Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36074886)

Someone has tried to sign up to VM & been told that they cannot do so until a debt to Telewest of £64 is paid. He denies he's ever been with Telewest and VM say that the debt is so old that they no longer have any further details. It's not really a problem as the debt will now be statute barred & he simply got his partner to sign up instead.

Is this practice of trying to recover old debts new as i've not heard of this before?

As a private company VM are free to refuse service to anybody they choose (except in limited circumstances), but if it were me i'd be questioning the legality of this given that they only have very flimsy evidence, yet were accusing me of owing money. In the past debt collection agencies have come a cropper when trying to do this.

It does seem an odd business decision to jeopardise at least 18 monthly payments for the sake of £64 though. If he genuinely didn't owe it (or did & simply didn't want to pay it) they still wouldn't get their money & have lost 18 months worth of revenue!

I have come across cases where Sky have written off trivial amounts so that returning customers can start afresh and enable Sky to raise far more than the original debt too.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36074894)

If he did owe, he’s a credit risk, and could accumulate further debt...

It also depends what else is on their credit score - if they have other missed/late payments for other utilities/credit cards/loans, this will lower the overall credit rating - it's very rarely decided on one "negative" action.

Do you have a link to this story, please?

Originally Posted by Jaymoss (Post 36074906)

Something dating back to Telewest most certainly will have been removed from the Credit Scores years ago

My main issue with this story is how something dating back so far is still on record

GDPR states

"any personal data must not be kept any longer than it is necessary for the purpose for which the personal data is processed"

I would quest the number of years passed since Telewest existed that this term has been breached

14 years have passed since Telewest ceased trading

Originally Posted by Jaymoss (Post 36074906)

Something dating back to Telewest most certainly will have been removed from the Credit Scores years ago

My main issue with this story is how something dating back so far is still on record

GDPR states

"any personal data must not be kept any longer than it is necessary for the purpose for which the personal data is processed"

I would quest the number of years passed since Telewest existed that this term has been breached

14 years have passed since Telewest ceased trading

Originally Posted by RobboEdin (Post 36074907)

Of course, this is all hearsay, anyway, from a source that usually provides less than full information.
How long ago? No information.
Was it really Telewest? Maybe but perhaps just a vague recollection. I still sometimes refer to Telewest but have no idea when it changed to NTL then Virgin Media.

Originally Posted by nomadking (Post 36074888)

They're not chasing after an old debt in general, but if somebody has arrears with a company, it's not unreasonable for them to ask for that debt to be cleared before signing up with them, again.

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 36074894)

If he did owe, he’s a credit risk, and could accumulate further debt...

It also depends what else is on their credit score - if they have other missed/late payments for other utilities/credit cards/loans, this will lower the overall credit rating - it's very rarely decided on one "negative" action.

Do you have a link to this story, please?

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36074889)

What a load of typical B/S from you again.

Originally Posted by GrimUpNorth (Post 36074901)

I think it's fair enough to refuse a service to someone who historically owes you money.

I used to work part-time for a company that collected debts for various companies and from my experience the majority of the people we visited denied owing anything and insisted the company was in the wrong. Strange how very often they 'wrongly' owed money to lots of different companies who all must have got their records messed up. I suppose it's just like the majority of people in prison are innocent too!

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36074918)

He had to write to VM (Scotland I think he said). VM say it was from 20 years ago when he left Telewest, so it's definitely a debt related to Telewest but (he says) he's never been signed up to them. This all came about when he tried to sign up with VM.

---------- Post added at 15:08 ---------- Previous post was at 15:04 ----------



Fair point, but i'm surprised it wasn't written off years ago, for accounting purposes if nothing else.

When I worked in housing, if rent arrears hadn't been paid and the former tenant hadn't been traced after so long, the debt would have been written off. Otherwise the councils total rent arrears would look bad as it was inflated with debt that was unlikely to ever be repaid.

---------- Post added at 15:10 ---------- Previous post was at 15:08 ----------



Fair point Re: credit risk, but they did say that if he paid it, he could have a VM account, so I don't think there were any other factors involved.

---------- Post added at 15:13 ---------- Previous post was at 15:10 ----------



Unusually, your usual pig ignorant comment has served a purpose on this occasion as it could be an indication that this situation is not that common.

