Debt agency contacting you at old address?

M

marfsmal

Registered User
Messages
157
Hey all,

I contacted a debt agency by email about 2 months ago to inform them of my new address and they confirmed receipt of same and said they had 'noted' it. I clearly stated I no longer live at my old address.

Were they to contact me at this old address some time after they confirmed they had taken note of my new address, do I have any grounds to take a case against them?
 
Why does everyone want to sue someone these days? Seriously - change of address!!!
 

What damages to your name or reputation would you have suffered by them sending a letter or knocking at the door of that address?
 
Of course there would be damages to reputation were that letter to be accidentally opened, etc. or were it to be not properly closed when it arrived at the address which often happens.

From what I understand they would be breaking the law if they contacted me at an old address, be that by post or by turning up at that address.
They are legally obligated to update their records with new contact information.
 
staff said:
Why does everyone want to sue someone these days?
Click to expand...

Presumably to escape from their debts?

A woman on the other side of the road stared at me in a funny sort of way today. Have I a case against her for anything? Maybe some solicitor who is not too busy would take it on a no foal, no fee basis.

Brendan
 
And what's highly confidential about you walking down the other side of the street Brendan?
 
marfsmal said:
Of course there would be damages to reputation were that letter to be accidentally opened, etc. or were it to be not properly closed when it arrived at the address which often happens.
Click to expand...

Yes but the question is did you suffer actual monitory damage or not?

Judges to do not take kindly to people who wast the time of the courts and you could well end up have cost awarded against you even if you were in the right!

Furthermore you should not be surprised if the debt collection agency go out of their way to make the whole process as painful as possible as a result of your prating about!
 
Brendan mentioned above how people might do this if they want to escape their debts- well, when you have repaid principal, and lots of interest on top, anyone can hold their head up high. I know I can when I walk down the street.

The bubble has burst for the banks.

@Jim- monetary damages suffered by the nation?
 
marfsmal said:
Of course there would be damages to reputation were that letter to be accidentally opened, etc.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily, you would need to be able to show that you in particular suffered damage to your reputation by someone else accidentally opening your correspondence.
I rented a place in the UK recently which had been home to someone who had not settled all his debts - based on some of the correspondence looking for any information on the whereabouts of a previous tenant (generally speaking electricity providers and gas providers are not looking for you because they want to give you money back!). Does that mean that my viewing such correspondence amounts to a damage to the reputation of a person I have never met? Or is it a reasonable measure for them to try and track that person down? Given that he has essentially stolen from them I cannot see how their action is damaging.

marfsmal said:
or were it to be not properly closed when it arrived at the address which often happens.
Click to expand...
That is a bit of a generalisation! Exactly how often does it happen that your post is partially open? I suspect it is much rarer than you imply.

marfsmal said:
From what I understand they would be breaking the law if they contacted me at an old address, be that by post or by turning up at that address.
They are legally obligated to update their records with new contact information.
Click to expand...
And if they do so you can complain and insist they update their records, if they repeatedly use your old address to contact you and ignore your information then perhaps you could consider following up on the legal penalties. But there always has to be some allowance for mistake.

Also you appear to be mixing up the civil and the criminal in your thinking. The civil aspect would be damage to your reputation if any of their actions could be deemed damaging by a judge - by no means certain. The criminal aspect would be the record keeping.
 
Thanks so-crates. This is hypothetical for now. I'm trying to learn as much as possible about the area of personal debt. I really don't like what has happened to this country and really resent the divide.
 
You'd be a strange person marfsmal if you liked a hangover and Ireland is currently suffering the mother of all hangovers. I am not sure which divide you are referring to though.
 
The PI Bill hasn't even come into force yet, 5 years on, which says it all. That it is deliberate on the part of the government who gladly bought into the EU's austerity drive and do everything as they are told to do and yet at the same time they are getting away with it. Who is calling for speedier implementation of this legislation? Two names spring to mind- Jill Kerby and Eddie Hobbs.

The divide as I see it is between the conservatives and those who think the little guy should pay, and those of us who supported Morgan Kelly in 2010 when he said we should default and recover more quickly. It is so apparent all the time whenever you talk to people and sadly I have to interact with lots of camp 1 on a regular basis.
Camp 1 tend to believe Enda Kenny when he says that ATM machines would close and that we would be a 3rd world country if we did what Morgan Kelly advised.

And you have some seemingly intelligent people in Camp 1. So what hope, for the country, the people, then?
 
Normally we delete posts which go way off topic.

But as you are taking your own thread into a rant, we will leave it.
 

Well if I had any doubt about your first post, it seems clear now - avoid your debts and let your neighbour, work colleagues and relations carry the can through extra taxes!
 
As stated Jim, principal and interest have been paid back already.

Should I pay back 20k for what was a 5k loan to ensure my neighbours, work colleagues and relations don't get an increase in taxes?
 
marfsmal said:
As stated Jim, principal and interest have been paid back already.
Click to expand...

Well if you have paid it back, why are they still after you???

marfsmal said:
Should I pay back 20k for what was a 5k loan to ensure my neighbours, work colleagues and relations don't get an increase in taxes?
Click to expand...

You are the one that decided to take out the loan and you are the one who got the benefit from it, no one else agreed to carry it for you, so yes!
 
It's known as cumulative interest Jim.

And pitting one small fish against another one is no longer currency here either. People are far more aware now, not just me
 
marfsmal said:
It's known as accumulative interest Jim.

And pitting one small fish against another one is no longer currency here either. People are far more aware now, not just me
Click to expand...

One small fish expecting all the other small fish to foot the bill for his mistakes is what we have here! No matter how you dress it. Enough said I think.
 
marfsmal said:
As stated Jim, principal and interest have been paid back already.

Should I pay back 20k for what was a 5k loan ...?
Click to expand...

I haven't heard of accumulative interest before. Did you know about it before you borrowed?

In Ireland lenders are obliged under the Consumer Credit Act to show the APR and the total repayments on the loan agreement. Did they do so?

Was it an Irish lender?

Who is the lender?

What was the APR?

What was the period?

If you have not been charged in line with the agreement, then you should be challenging it, rather than trying some spurious counter-claim?

If they have not complied with the Consumer Credit Act you should challenge it.

But you have really no case by simply ranting about banks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register