Aktiv capital are licensed in BC, see here;

http://www.consumerprotectionbc.ca/businesses-debt-collection-home/employee-licence-search?first_name=&last_name=&alias_first_name=&alias_last_name=&business_name=aktiv&doing_business_as_name=&Submit.x=0&Submit.y=0&Submit=Search&_submit_check=1

"and had them pull their files from debt buyers under PIPEDA so they could fight them."

Were these interprovincial debts or international debts ?

Hi Hank,

You appear to have a slanted view of things.

What do you do for a living ? Do you run a debt collection business ? Otherwise how could you lawfully have access to a list of debt containing " the account holder's name, address, account number, date of delinquency, purchase date and balance as of purchase date" as that constitutes a credit report and you need justification to have that info.

Assignment relates to a contract, if the contract places obligations on the creditor (which they invariably do) the debt cannot be sold free of those obligations.

If a debt has been assigned and it is a contractual term of the original contract that the English Courts have the exclusive jurisdiction does that obligation transfer to the assignee ?

Hank
"Cannacede does not having any original documentation about Suttle debt. All they have is a summary list of names and amounts owing on the delinquent accounts, but that's sufficient evidence for the Court to find the debt belongs to him."

No that is not the case - see [4] and [40]

[4] On July 15, 2009, MBNA Canada Bank transferred certain accounts receivable by way of a Bill of Sale to Canaccede. The Bill of Sale identifies the effective date for the sale to be March 11, 2009. Although not specified on the face of the Bill of Sale, UNDERLYING DOCUMENTS established conclusively at this trial that one of the “unsecured consumer credit” debts was that of the Defendant.

"[40] Canaccede was also required under the Act to give Suttles notice of the Assignment of the MBNA debt. While details about the debt and a copy of the Assignment were later provided to Suttles, Canaccede failed to do so in accordance with the timelines set out in the legislation and did so only after Suttles requested the information from them."

==============================

Hank, when you say, in relation to [44] "Had they [Canaceede] been forced into compliance by the Director, the legislation would NOT have stopped the company from then attempting to collect the debt from Suttles"

Please read this again. The important word is "then". So they cannot attempt to collect until they are in compliance, otherwise the judge would have omitted the word "then".

Suttle's problem was that he bypassed Consumer Protection BC in the first instance.

In [46] Canaceede did not get contractual interest beyond the assignment date, which they would have been entitled to had the agreement been lawfully assigned.

Dragonslayer,

Why not simply ask them to evidence consent to obtain a report per S107 (1) and S107(2) of the BPCPA, and see what drops out.

If they don't evidence something complain to Consumer Protection BC.

"Consent for report
107 (1) A person must not obtain from a reporting agency a report respecting an individual for a purpose referred to in section 108 (1) (a) [to whom reports may be given] without the consent of the individual.

(2) A person may obtain the consent of the individual by any method that permits the person to produce evidence that the individual consented" including by prominently displaying the information respecting the consent in a clear and comprehensible manner in an application for credit, insurance, employment or tenancy."

Hank - and who ever else cares... I am interested in what you think of this letter. It would be sent to the collector. This is asking the collector to prove that they indeed do carry proof that they hold a contract that you owe them money. Is this dishonest? Is it bad to ask someone to prove that you owe them money before you start dishing out cash? You do know that debts are sold more than once... so an old collector could actually be trying to collect on a debt that they sold years ago. Wouldn't you at least want some kind of proof that they are the new owners of the debt that has been sold 2 or 3 times and be sure that they are being honest before you pay that debt?

Also, if they are not able to prove that they are indeed the owners of the debt, how can they claim that they hold a relationship with me and pull credit history from my file? Again, show me a contract with my signature on it and the collectors legal business name on it that I have entered into contract with. Very basics of contract law. Show me the contract is what this letter is asking. Simply, polity, and to the point.

From:
Date:
To:
Re:
Account Number(s):

To whom it may concern:

I would like to make arrangements to settle the above referenced matter.

