Action Orange - Problems with Orange and you want to take them to court

Breach of Consumer Credit Act , breach of Office of fair Tradings Debt Collection Guidance, breach of Credit Service Association Code of Practice

After I had won my second case in August 2009, I wrote to Orange offering them a chance to settle out of court before I initiated a third case against them. I was giving them an opportunity to save us both some time and money without going to court. I offered to accept £1,000 rather than start any other proceedings against them, and they responded as I would expect an arrogant, greedy company to, saying that all matters had been dealt with in full in the previous two cases.

Once again, I went online in October 2009 and started proceedings against Orange and their chief collection company ( at that time with all the letters I had received ), NCO Financial Services for a breach of the Office of Fair Tradings guidelines on debt collection, the Credit Services Association Code of Practice and the Consumer Credit Act. Now NCO had their office in Scotland according to most of the paperwork ( which initially meant I could not include them in my court action as they weren’t in England or Wales ) but after some delving, I found they their main company was registered in London and I used that address for the court 

During the whole of this third case I never once had any correspondence from NCO ( nor did the court ).

The case was initially set to be heard in February 2010 but due to my work commitments I had to have it moved to a later date. NCO still hadn’t responded and filed their allocation questionnaire with the court, and I kept writing to complain and ask the Judge to find the case in my favour, as the defendants hadn’t filed and complied with the allocation questionnaires. Several letters went back and forth between the court, myself and Orange but nothing was resolved. I then realised whilst all this was going on that I had made a miscalculation in the amount I was claiming and went to the court to increase the amount claimed by another £250  

Orange called my action against them ” scurrilous and vexatious “, which basically meant that they knew they’d met their match and they were going to lose again and didn’t like it 

They tried a host of letters complaining to the court that the matters had been dealt with in full and that I had no grounds for any further action against them.

Mediation was then offered by the court but neither party was interested and finally a date was agreed in February 2011 after the court moving the date once ( god knows why, it was never explained to me ).

Once again Orange didn’t bother sending anyone to represent them in the case and asked for it to be heard in their absence.

I had a different Judge for this case, once again a very professional, polite and thorough man, who made me run through the WHOLE history of the previous two cases. He made me explain in detail why I had brought a third case against Orange, and after hearing everything I said and looking at my evidence, he also found in my favour for recovering my loss of earnings during the period between August 2008 to March 2009 and their breaches of the legislation. He very kindly made the Judgement ” joint and several “, so that Orange would be liable for the whole Judgement as NCO had never bothered to contact the court at all  

This time I was awarded £1382.14  

I have now taken Orange for £1449.00, £885.00 and £1382.14 -  a total of  £3716.14 because they are so arrogant and pig headed they refuse to accept and admit when they are wrong. They were so greedy and wanted to get £60 from me that I didn’t owe, and it’s ended up costing them nearly £4,000.00 - will that teach them a lesson, I can tell you from the people that contact me every week that it hasn’t!

Orange in my opinion demonstrate the worst time of commercial sharp practice and poor business ethics and principles, and because of the way they behave will continue to leave themselves open to litigation from anyone like myself, who is brave enough to challenge their illegal business practices in the courts.