Inappropriate collection processes:
Solicitor’s debt collection subsidiary dysfunction creates distress
This is the last of 3 examples where we were able to identify and rectify a particular organisational issue. We would say though that for the most part banks, solicitors and debt collection agencies play reasonably fair.
This is a more recent issue that has only been resolved in September 2016.
For nearly three years we were aware of miscommunication and breaches of protocols with respect to this firm’s activities, including court proceedings issued and enforced despite undertakings that they would not be by the firm.
This was particularly difficult and distressing as it took over 2 years to compile a report of 15 cases where these issues occurred. In September 2016 it came to a head when inappropriate court proceedings were instigated against four of our clients by this firm in a short period of time.
We presented evidence to the firm with regard to these four cases and the other 11 that accumulated during the previous period. It was established that this firm operated a front line call centre in one office whilst the legal aspects were dealt with by another office. We established that what the call centre people were committing to was not being acted upon by the legal office; they were making their own decisions.
Furthermore the computer systems were generating outdated and inappropriate court related communications.
The firm withdrew the proceedings on the four clients and since that time the firm have changed their processes (at least with regard to our clients) resulting in minimal recurrences. However, it is possible that much of the reduced level of issues is because we understand how their systems go wrong and therefore manage our communications accordingly.
4 October By Mel Loades