---------- Post added at 15:27 ---------- Previous post was at 15:13 ----------



He does deny any knowledge of this debt, but as you say this could be because he doesn't want to pay it. He might owe it, but have genuinely forgotten about it or VM might indeed have got him mixed up with someone else.

He did ask about a subject assess request, but the VM staff said that they had no other information other than what he had given him eg the original invoice.

My main concern isn't about this particular individual though, but the fact that any of us can, on the face of it, be accused of owing money based upon very flimsy & very old information with no way of challenging it!

There used to be a PPV service on Sky that went bust called U>Direct. Years later a debt collection company bought their outstanding customer debts, again with very little information about how these debts arose. From what I remember they either had to be written off or were unenforceable because of this.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36074918)

He had to write to VM (Scotland I think he said). VM say it was from 20 years ago when he left Telewest, so it's definitely a debt related to Telewest but (he says) he's never been signed up to them. This all came about when he tried to sign up with VM.

---------- Post added at 15:08 ---------- Previous post was at 15:04 ----------



Fair point, but i'm surprised it wasn't written off years ago, for accounting purposes if nothing else.

When I worked in housing, if rent arrears hadn't been paid and the former tenant hadn't been traced after so long, the debt would have been written off. Otherwise the councils total rent arrears would look bad as it was inflated with debt that was unlikely to ever be repaid.

---------- Post added at 15:10 ---------- Previous post was at 15:08 ----------



Fair point Re: credit risk, but they did say that if he paid it, he could have a VM account, so I don't think there were any other factors involved.

---------- Post added at 15:13 ---------- Previous post was at 15:10 ----------



Unusually, your usual pig ignorant comment has served a purpose on this occasion as it could be an indication that this situation is not that common.

---------- Post added at 15:27 ---------- Previous post was at 15:13 ----------



He does deny any knowledge of this debt, but as you say this could be because he doesn't want to pay it. He might owe it, but have genuinely forgotten about it or VM might indeed have got him mixed up with someone else.

He did ask about a subject assess request, but the VM staff said that they had no other information other than what he had given him eg the original invoice.

My main concern isn't about this particular individual though, but the fact that any of us can, on the face of it, be accused of owing money based upon very flimsy & very old information with no way of challenging it!

There used to be a PPV service on Sky that went bust called U>Direct. Years later a debt collection company bought their outstanding customer debts, again with very little information about how these debts arose. From what I remember they either had to be written off or were unenforceable because of this.

Originally Posted by Mythica (Post 36074926)

Who is "he" or who is "someone"? For all we know, it's someone you've just made up.

Originally Posted by Maggy (Post 36074927)

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36074929)

That's none of your business, but giving you their name wouldn't satisfy your ridiculous assertation anyway..

---------- Post added at 19:26 ---------- Previous post was at 19:10 ----------



Not everything has something that can be linked to, or if it has, one that would provide any additional information or prove anthing one way or the other. Most posts are based on hearsay regarding the poster themselves, friends, family, neighbours etc

The salient point of this thread is to ascertain if this practice is widespread by VM (or any other company) but it doesn't seem to be as nobody has mentioned thus far that it has happened to them or someone they know. This pleases me immensely.

Originally Posted by Mythica (Post 36074936)

If its none of my business then why are you posting it on a public forum? What, that I think you could be making it up? I don't think that's ridiculous considering.

Originally Posted by Mythica (Post 36074936)

If its none of my business then why are you posting it on a public forum? What, that I think you could be making it up? I don't think that's ridiculous considering.

Originally Posted by RobboEdin (Post 36074938)

Touché.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36074942)

It's already been explained why I have posted about this. I know that you like to ask questions about things that have been clearly explained to you over and over again; try reading and digesting things instead.

The persons name is irrelevant and remains none of your business, but it's not about this is it? It's a further example of you stirring things up.

To clarify, I didn't 'make it up' as you put it. Adults don't tend to do that sort of thing, not that I would expect you to understand.

This conversation is now closed.

---------- Post added at 21:46 ---------- Previous post was at 21:45 ----------



And the same goes for you.

Originally Posted by punkrock101 (Post 36075520)

I doubt this story If I'm honest is debt not statute barred after six years? meaning they can't pursue you for the debt. Just another wild story from Mr Coulter.

