Family ‘harassed’ by debt collectors
AUCKLAND: A family says its members have been ‘‘harassed and intimidated’’ by debt collectors who have visited 10 times looking for people not living at their home.
Stephen and Taryn Dryfhout tried unsuccessfully to trespass the two debt collectors from Intercoll, complaining to police and to the manager of the company.
But they say that as recently as Wednesday night, a debt collector from the company turned up at their Papakura home looking for a person they maintained was connected to the address.
Taryn Dryfhout said her husband ordered the collector off his property.
‘‘My children have gone to bed in fear,’’ she said. ‘‘My husband, myself and our children are frightened and feel harassed at the hands of Intercoll.’’
The couple moved to the Auckland state house from the South Island last year and do not know the people Intercoll are seeking.
Ms Dryfhout said the debt collectors first came knocking last December, looking for a man and a woman who allegedly owed money and previously lived at the address.
After that, she said, they began turning up regularly. They were intimidating and persistent, ‘‘standing over me and visiting during work hours when my husband was not home and I was alone with the children’’.
Ms Dryfhout complained to Intercoll general manager Mark Francis.
‘‘They say they have a credible lead that the person they’re looking for is con nected to this house and do we know them . . . We don’t really know many people in Auckland and we feel it’s nothing to do with us.’’
She said initially, calls to police were fruitless. However, on Wednesday police updated their complaint to a case of criminal harassment.
Mr Francis said an investigation into the Dryfhouts’ address indicated it had been given fraudulently and Intercoll had removed it from its database while the investigation was ongoing.
In a May 11 email to Ms Dryfhout, he denied harassing the family.
‘‘The simple fact is that these people have historically used your address and we are obliged to try and make contact with them at any address they may be residing or using for mail,’’ he wrote. ‘‘We do not accept this constitutes harassment.’’ — NZME