Kia Ora Gents, thought i would share one of our experiences with you and who ever else may find it interesting.
How I fobbed off the debt collectors
I have already fobbed off Auckland collection agencies as well as others from around Australasia, also fended off courts and major banks,…and made them run for the hills, DCA’s (Debt collection Agencies) are festering financial scabs and financial bullies that try to use intimidation and fraud to scam money out of people, learn the rules and laws of commerce and contracts to beat them off.
There is an auckland collection agency that use intimidation and fraud and try to operate outside legislation hoping people are either too stupid or too scared to front them, by posing as a courier company to get information from people and another that uses its private investigation license to intimidate people into contacting them to try and contract people.
Both are operating outside the fair trading act and one is operating outside the private security personnel and private investigators act 2010, see below for the legislation in particular section (4) subsection (a) and (vii)
Private Security Personnel and Private Investigators Act 2010
5 Meaning of private investigator
(1) In this Act, private investigator means a person who, for valuable consideration, either by himself or herself or in partnership with any other person, carries on a business seeking or obtaining for any person or supplying to any person any information described in subsection (2).
(2) For the purposes of this section, information—
(a) means any information relating to—
(i) the personal character, actions, or behaviour of any person; or
(ii) the financial position of any person; or
(iii) the occupation or business of any person; or
(iv) the identity or whereabouts of any person; but
(b) does not include information that is contained in a public record.
(3) For the purposes of this section but without limiting the meaning of the term carries on any business, a person is carrying on a business if he or she holds himself or herself out to the public as being ready to carry on that business.
(4) Despite subsection (1), no person is a private investigator within the meaning of this Act by reason of the fact that—
(a) he or she seeks, obtains, or supplies any information—
(i) for or to the Crown, or any constable, or any local authority; or
(ii) at the request of a person who is not a client of the business; or
(iii) only as a necessary, usual, or reasonable incident of any other activity by that person that is not described in that subsection; or
(iv) for any purpose relating to the dissemination of news or other information to the public or to any section of the public; or
(v) for any cultural or historical purpose or for any purpose relating to education, literature, or science; or
(vi) relating only to the person by whom he or she is engaged or retained; or
(vii) in the course of and for the purposes of the business of a bank, or of a credit bureau, or of a debt collecting agency; or
(b) he or she is a security technician, security consultant, confidential document destruction agent, property guard, personal guard, or crowd controller.
If they leave a note that a private investigator has visited the address acting under instruction from a debt collection agency to either get you to contact them or get the occupants to divulge your details (third party hear, say)they are clearly breaking the law, and usually the person who left the note is NOT the private investigator, its usually the company that is the registered investigator or one or more of the directors and usually not the person visiting the property, some also have what they call “court document servers” which is nothing more than someone dropping off a letter (DCA posties), they are not bailiffs of the courts though they try to make it seem that way, bailiffs are sheriffs and take the same oath as police officers, (district courts act 1947, adjudicature act 1908), these people are not bailiffs and do not work for the courts, you are under no obligation what so ever to answer any of their questions, so don’t.
And what ever you do,…..DO NOT,….I will repeat that,…DO NOT contract with them over the phone, they are recording the conversation and a verbal contract is legal and binding, a voice recording and video recordings are legally classed a document in legislation, interpretation act 1999, tell them that you have no way of verifying who they say they are over the phone and neither can they verify who you say you are, that you do NOT discuss private financial matters with strangers over the phone, and that you do not consent to them ringing you in regard to that matter and hang up,…i mean it HANG UP on them before they try to cause conflict to gauge a measured response from you, that is one of the childish tactics they use, they will say something to piss you off and engage you in conversation with a means to contract you, don’t fall for it, in fact get an app for your phone or something that will record the conversation as your back up that you have told them not to call you, i once to a DCA over the phone “Hello, before we proceed, i would just like to inform you that this call is being recorded for training and evidential purposes, and by continuing this conversation you are consenting to these conditions”, he went straight into his pre-programmed bully script, gotcha, he thought i had said “training and educational purposes”, he had called me a “hire purchase activist” , claimed i was under the mental health act, and a few other derogatory things, then denied it correspondence, until i played it back, never heard from them again.
If they can’t prove the alleged debt exists (because they do not have first hand knowledge of it) can’t provide proof that they have factored the alleged debt being the holders in due course, meaning they have bought the original debt instrument that created the alleged debt, ie, the ORIGINAL contract with your wet ink signature on it (do not…DO NOT..accept a photocopy as proof), making them the holders in due course, can’t prove their claim against you, or can’t provide proof of a contract between them and you then they no have right to try and force any payment out of anyone.
But do not dispute the alleged debt either, they can take you to court if you dispute it,there is something in banking and finance called “conditional acceptance” which these DCA’s either know nothing about or completely ignore, they only want you to either accept (contract) or deny (dispute, which in itself is a form acceptance, if you dispute it then you are acknowledging it’s existence) the alleged debt, which ever one of these you choose acceptance or dispute, you loose, they normally are “acting” on behalf of a principle, you have no debt with the DCA until you contract with them.