Originally Posted by punkrock101 (Post 36075520)

I doubt this story If I'm honest is debt not statute barred after six years? meaning they can't pursue you for the debt. Just another wild story from Mr Coulter.

Originally Posted by Inactive Digital (Post 36075524)

A debt that is statue barred can still be pursued, just not through the legal system.
I can't say I blame VM for wanting a debt paid before allowing a customer to sign up again, regardless of how old the debt is.

Originally Posted by Inactive Digital (Post 36075524)

A debt that is statue barred can still be pursued, just not through the legal system.
I can't say I blame VM for wanting a debt paid before allowing a customer to sign up again, regardless of how old the debt is.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36075548)

Exactly. It's a shame that others don't get their facts right before trying to be clever as it just makes them look stupid.

Originally Posted by punkrock101 (Post 36075603)

Richard you post these daft stories all the time to digital spy also.. always revolving round virgin media and how bad they are.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36075548)

If you read the full thread you will see the answer to your question. You haven't provided any examples to back up your last remark, so it must be assumed you are just talking crap again to try & stir things up.

Originally Posted by Carth (Post 36075589)

You've changed your tune since the original first post :shocked: :p:

Originally Posted by punkrock101 (Post 36075603)

Richard you post these daft stories all the time to digital spy also.. always revolving round virgin media and how bad they are.

Originally Posted by pip08456 (Post 36075610)

It is a typical "Richard" thread where he is "Told" something, believes it and presents nothing to back it up. When challenged resorts to...



Accusing someone of not providing examples when he himself hasn't is rediculous.

Originally Posted by Itshim (Post 36075705)

Richard you do seem to have record of posting " moans" regarding virgin media . With filmsy "links" to say the least . I really fail to understand why you wish to have anything to do with them. As they clearly causing you and your "friends" great troubles why do you not give them up as a bad job ? . It really is time for you to move on . Unless ...........

"This thread isn't about me, but the subject in hand"

the tone of your posts make it seem that it is :

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36075872)

I have indeed had some shocking trouble with VM, but after intervention by Ofcom & a solicitor, everything has been sorted out & I have been adequately compensated for how I was treated. It is a fact, however, that I have now allowed most business contracts to expire to limit my contact with staff who can often barely speak English and appear to have a limited grasp of manners or common sense. I have been told off the record that VM are looking to stop using these foreign call centres. I do hope that this comes to fruition as many problems would be resolved at a stroke.

I am, however, under no illusion that many, many other people are still being treated badly by this company; a great deal of whom won't be in a position to obtain legal advice & representation.

I speak as I find. When NTL & Telewest rebranded to VM, I found that customer service & the hardware improved. Since LG got their hands on the company it's gone further & further down the pan.

Virgin Media are the most complained about Pay TV provider and, only two days ago, Ofcom told VM to 'up it's game'.

I post about a wide variety of subjects, both negative & positive. Sometimes these involve VM & this forum was actually created to enable people to do this.

Unless otherwise stated, threads that I start are indeed about the subjects in question and not me as an individual and the phrase 'Play the ball, not the man' seems apt.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter (Post 36075872)

I have indeed had some shocking trouble with VM, but after intervention by Ofcom & a solicitor, everything has been sorted out & I have been adequately compensated for how I was treated. It is a fact, however, that I have now allowed most business contracts to expire to limit my contact with staff who can often barely speak English and appear to have a limited grasp of manners or common sense. I have been told off the record that VM are looking to stop using these foreign call centres. I do hope that this comes to fruition as many problems would be resolved at a stroke.

I am, however, under no illusion that many, many other people are still being treated badly by this company; a great deal of whom won't be in a position to obtain legal advice & representation.

I speak as I find. When NTL & Telewest rebranded to VM, I found that customer service & the hardware improved. Since LG got their hands on the company it's gone further & further down the pan.

Virgin Media are the most complained about Pay TV provider and, only two days ago, Ofcom told VM to 'up it's game'.

I post about a wide variety of subjects, both negative & positive. Sometimes these involve VM & this forum was actually created to enable people to do this.

Unless otherwise stated, threads that I start are indeed about the subjects in question and not me as an individual and the phrase 'Play the ball, not the man' seems apt.