Please provide me with your statement of the amount owing as of, %date here(2 weeks out)% together with your assurance that you will accept payment in direct and immediate exchange for the original instrument of indebtedness in its original form.

I require all communication in written form. Pursuant to section 116 (4) (a) of the Business Practices and Consumer Protection Act, Please send all correspondence to:

Contact information here....

Thank you very much.

___________________________
by: NAME HERE

Who is Steve Hoddinott and what happened to him ?

Hank you say "I'm afraid Phillips isn't exactly very clear in Paragraph 36 when he uses the term "assignment" Invariably, it refers to 3'rd part collectionagencies, but Cannacede is strictly a debt buyer, which also has to be licensed as do the collection agencies. "

I think the meaning of "assignment" is clear within the BPCPA and Canaceede.

It follows that if the debt can't be lawfully assigned as a result of the BPCPA then any consent associated with the debt can't have been lawfully assigned. The debt doesn't go away but the contract (including contractual interest) is unenforceable until the deficiency is corrected. The judge didn't award damages as Suttles didn't take his complaint to Consumer Protection BC in the first instance.

The whole agreement consisting of the debt with any obligations of the creditor has to be assigned, the creditor can't pick and choose which elements are assigned. For instance, there is an obligation under UK law for the creditor to provide a copy of the agreement (Section 79 of the UK Consumer Credit Act 1974) on demand, this obligation passes from the assignor to the assignee on assignment of the debt.

Hank "Now, you're claiming Section 12(2) has no relevance? Not even sure what your point, if any, is."

I believe 12(2) is the applicable section. What I am saying is that even if they are not "another organisation" their argument falls apart within 12(1).

You say "However, more relevantly, I wonder why Equifax is going against their own stringent policy of allowing credit reporting info on accounts outside Canada."

Equifax have stated to me that an inquiry is not credit reporting. However, a hard report leaves information viewable by any user of the consumers credit report, and adversely affects credit score. Depending upon the timing a hard inquiry can contravene 109(1)(o) of the BPCPA. This will be investigated in the Trans Union / CPBC judgment.

Hank "Because "Gentle Reader", a loan or a debt is an accounts receivable which is an asset that can be sold just like any other asset. Every debt carries with it the right of the lender to be paid, and it accompanies the debt as long as it remains unpaid. That right can be transferred as many times as it's sold. What part of that fundamental principle of contract law don't you understand?"

I disagree, assignment in BC is regulated activity.

S125 of the BPCPA defines a debt collector as
"collection agent" means a person, whether in British Columbia or not, who
(b) in the course of business takes an assignment of a debt due to another person for the purpose of collecting or attempting to collect payment of the debt"

The DCIR stipulates the exceptions to licensing
http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/12_295_2004#section1.1

So assignment of a debt is not like the sale of "any other asset".

Many banks have a policy of selling UK debt to american lawyer firms for instance Bluestone Law. Bluestone are not lawyers in BC they are defined by the law society of BC as merely "practitioners of foreign" and are not exempt.

Canaccede v Suttles is interesting on this point

"[35] Section 1.1 of the Regulations defines “designated activities” by reference to the businesses and occupations described in s. 125 of the BCPC Act. Section 125 defines a “collection agent” to mean a person who, in the course of business, collects or attempts to collect payment of a debt for another person, or takes an assignment of a debt due to another person for the purpose of collecting or attempting to collect payment of the debt. Collection activities are not prohibited but rather require licensing unless the person or company is exempt.

[36] On the evidence lead by the Defendant, it is clear that Canaccede took “an assignment of a debt due to another person for the purpose of collecting or attempting to collect payment of the debt”. On this basis alone, I conclude they were engaged in a designated activity and should have obtained a license. "

http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.do?text=suttles&language=en&searchTitle=Search+all+CanLII+Databases&path=/en/bc/bcpc/doc/2012/2012bcpc243/2012bcpc243.html&searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAHc3V0dGxlcwAAAAAAAAE