OFT Debt Collection Guidelines (for reference)

[ForumFriend]

This post is to provide the link to the OFT Debt Collection Guidelines, which has been referred to in recent forum posts.  Anyone who hears from Oriel may wish to consult these to decide whether or not Oriel are following the guidelines or not.

http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

[Dave McDave]

Well for anyone that has been contacted by Oriel as "The Computer Owner" I suggest they read page 10 of the document. Section 2.8 paragraph A.

[hemogoblin]

After reading section 2, 'Unfair Business Practices', I'd say both Platte and Oriel are playing dirty.
Careful, Mr Owen Williams, Oriel may just lose that precious 'reputable' tag!

[matt_d]

Well for anyone that has been contacted by Oriel as "The Computer Owner" I suggest they read page 10 of the document. Section 2.8 paragraph A.

Care to enlighten us?

[Dave McDave]

Well for anyone that has been contacted by Oriel as "The Computer Owner" I suggest they read page 10 of the document. Section 2.8 paragraph A.

Care to enlighten us?

I think it's already been mentioned Matt_d, But I'll quote it out.

"Deceptive and/or unfair methods.
2.8 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

a. sending demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question, for example, threatening debt recovery action to 'the occupier' or sending a payment demand to all people sharing the same name/date of birth as a debtor in the hope that contact with the correct debtor will be made.

b. disclosing details to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question, for example, disclosing details to 'the occupier' of an address."

Now I'm no solicitor but I'd say that Oriel are in breach of the OFT Guidlines for Debt Collection if they sent a letter addressed to "The Computer Owner" as this is directly related to the OFT's example of attempting to persue a debt from 'The Occupier'.
And that would be one count for every letter sent. Add them all up and they should be in for a serious investigation of their entire business by the OFT.

I'd suggest that anyone that has received a letter addressed to 'The Computer Owner' immediately forward a complaint to the OFT about Oriel.
I'd recommend sending these complaints by recorded delivery, not certificate of posting, and then post on this Forum so that we can keep account here of the number of complaints registered. Perhaps ForumFriend can begin a new thread specific to this task?

McDave

[Dave McDave]

With regards to our case, or to be specific my mothers case, I noted only one thing in these guidlines, which sort of applies to everyone being chased by Oriel and Platte for payments.

"Charging for debt collection

2.10. Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

e. applying charges which are disproportionate to the main debt."

Now my maths are a bit rusty but a debt of £29.99 gets a charge added of £25. That's a massive 83%.
I'd say that was pretty 'disproportionate'! Even though I know they'll argue that £25 is what it costs to send a letter these days.
But since banks were recently brought to heel for applying charges such as this for going overdrawn or not having enough in your account to cover a direct debit, perhaps there is a case here for the same?

McDave

[matt_d]

Oh I see. Sorry, I wasn't sure what "the document" referred to.