Two reasons:

1. Get EVERYTHING in writing - so that you can prove it to lawyers and judges
2. A trained debt collector can do a lot of damage to you on the phone. They can talk you into giving information that seems innocuous to you but which is damaging to you.

Reader's tip 1:

"My strategy when telephoned was to take the name of the person and put the phone down. Then write warning them that they were jeopardising my position by harassing me at work (all written plainly and factually I might add, rather than using any nasty tones)"

You are likely to receive all sorts of written requests to pick up that phone and call. Here are some reader's tips on what to put in a letter that gently refuses to discuss this by phone

Reader tip 2:

"I appreciate that you would prefer to continue negotiations by telephone, but I think giving the seriousness of the matter that all communications with yourselves should be in written form. This will lead to less misinterpretation at a later date, should the situation arise."

Reader tip 3:

"Well, I can tell you what I did, because this has happened to me. Abbey have asked me to phone a Mr Paul Mullins (debt recovery manager) a few times now, instead of giving me the evidence I've asked for. So it's probably a common tactic. I guess they want us to ring up to discuss a 'settlement' - easier for them than actually supplying the evidence, of course.

I simply wrote something along the lines of, 'As you have instructed solicitors against me, and as this is clearly an issue to be addressed with the utmost seriousness, I am unable to discuss this matter over the telephone. I would be grateful if you put any information which you have for me in writing at your earliest convenience, along with the evidence of your claim which I have previously requested, and I will of course respond in due course."

Reader tip 4:

"In order to ensure:

a) that yourselves, your client and myself have an accurate record of what has been said, and
b) that the court is presented with an accurate record in any subsequent legal action you may bring,

I am happy to continue this correspondence in writing. Please put in writing the information you wished to impart by telephone.

I am very hopeful that the information you wish to supply is a proper response to my CPR requests for information about your client's claim and you will be aware that you weaken your client's legal position if you impart this information by phone rather than in writing."

Our tip: Stay off the phone.

Here's how easily you can be conned into getting on that phone. This is a picture of note designed to look like a delivery message from Hillside Couriers. It was sent to a couple being chased by Abbey National lawyer Dibb Lupton Alsop. It asked them to dial a telephone number.

Click on the image to see a bigger copy (about 400kb download but worth it!)

And here is a transcript of the telephone call that followed:

All they were basically interested in was if we worked. It was my wife Tracey who made the call, she was actually looking forward to it - unbelievable! She is much better on the phone than I am. The conversation she had with the female at the other end of the line consisted of the following:

Q. We are working for the Dibb Lupton Alsop group and we have a message from them. Are you working?

A. I'm not telling you that.

Q. Well, are you employed?

A. Mind your own business.

Q. You are not doing yourselves any favours! We have you down as a housewife. Are you working?

A. Look, why should I tell you?

Q. All our client wants to establish is if you can't pay, then they will close your mortgage account. (very sly).

A. Silence.........................

Q. Is Mr working?

A. I'm telling you nothing

Q. You are being very unco-operative. We have no alternative but to tell our client to proceed with legal action.

A. Go ahead.

Q. Why are you being so unhelpful

A. Dibb Lupton Alsop are the unhelpful ones.

Q. Why

A. They won't supply us with documents to substantiate their claim.

Q. Such as?

A. For a start they deny cashing-in endowment policies

Q. Dibb Lupton Alsop wouldn't have done that

A. That's funny, we have photocopies of the cheques that have been made out to them - and actually, it would have been Abbey National, who are Dibb Lupton Alsop's clients (durrrr!!!)

Q. You are doing yourselves an injustice by not co-operating.

She then went on to repeat again the "are you working" questions and then finally to repeat the threat of legal proceedings, she then abruptly hung-up Anne Robinson style - perhaps we are the weakest link!

The above is not necessarily in the correct order of what was said - if you know what I mean, but it is what was actually said. The actual call couldn't have lasted any more than a couple of minutes. We guessed that the note was from them. As you can see from the way it is worded, if you don't stop and look at it properly you would think that the message was a recorded one.

Just as a matter of interest, we have had a similar event happen approx. 2 yrs ago. Then it was a postcard addressed to my wife only from a company called Interim Justica (or something like that), asking her to "please telephone Val". We couldn't actually read the number on the card because it was so badly handwritten, therefore no call was made. We thought if it was important they will get in touch again. This was all before the shortfall chasers were on the scene.

