Not all contracts via phone are recorded. Think of insurance contracts. My company records all calls, but others don't.
I used to work for a company that originally worked by taking business over the telephone then sending a contract for the customer to sign.
We then changed to taking instruction on the telephone with no written contract. The company had to spend many thousands of pounds purchasing call recording equipment to record all calls and give the facility to access any call by date and time and the record it on to tape cassette. Also all agents had to learn certain legal scripts to read to customers.
On many occasions calls had to be accessed and refered to regarding information given.
I can't see a company being able to enforce a contract when they have no evidence of the original agreement, either written or recorded verbally.
Then again, I am not a lawyer!! Any lawyers reading??
Well its been over a week and no follow up letter for me.
Its all very well saying contact TV shows etc but I want to know where people stand legally in terms of not responding to them.
In considerable risk, imo. Ignoring any 'bad debt' claim will count against you if it came to court, and could end up damaging your credit rating. Always go back, state that you do not agree that you owe the money, give your reasons for this and demand evidence that you did watch the films, eg the associated viewing card number.
I used to work for a company that originally worked by taking business over the telephone then sending a contract for the customer to sign.
We then changed to taking instruction on the telephone with no written contract. The company had to spend many thousands of pounds purchasing call recording equipment to record all calls and give the facility to access any call by date and time and the record it on to tape cassette. Also all agents had to learn certain legal scripts to read to customers.
On many occasions calls had to be accessed and refered to regarding information given.
I can't see a company being able to enforce a contract when they have no evidence of the original agreement, either written or recorded verbally.
Then again, I am not a lawyer!! Any lawyers reading??
I know the type of TVR equipment you're talking about, possibly manufactured by Aspect, but at the end of the day the system can still go down! There's always has to be a plan B for when things go wrong.
1/ Dose OffCom know about this company?
2/ How do the scam company know you got sky in the first place if you don't watch the channels?
One easy way for a scammer to find out who's got Sky is to drive around noting all the houses with Sky dishes on them. Then match up the address to the name on the electoral register, and there you go. Or they could buy up records from an installer (illegally, I'm sure). Obviously, they're going to make plenty of mistakes, but most scams only need a tiny percentage success rate to be profitable. And for a scammer, a victim who pays up has extra value, because he can then sell the victim's details to other scammers because, unfortunately, people who crack under the pressure and give into scammers often do so repeatedly.
And there is always the possibility that someone from this company will start posting on this thread. Someone who joined the forum very recently - especially if their English isn't very good.
they do take people to court as i have heard the horror storys..
dont dispute what you cant disprove about viewings and you will find if you pay what you owe you will have no hassle.
I have not watched the channel/film they say. They say it was July 30 2000 when I watched as they also claim the other people on here did. If we watched any of these channels where have they been til now? where is there proof? i.e. viewing card number on the demaned... etc..
My understanding is that the law works the other way round.
In order to be successful in a court, the debt recovery company will need to show evidence that proves the validity of the debt.
It's entirely reasonable, in my opinion, for people receiving these letters to ask to see the evidence before paying, particularly given the time span that has passed.
If the debt recovery company's case is in order, then it should cause them no problem to do so.
I wouldn't encourage anybody to ignore a demand- just ask to see the evidence if they are uncertain.
All those who think that watching something on your sky through ppv and then dont expect a bill.
trust me it isnt a scam
Ps. they know you have watched the channel as its booked through your handset and you have to enter a pin.
when you have your STB communicates with the server and allows you book witch is linked to YOUR sky account.
You don't perhaps 'work' at key2? Or am I just being too cynical about the fact that you've just joined DS and only have two posts both on this thread encouraging people to pay up for something they haven't had?
My understanding is that the law works the other way round.
In order to be successful in a court, the debt recovery company will need to show evidence that proves the validity of the debt.
To those considering offering the couple of quid but not the fees to get rid of them: This will effectively count as acknowledging the debt - in which case I believe it'll be easier for them to get the full amount including charges through the courts.
To those considering offering the couple of quid but not the fees to get rid of them: This will effectively count as acknowledging the debt - in which case I believe it'll be easier for them to get the full amount including charges through the courts.
I agree. Anybody who pays the original "debt" is likely to be seen as having acknowledged that the money is due. The debt recovery company is likely, in those circumstances, to be successful in being awarded its fees.
You don't perhaps 'work' at key2? Or am I just being too cynical about the fact that you've just joined DS and only have two posts both on this thread encouraging people to pay up for something they haven't had?
