Energy Supplier continuing harassment (for a debt you do not owe):
“ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE”
[YOUR NAME & ADDRESS]
[ENERGY COMPANY’S NAME & ADDRESS]
Your Ref: [ENERGY COMPANY’S REFERENCE]
Dear Sir / Madam
RE: YOUR CONTINUED HARASSMENT]
I refer to your most previous letter to me dated [ENTER DATE] [and your persistent telephone calls – DELETE AS APPROPRIATE].
In reference to this matter, you are now making threats for the amount of [ENTER AMOUNT]; an amount you acknowledge fully well I do not owe. You are therefore found in Breach of statutory law, as detailed below:
1. s.40 The Administration of Justice Act 1970 –
(1) A person commits a criminal offence if, with the object of coercing another person to pay money claimed from the other as a debt due under a contract, he –
(a) harasses the other with demands for payment which, in respect of their frequency or the manner or occasion of making such demand, or of any threat or publicity by which any demand is accompanied, are calculated to subject him or members of his family or household to alarm, distress or humiliation.
2. Protection from Harassment Act, 1997 –
(1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct:
(a) which amounts to harassment of another, and
(b) which he knows or ought to know, amounts to harassment of the other.
(2) For the purposes of this section, the person whose course of conduct is in question, ought to know that it amounts to harassment of another, if a reasonable person in possession of the same information would think the course of conduct amounted to harassment of the other.
3. Communications Act 2003, s.127 – [DELETE AS APPROPRIATE]
(2) Misuse of communication, with the intent to cause annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety.
As an Energy Supplier, you will not doubt acknowledge the Acts above, and should therefore not cause an abuse of your powers. You have however, gone beyond what is considered as ‘reasonable conduct.’
I therefore further draw your attention to a relevant Court of Appeal decision, held in favour of the Defendant in such action; (the Claimant being the Energy Supplier): British Gas V Ferguson. Please be aware, the Court ruled – “liability for harassment can be generated via an automated system such as a computer, and if an employee carries out acts of harassment which management knew nothing of; then an ‘ought to know’ claim would suffice.”
If you continue to harass me in this way, you provide me with no other alternative than to report this matter to The Financial Services Ombudsman and The Enforcement Services Association, and I will seek compensation, with application to bring about criminal proceedings against yourselves.
[PRINT NAME AND SIGN]