looking out the window when the debt collector called and then thought less of him (assuming that he does not pay his debts) then there may be a case. However, even if this did happen the extent of publication would be small that you might only get nominal or even contemptious damages (the court awards about 5c and you have to pay all your own costs).

alanfa

Thank you for the insight , in one of the letters I received I was threatened with publication of the debt .

Where would such a statement be published ?

alanfa

Victor wrote: »

Make sure you are in the right and have complied with whatever agreement was reached.

---

Write to the internet provider, telling them that they have incorrectly passed the issue to a debt collector. Enclose a copy of whatever reference number / correspondence / agreement you had with them and ComReg. Copy the letter to ComReg and the debt collector.

Mention that you would like to be compensated for you time being wasted with the multiple extra letters and phone calls and that if a prompt resolution and apology isn't forthcoming that you may have to involve your solicitor and you will be holding them responsible for costs.

Thank you very much for the advice I'll do it today

234

alanfa wrote: »

Thank you for the insight , in one of the letters I received I was threatened with publication of the debt .

Where would such a statement be published ?

I have no idea where such a statment would be published and the collectors would probably know better than to take out a notice in the local newspaper. I'm almost certain that implying that somebody does not pay their debts is defamatory but I'd have to check. I'm no sure about simply saying that a debt exists, though in this case it obviously doesn't.
The issue I was trying to address with pirelli's post is that it would be very difficult fot you to show that knocking at your door constituted "publication" which is essential to any defamation action. It has to be publication to more than just you, so in this case I guess that would mean your neighbours. However, unless they started shouting accusations at you house with a megaphone from the street your neighbours would probably never come to the conclusion that you don't pay your debts.
This is all probably irrelevant to your situation anyway. The core point is that if you convey something defamatory only to the victim of the defamation i.e. you, then there is no defamation, ther has to be wider publication. I doubt a debt collecting agency would be that stupid.

Edit: one other point. If they do publish some kind of notice of the debt then you have a strong case. Don't bother to listen to them saying that what they are publishing is true or they believed it to be true. You do not have to show that something is false for it to be defamatory. They bear the burden of proving the truth of the statment as a defence and it is no defence to say that they believed what they were saying to be true when it wasn't.
Just checked and it's implicit in the judgment of Lord Shaw in Stubbs v Russell [1913] 1 AC 386 that a publication bearing the meaning that somebody is refusing to pay a debt is defamatory.

TheZ

Write to them as follows

1. Say no debt is owed and they should contact whoever instructed them to confirm that

2. Reserve right to take legal proceedings against them for defamation and harrassment

3. Make a request of them for all information they hold in relation to you under the Data Protection legislation and ask them to confirm they are properly registered. If no response within 14 days say you will make a complaint to data protection commissioner

4. Finally say that any further correspondence from them to you in relation to the alleged debt will result in you charging them an administration fee of €100 per letter and you will take any further correspondence as deemed acceptance of these terms and conditions. If they write to you again start chasing them for your 100 euro and use the form of letter they use against you. this last one is a bit of fun if you want to do it

Our man in Havana

What the OP has is a standard computer generated letter, threatening everything under the sun so as to frighten the OP in paying up.

What they mean by publishing is sticking a notice in Stubbs Gazette. Now they cannot do this until they have first taken you to court and obtained a judgement. Many wouldn't know this and would be frightened enough to pay.

Victor

Of course, the accusation has already been published - by the ISP to the debt collector.

While debt collectors aren't a huge segment of society, they are a rather important one.

pirelli

Victor wrote: »

Of course, the accusation has already been published - by the ISP to the debt collector.

While debt collectors aren't a huge segment of society, they are a rather important one.

Hi Victor,

Would you say there is a case against the ISP for defamation.

I am in the same boat at the moment. I complained to the omsbudsman about airtricity and CER found in my favour and awarded me a fairly generous sum of money against airtiricity and also found i was not liable for the money airtiricty were seeking through their solicitor.

However a month or so after CER made the decision. I received a letter from a debt agency. I informed them of their mistake but airtiricity seem not to recognise CER's decision or something and claim they no nothing of CER.

I would very much like to sue airtiricty for defamation. Such is our relationship and history and the fact that they lost and were the guilty party in the end, i feel they are doing this out of malice.


In fact the debt collection agency's envelope was open when recieved.

Victor

pirelli wrote: »

Would you say there is a case against the ISP for defamation.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but I would suggest here is a case, albeit a weak one that would be fraught with difficulty and risks costing any plaintiff more than they would receive.

For example, does the regulator actually have the power(!) to make such a decision and award such an amount? Are the facts as presented correct? In the contract with the service provider, what is said about sharing such information?

Did the the service provider (not the debt collector) actually issue the debt collection letter internally and hence there was no defamation?

Tom Young

Anyone here ever heard of qualified privilege? There are about 8 posters above randomly GIVING ADVICE to the OP. The charter forbids that.

Debt collection by its nature is deeply unpleasant. Publication in Stubbs Gazette or other places further to a judgment or decree is normal. That letter is not defamatory, at all. Period. So forget that. There may be some mistake .... so deal with it.

If I see another thread like this everyone is getting an infraction.

Victor

Legal privilege - does it apply here? Its not like debt collectors are an authority on whether people owe money or not. The ISP was already proven to be wrong in-front of ComReg and they aren't mistaken, they are wrong.

My post was intended as practical advice, not legal advice.

Tom Young

Sorry not too sure what your angle here is. The ISP (according to what I can see above) has not yet been proven wrong by ComReg. The OP should take that course of action first.

Victor

Tom Young wrote: »

Sorry not too sure what your angle here is. The ISP (according to what I can see above) has not yet been proven wrong by ComReg. The OP should take that course of action first.

But the OP sadi he went to ComReg and the dispute was settled. I presume he means 'settled' in the ordinary meaning ("ComReg settled it for us"), not the legal meaning ("we settled between us"), i.e. that ComReg made a decision, not that the parties agreed something between themselves and the ComReg complaint was withdrawn.

alanfa wrote: »

I was in dispute with an Internet provider , the dispute went on for about 6 months and eventually I got the regulator to intervene and the dispute was settled .

Tom Young

That doesn't mean that monies are not due and owing ..... or a mistake could have been made.

pirelli

Tom Young wrote: »

That doesn't mean that monies are not due and owing ..... or a mistake could have been made.

So either way it is qualified privilege, and as to a mistake: to argue that such a 'mistake' does not qualifiy for such privilege, is just not worthwhile.


There is still a case there..malice..mistake amounting to..

Tom Young

Amounting to a loss of goodwill on the part of the supplier to the customer who in this instance is the OP. There is unlikely to be anything further, understandible annoyance for same but nothing more.