This seems to be a growing trend. Over on the blagger.com message board (where people post complaints about companies) there have been several posting recently of this nature. They either say how good the company is or claim that they actually work for the company. In all cases the spelling and grammar have been diabolical. I wonder if there is one individual who is posting these replies as a piece of mischief making , and is a bit lacking in the English department ?
I wonder if there is one individual who is posting these replies as a piece of mischief making , and is a bit lacking in the English department ?
Strange really. According to his profile, he hails frae bonnie Scotland, where, as we all know, education is far superior to our Sassenach variety.
I really like the site for that company Key2recoveries - it's very "London": lots of pictures of London transport, Tower Bridge etc.
I bought a bottle of Czech whisky once, and the really interesting thing about it was the label - it was plastered in kilts, thistles, bagpipes, claymores and just about every
Scottish cliche you can imagine, but the more it tried to look Scottish, the less Scottish it appeared.
Like I say, I really like the site for that "London" company key2recoveries.
good luck fighting the charges.
dont dispute what you cant disprove about viewings and you will find if you pay what you owe you will have no hassle.
Good lord you are stupid. I cannot disprove that I was not in Tesco on my twelth birthday. But that doesn't mean I shouldn't dispute a claim that some scamming company puts to me that I ramraided it with a 4x4. Evidence is required by the accuser.
For this size of claim, if they ever took out court proceedings it is likely to go to the small claims court. In cases where debts are disputed, the petitioner has to provide the court with proof of the debt, and also that they are legally entitled to claim the debt.
It is difficult to imagine that it would be worth their while pursuing these claims this way - with solicitor rates well above £100 per hour. they would have to be 100% certain of success and that they would be awarded full costs - I have read that judges are not sympathetic to do this in the small claims court where debts are disputed.
I haven't had a letter, but if I had I would contact the Office of Fair Trading referring them to others on this site who have received similar letters - the OFT have a code of practice for debt recovery companies to follow. This obliges the recovery company to make reasonable investigations to ensure the claim is justified (if the debt is disputed) and not to harrass. I've previously taken another matter up with the OFT in the past and they replied efficiently by email and became very interested and helpful with advice when I provided information that suggested that a company was not following their code of practice.
The following works (happened to me with a company once.. had to consult a lawyer):
1. Write to them, requesting that the either the claim be dropped or that documentary evidence be sent to you proving the claim within 7 days.
2. Inform them that any further correspondence (other than a reply to item 1.) will be charged at a rate of £30 per letter/phone call.
99.9% of the time they'll drop it - companies get these old debt lists and hope they scan scam people out of a few quid... they don't really have a leg to stand on as they rarely actually have evidence, just your name on a printout somewhere.
You do have the right to charge for correspondence (provided you give them notice you're going to), just like they do... if it goes to court they'll get hit for the whole bill - and they know it.
Oh, and most important. Keep copies of all letters and send them by recorded delivery. Don't accept agreements over the phone - if it isn't written down it didn't happen.
Comments
I did move house two and a half years ago though, so that may be why.
I used to work for a company that originally worked by taking business over the telephone then sending a contract for the customer to sign.
We then changed to taking instruction on the telephone with no written contract. The company had to spend many thousands of pounds purchasing call recording equipment to record all calls and give the facility to access any call by date and time and the record it on to tape cassette. Also all agents had to learn certain legal scripts to read to customers.
On many occasions calls had to be accessed and refered to regarding information given.
I can't see a company being able to enforce a contract when they have no evidence of the original agreement, either written or recorded verbally.
Then again, I am not a lawyer!! Any lawyers reading??
2/ How do the scam company know you got sky in the first place if you don't watch the channels?
In considerable risk, imo. Ignoring any 'bad debt' claim will count against you if it came to court, and could end up damaging your credit rating. Always go back, state that you do not agree that you owe the money, give your reasons for this and demand evidence that you did watch the films, eg the associated viewing card number.
I know the type of TVR equipment you're talking about, possibly manufactured by Aspect, but at the end of the day the system can still go down! There's always has to be a plan B for when things go wrong.
key2 are ruthless
they do take people to court as i have heard the horror storys..
dont dispute what you cant disprove about viewings and you will find if you pay what you owe you will have no hassle.
One easy way for a scammer to find out who's got Sky is to drive around noting all the houses with Sky dishes on them. Then match up the address to the name on the electoral register, and there you go. Or they could buy up records from an installer (illegally, I'm sure). Obviously, they're going to make plenty of mistakes, but most scams only need a tiny percentage success rate to be profitable. And for a scammer, a victim who pays up has extra value, because he can then sell the victim's details to other scammers because, unfortunately, people who crack under the pressure and give into scammers often do so repeatedly.