Look at it this way, say you are walking down the street and a complete stranger approaches you and say’s,…oi give me that fifty bucks you owe Joe, NOW!!!!, even though you may never have met Joe in your life…what would be your first reaction? well,..that is all they are doing only just on paper.
they will even go to the extent of using law firm letterheads to try and scare you into contracting with them, nearly all of them have no proof the alleged debt exists until you agree to pay something to them and even if they have factored the alleged debt they don’t pay anything anywhere near what they demand from you, demand to see the ledger as proof that they have factored it and you will see how much they paid for it.
In this country there is a six (6) year limitations act, or a statute of limitations, in that after six (6) years the alleged debt can no longer be enforced by the courts, even if the vultures try use the old “legal action” patter to try and intimidate you into contracting with them, unless you accept the debt some how, then the six years starts over again.
They are financial vultures and just like real vultures are pretty persistent but are also easily frightened off if you know commercial law and the laws of contracts, they will not spend too much trying to chase you, their job is gather money not spend it, if they don’t drop it and run away like the financial cowards they are (as most bullies are cowards), they will just fob it off to another vulture, then you just repeat the process until the alleged debt is just bones that no-one is interested in and can’t be bothered chasing anymore.
After taking on a major Australasian Bank and getting the result without going to court, these tough guy wanabe bullies seem like little piss ants in comparison.
Quite alot of these vultures try to give the impression they have some sort of legal clout, they will even try to sound like a law firm with names such as Coward, Bully and Vulture collections limited, and have a picture of the scales of justice or something ridiculous like a roman looking building added to make it look like a courthouse to try and intimidate and frighten people into paying them.
They use word association to try and scare people into thinking that they have legal standing, or are affiliated with a “district” court somehow, but its all smoke and mirrors.
Some, if not most are run by ex cops who were a disgrace to the police while they were there or are just too old, or too stupid for the police, but still crave the bullying they did whilst “acting” as a policy enforskin officer that has become part of their normalcy bias, these are who I call “pigs” they are greedy bullies that no longer have any authority what so ever and never did to start with and are addicted to pushing people around.
make sure that any correspondence you have with these vultures is strictly in writing so you have a record of anything they communicate to you, and you send everything you write to them by registered post, if they only give a P.O Box number then demand, as part your conditional acceptance, that they provide a “physical address for service” to send registered mail (make sure it is the blue envelope not the red one) that way you have records of them receiving your correspondence, and always practice good record keeping.
I have turned the tables on them everytime, by conditionally accepting their presentments and then getting them to dishonour my presentments, and I will eventually end up contracting them through an adhesion contract, tacet agreement by acquiescence by their non response and get the judgement in commerce by having them break the maxims of commercial law in a very short time and trap them into becoming tort feasor or joint tort feasor.
I will then send them an invoice for time spent (just like them my time is not free), damages, administration costs, fee’s, and what ever legal fee’s may be applicable in any functional currency, Euro’s, American Dollars, Peso’s, British Pounds, what ever is going good at the time, (I will only use a lawyer as co-counsel and never EVER as re-presentation), and add 1% of the total outstanding every three (3) months, for their non-compliance they are very substantial amounts and what ever fee’s for lodging a claim on the PPSR.
They will always dishonour (because they have none) and default on their obligations every single time, I will wait until the fifth year of the limitations act and then lodge the claim through a court of competent jurisdiction and add in all the five years worth of late payment penalties they agreed to pay by their silence and here is the Maxim of law that backs that.
Qui tacet consentire videtur.
He who is silent appears to consent.
I use the Maxims quite a lot in my correspondence because they cannot be rebutted and the idiot vultures have to get legal advice on them, because the judges and lawyers like to use these old Latin phrases to sound clever and intelligent, and (Regula pro lege, si deficit lex. In default of the law, the maxim rules) because they are the very foundation of law itself.
I have received sarcasm in response to maxims I have used, on one occasion a complete and utter idiot who thought he was a tough guy debt collector and probably told all his gay mates he was a tough guy, had lied about having first hand knowledge of the Maxims of commercial law in a recorded phone conversation, and when I sent correspondence with a Maxim in it he replied in sarcasm to the Maxim, (BINGO gotcha you knob end and your organization as well), he probably thought he was sounding tough or funny and to his work colleagues had a good laugh, he soon found out it was no laughing matter when he had desecrated the judges sacred Maxim and i slapped a lien on the organization he works for and showed them where they have broken legislative rules. when this goes to court and it will, the judge will tear them to shreds, some judges are multi-generational and these maxims are passed down in their families, and it will definitely not work in their favour at all.
I will always write back to them everytime they write to me, after the invoice, notice of non response, notice of default, 1 or 2 demand notices and a final demand notice have gone out I will only reference my claim against them when corresponding with them and never theirs, as my claim is lawful and theirs isn’t because it doesn’t exist and it is none of my business, my claim is all i need to know, their claim is their business and they have no right to know mine, when they first make contact by writing to you they will always prompt you to “act now” or “you take action” and here is why I write back (Scribere est agere “To write is to act”,) another handy little Maxim.
Hope this helps others to see the disgusting puss ridden scabs that are Debt Collectors and hopefully people will start to stand up to these useless eaters of currency that grow fat off scaring ordinary people into contracts they need not be involved in.
DUM SPIRO SPERO