thanks for bothering to update us after all the free help you got... dx

eh? they have ZERO standing nor any legal powers on ANY debt. they are NOT BAILIFFS. dx

all are incomplete? we need all pages. the agreement must be for the time/address of takeout date with a tickbox/sig/or typed name if online. the T&C's must have your name and address for the time of their released 'update' the base agreement is here already in many barclaycard PRA or Lowell threads go read a few 10's... as appears and as other threads...mostly bogroll. await the DQ n180 from the court IF one ever comes keep checking MCOL history status.

pers i'd await the mediation and go for a consent order. get things ratified by the judge and legally binding then they cant keep pestering you to up payments dx

yours is not the next move. until/unless lowell produce an enforceable agreement (fat chance) you ignore them. if they dont by say 3 days before the hearing date i'd put in a demand for the claim to be dismissed and an absolvitor issued. blow lowells out the water. used to be an incidental Application not sure if its the same now in the new system. dx

give the SAR another few days . if you get nowt by say tuesday complain to the ICO studio have ignored your legally binding SAR. dx

stupid willy waving. means ZERO. the claim is now well stayed ignore them until/unless they ever raise an N244 to lift the stay and go for defence strikeout/summary judgement...FAT CHANCE. dx

well get reading up then Programmable Search Engine (google.com) clickme^^^^ we are self help too.. you should be blocking and bouncing ALL emails/addresses and blocking their number and reporting the txtx to spam 7726. if you'd read up...you'd have known to do that. dx

you dont seem to have uploaded the cancellation box sheet nor anything with a tickbox/dates name typed in //ie your signup agreeing? did they not supply those? ps ive redacted things too...you left your name on both docs..is the address correct for time of takeout for each set of T&C's/Agreement? (note they are diff updated T&C periods) have a look at PRA barclaycard threads already here, you'll see that (base) agreement return already.... its identical.

i dont think the reason why the defendant lost the case means anything at all in that case. it was a classic judge lottery example.

the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx

wonder what happened? dx

well? dx

post hidden please do not put up docx file all YOUR pers details are in file info/properties - then they'll know you are here. file save as .pdf (turn off properties in options click box) the MEGRE everything to one mass pdf, see the online sites in UPLOAD

just type no need to keep hitting quote. dx