And there is always the possibility that someone from this company will start posting on this thread. Someone who joined the forum very recently - especially if their English isn't very good.
All those who think that watching something on your sky through ppv and then dont expect a bill.
trust me it isnt a scam
Ps. they know you have watched the channel as its booked through your handset and you have to enter a pin.
when you have your STB communicates with the server and allows you book witch is linked to YOUR sky account.
So you are saying we are all dishonest? :mad:
How do you know it's not a scam?
Why should we trust you?
Especially as he can't seem to string a sentence together.
What are you talking about. We do not owe them money and never watched the films mentioned
If we see the evidence that we actually did order the movie then we will pay but we DIDNT watch the channels.
The people on this forum know that you have to enter a pin to watch PPV and know lots about Satellite. Maybe even more than you know.
I speak for everyone that has had one of these letters
My understanding is that the law works the other way round.
In order to be successful in a court, the debt recovery company will need to show evidence that proves the validity of the debt.
It's entirely reasonable, in my opinion, for people receiving these letters to ask to see the evidence before paying, particularly given the time span that has passed.
If the debt recovery company's case is in order, then it should cause them no problem to do so.
I wouldn't encourage anybody to ignore a demand- just ask to see the evidence if they are uncertain.
You don't perhaps 'work' at key2? Or am I just being too cynical about the fact that you've just joined DS and only have two posts both on this thread encouraging people to pay up for something they haven't had?
To those considering offering the couple of quid but not the fees to get rid of them: This will effectively count as acknowledging the debt - in which case I believe it'll be easier for them to get the full amount including charges through the courts.
I agree. Anybody who pays the original "debt" is likely to be seen as having acknowledged that the money is due. The debt recovery company is likely, in those circumstances, to be successful in being awarded its fees.
This seems to be a growing trend. Over on the blagger.com message board (where people post complaints about companies) there have been several posting recently of this nature. They either say how good the company is or claim that they actually work for the company. In all cases the spelling and grammar have been diabolical. I wonder if there is one individual who is posting these replies as a piece of mischief making , and is a bit lacking in the English department ?
Strange really. According to his profile, he hails frae bonnie Scotland, where, as we all know, education is far superior to our Sassenach variety.
I really like the site for that company Key2recoveries - it's very "London": lots of pictures of London transport, Tower Bridge etc.
I bought a bottle of Czech whisky once, and the really interesting thing about it was the label - it was plastered in kilts, thistles, bagpipes, claymores and just about every
Scottish cliche you can imagine, but the more it tried to look Scottish, the less Scottish it appeared.
Like I say, I really like the site for that "London" company key2recoveries.
Just for everyones infomation, the above info was gained from The Royal Mail Website, maybe Key 2 Recoveries Ltd are one and the same?
Good lord you are stupid. I cannot disprove that I was not in Tesco on my twelth birthday. But that doesn't mean I shouldn't dispute a claim that some scamming company puts to me that I ramraided it with a 4x4. Evidence is required by the accuser.
It is difficult to imagine that it would be worth their while pursuing these claims this way - with solicitor rates well above £100 per hour. they would have to be 100% certain of success and that they would be awarded full costs - I have read that judges are not sympathetic to do this in the small claims court where debts are disputed.
I haven't had a letter, but if I had I would contact the Office of Fair Trading referring them to others on this site who have received similar letters - the OFT have a code of practice for debt recovery companies to follow. This obliges the recovery company to make reasonable investigations to ensure the claim is justified (if the debt is disputed) and not to harrass. I've previously taken another matter up with the OFT in the past and they replied efficiently by email and became very interested and helpful with advice when I provided information that suggested that a company was not following their code of practice.
1. Write to them, requesting that the either the claim be dropped or that documentary evidence be sent to you proving the claim within 7 days.
2. Inform them that any further correspondence (other than a reply to item 1.) will be charged at a rate of £30 per letter/phone call.
99.9% of the time they'll drop it - companies get these old debt lists and hope they scan scam people out of a few quid... they don't really have a leg to stand on as they rarely actually have evidence, just your name on a printout somewhere.
You do have the right to charge for correspondence (provided you give them notice you're going to), just like they do... if it goes to court they'll get hit for the whole bill - and they know it.
Oh, and most important. Keep copies of all letters and send them by recorded delivery. Don't accept agreements over the phone - if it isn't written down it didn't happen.
interesting... seems they're part of a bigger group.