IQ Consultants, Felicitas Solutions, ECS Trustees - loan repayment demands

[pnr8uk]

Very simple really. Felicitas have started sending text messages. How could you find out if the messages are being sent to the intended person?
I confirmed with HMRC that they did not make the call. I am merely warning others to be cautious before disclosing personal identifiable information to witheld callers posing as HMRC (or anyone else for that matter).

Is this 'a warrant for your arrest has been issued' call/scam?

[webberg]

Very simple really. Felicitas have started sending text messages. How could you find out if the messages are being sent to the intended person?
I confirmed with HMRC that they did not make the call. I am merely warning others to be cautious before disclosing personal identifiable information to witheld callers posing as HMRC (or anyone else for that matter).

So do you have a text message or a call?

A text message from somebody who claims to own your debt has come at the end of an exchange of other communications.

A call from HMRC - if legitimate - has NO CONNECTION - with whatever Felicitas is doing.

By conflating two unrelated items, you are simply creating confusion.

[Paralytic]

I confirmed with HMRC that they did not make the call. I am merely warning others to be cautious before disclosing personal identifiable information to witheld callers posing as HMRC (or anyone else for that matter).

I'd suggest that phoning HMRC and someone telling you they did not make the call does not mean that HMRC did not make the call. Don't put down to malice something that incompetence can explain.

[eek]

I'd suggest that phoning HMRC and someone telling you they did not make the call does not mean that HMRC did not make the call. Don't put down to malice something that incompetence can explain.

HMRC don't make phone calls to chase debts - they outsource that work.....

[webberg]

HMRC don't make phone calls to chase debts - they outsource that work.....

In our client population which has seen APNs, regular tax debts and various disputed debts, I have to say that we have NEVER had a call from any "outsourced" debt collector.

I'm aware that HMRC is able to engage such people, but I think the incidence may be less common than you think.

In the exchange above however, the poster has managed to confuse some sort of nudge from the alleged owner of the loan and HMRC taking action (or possibly their being subject to a scam attempt).

The inference we are invited to draw is that the alleged owner of the loan and HMRC are colluding to remove money from him/her.

I have tried (third attempt now) to say that this is not the case.

[SouthKD]

So do you have a text message or a call?

A text message from somebody who claims to own your debt has come at the end of an exchange of other communications.

A call from HMRC - if legitimate - has NO CONNECTION - with whatever Felicitas is doing.

By conflating two unrelated items, you are simply creating confusion.

Both.

As I've clearly stated, the call WAS NOT legitimate which leads me to believe it was Felicitas trying to ascertain if the number they had for me is correct. There is the correlation. No need to over-complicate a 'warning'.

Obviously any HMRC related debate is not part of this thread.

[SouthKD]

In our client population which has seen APNs, regular tax debts and various disputed debts, I have to say that we have NEVER had a call from any "outsourced" debt collector.

I'm aware that HMRC is able to engage such people, but I think the incidence may be less common than you think.

In the exchange above however, the poster has managed to confuse some sort of nudge from the alleged owner of the loan and HMRC taking action (or possibly their being subject to a scam attempt).

The inference we are invited to draw is that the alleged owner of the loan and HMRC are colluding to remove money from him/her.

I have tried (third attempt now) to say that this is not the case.

You have over-complicated (what I thought was) a very simple statement which I hadn't though to be so ambiguous. Looking back at it, I should have stated 'Felicitas', but was merely continuing the thread from the previous post(s).

I am not linking HMRC to Felicitas in the way you have described above. I am saying, for the final time, I suspect the call I recieved is from Felicitas claiming to be from HMRC to determine if the number was mine. I cannot make it any simpler. Their reason for doing this is quite self-explanatory. You've mentioned HMRC outsource calls - thank you for clarifying.

[webberg]

. You've mentioned HMRC outsource calls - thank you for clarifying.

I have not mentioned that HMRC outsource calls.

What I said was that HMRC has been known to outsource debt collection. I made no mention as to how those outsourced collection agents are permitted or do act, not whether making calls is part of their armoury.

I have said that we have NEVER had a call from any such outsourced collector.

[eek]

You have over-complicated (what I thought was) a very simple statement which I hadn't though to be so ambiguous. Looking back at it, I should have stated 'Felicitas', but was merely continuing the thread from the previous post(s).

I am not linking HMRC to Felicitas in the way you have described above. I am saying, for the final time, I suspect the call I recieved is from Felicitas claiming to be from HMRC to determine if the number was mine. I cannot make it any simpler. Their reason for doing this is quite self-explanatory. You've mentioned HMRC outsource calls - thank you for clarifying.

Why would anyone use the name HMRC in a call - that would be illegal and blooming stupid. There are far easier ways to determine if the number is yours like phoning up and asking if you are SouthKD then saying thank you and putting the phone down.

Did they ask you to confirm your name as otherwise I strongly suspect it was the usual dodgy Indian HMRC phone call scam...

[Superfly]

Before taking up Felicitas on their generous "final" offer, people should consider whether Felicitas have proven to you that you do indeed owe the money they are claiming and also that Felicitas are the legitimate owners of this debt.

This was the crux of the argument of the response letters that were sent to dispute the debt when the first batch of letters began falling from Gladstones. I am not aware of Felicitas being able to successfully respond to these dispute letters, categorically proving to the rest of us that money which we previously thought was remuneration is in actual fact money owed and that they are the legitimate owners of this debt.

They were initially charging 12% to write off the 'loan'. People were told in a previous communication from Felicitas that they had 14 days to respond and set up a standing order for the interest or pay 12% of the loan value to write the full amount off, otherwise court proceedings would be initiated. That didn't happen, instead they have come down to a 5% write-off fee.

They are effectively employing the THL technique of a quickfire twenty-eight day 'Miss-it-Miss-out! Never to be Repeated!' sale, so people do not have time to think things through rationally and just stump up the money in the hope that they do not miss out on this 'opportunity'.

Bear in mind that if you are considering stumping up the 5% write-off fee then you may be opening yourself up to the possibility of admitting that you actually do owe the money. This may erode your ability somewhat to dispute the legitimacy of the debt in the future should things fall through during the 'loan' write-off or if/when anybody else comes knocking in a years time.

Make sure you think things through fully before taking Felicitas up on their generous offer, you may potentially be making things worse for yourself if you handle this poorly. Do not scrimp on this part, seek professional advice and do not decide solely on the basis of the murmurings of anonymous members on a of public forum.