You may also receive requests to telephone "to discuss the situation but not to discuss the shortfall". Be careful of these. Here is a post about this kind of request and our reply:

Then today, my husband gets a letter from 'Target Professional Services' asking him to phone them immediately about the shortfall. They say they were asked to contact him on behalf of their client (halifax) and are not there to demand any money from him but to merely discuss his current situation.

Obviously he is not going to phone them, says he is going to write them a letter saying that he informed the Hlaifax that there would be no further correspondance until they have proveided the SARN info he has requested.

But - who are they and what do they want? It seems strange that the Halifax would get them involved at this stage when they are still processing the information for the SARN.

Here is The Home Repossesion Page's reply to this reader:

You wanted to know why they wanted you to ring.... You have to remember that all shortfall chases are about trying to extract as much money from as possible *as cheaply* as possible.

Lenders ensure that they keep their costs down by assessing the cost/benefits of each different way of handling the different collection methods they have available. But to make that assessment they have to have information about you. Like how much you earn, how much you spend, what assets you own. Ie, what you are worth. They can then decide whether it is worth the cost of taking you to court or not.

Income and Expenditure forms are a key part of gathering information about you. By filling it in you help the lender get a better grip on the cost/benefits of chasing you in different ways. That's one of the reasons why this site strongly recommends that people do not fill income & expenditure forms in. It keeps the lender that bit more off-balance, that bit more uanble to decide what to do about you.

Debt collectors and private investigators are two more information gathering tools. People are surprised to hear that lenders employ private eyes for shortfall collection assessment. My SARN on Bradford & Bingley had odd "3/4" numbers in it. Bradford & Bingley's compliance officer told me that these mean three out of four private eyes had been employed on this case. The Council of Mortgage Lenders admitted to Mortgage Introducer magazine that its members used private eyes to gather information on former customers. This was in response to an article I wrote after several contributors noted people sitting in cars outside their houses, being followed and having their bins raked through. Private eyes and debt collectors are often the same thing - as we show elsewhere on this site. The reason? To prepare a detailed pre-litigation report (AKA a prelit report) that establishes whether you are worth the costs (and risks) of suing you or whether other options - debt collectors or more letters - would be more likely to produce a *profitable* result instead.

Target was being honest - it almost certainly does not want to talk to you about the debt. It wants to talk to you about how much you earn, how much you spend, what assets you own. Ie, what you are worth. This is so it can product a prelit report for Halifax.

I received a roughly similar request to telephone Wescot when I told Bradford & Bingley to prove the debt it claims I owe.

You can see that request here: http://www.home-repo.org/reposses/letter8.htm

You can see my response to it here (I strongly recommend you use my response and stick to it): http://www.home- repo.org/reposses/letter9.htm

You can see the two pages Wescot sent to Bradford & Bingley when it received my response here: http://www.home-repo.org/reposses/wespreli.htm and here: http://www.home-repo.org/reposses/wesprel2.htm

And you can see why all this was being done by reading Bradford & Bingley's internal record of the shortfall chase. To get to the material about what Wescot was doing, you need to scroll down to the entry for 27th October 1997 in the document here: http://www.home- repo.org/reposses/mindset.htm

I obtained this internal record by later serving a SARN on Bradford & Bingley. I obtained the copies of what Wescot sent to Bradford & Bingley by serving a SARN on Wescot. I knew to serve a SARN on Wescot because I saw their name in the documents that Bradford & Bingley sent to me in response to the SARN I served on Bradford & Bingley.

Reader Tip 5.

If you have the nerve follow this script.

You: for legal reasons I have to inform you that I am taping this conversation, please may I have your name.

Some will put the phone down now, other will argue about giving you their name, other will give it over easily. IF they refuse to give you their name simply put the phone down.

You: As of today the (date, time) I am formally requesting that under the data protection act that you remove my telephone number from your records, failure to do so is an offence and I will report you to the data protection office.

Some will argue that they have the right to keep it, this isnt the case if they have your address. Simply repeat the last bit and state that you arent prepared to argue points of law.

You: Furthermore I am formally requesting that you only contact me in writing, should you phone again I will consider this as harassment and report you to the Office Of Fair Trading, who have the power to remove your credit license, I may also take legal action against you. Please note I will now be writing to your company confirming this discussion. Goodbye.

If you have access to a tape it's best to use it and send a transcript of the convo.

For any further calls simply quote the time & date of the convo, with who you spoke to. Get their name and report them to the OFT and your solicitor.

Return to Do's and Don'ts

Home Page	Receive free news and updates
	Tell a friend about this site
Last modified: 05 May 2002
© The Home Repossession Page 1997-2000