Jump to content


Lowell claim form - old shop direct CAT debt ***Claim Dismissed***


markwales
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2635 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Thanks Mark. I can understand it all being a bit of a blur, but I hope it's a 'nice' blur in your head tonight!

 

If I'm honest, I didn't think the charges and insurance line of attack would get you the result

- it would have been easy to counter-argue.

 

 

Admittedly, there was no way of knowing how 'legal' or 'fair' they were without account statements.

 

 

Maybe the combined strength of all the points you put forward with regards sketchy proof of the debt was enough to give the judge cause to take the easiest route towards dismissing claim

- that being the charges and interest.

 

 

Serves Lowell/Carter right for being so brazen and lazy.

 

 

More power to you for sticking at it!

 

 

Hope it's given you and your wife a nice lift and that spring in your step lasts for a while. :D

 

hope this pays lowlife back some of your pain shamrocker.

 

Without doubt it does!

I personally lost to Aktiv Kapital - naivety played a big part - but my wife had a default judgement and CCJ from Lowell, even after paying a chunk of the debt upon receipt of the claim form.

 

 

I didn't have much of a clue about this stuff back then and probably would have defeated it had the same claim been placed now.

 

 

We recently received correspondence about another debt that's been bought by Lowell, albeit only for a few hundred quid.

 

 

Consequently, it's only served to perk me up a bit and I've already started making their life difficult, and it's got my spark going again and got me back on the forum.

 

 

All things considered,

I'm determined to erode the profit of these leeches by helping others take them on.

 

 

I hate the very nature of this industry as they don't care a jot about the impact their greed has on everyday people like you and me.

 

Happy days!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 222
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

its an amazing blur and its now coming back to me slowly, wife came home and went to bed and has not got up since.

 

the judge ran through all of the formalities of the consumer credit act,

the fact that we had entered into a contract, written, oral or otherwise which i did not deny.

 

 

then asked me if there was anything i wanted to say, after confirming his receipt of my request for lay representation, which he granted immediately, which was awesome as the usher had said it was up to the judges discretion.

 

i just ran through the whole of my supplementary witness statement and as you already worked out with me, sham ,

 

 

all of the figures didnt add up and dates also, so i just brought up as many points as i could and the judge was happy to add it all up on his calculator, none of it made sense to him .

 

shamrocker

 

 

i have been naive through this whole process but now feel informed and although i dont think i have anything else in the wings waiting to pounce you never know.

 

 

hoping that this thread and my donation will help others........

Link to post
Share on other sites

DX

have so appreciated the help you and many others have given me on this forum,

 

however some terminology used is confusing for a first timer.

 

Was shocked when the " recon" reconstituted docs turned up as the law allows the originals to not be present.

 

just a thought?? thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark - the law doesn't simply allow the creditor to enforce a debt in the absence of the original signed agreement,

it gives the court discretion to enforce agreements that might be deemed improperly executed pursuant to the CCA.

 

 

As of 6th April 2007, s.127(3) was repealed

- prior to this the court could not enforce an improperly executed agreement.

 

 

This includes where the original signed document cannot be produced.

It doesn't stop you arguing your case, but there's nowhere near the same wriggle room as with an agreement that commenced prior to this date.

 

The significance of the 'recon' is that it is deemed acceptable for a creditor produce a reconstituted version of the agreement

when a debtor/customer sends in a s.77/78 CCA request - read up on HSBC v Carey case if you're ever bored and want to understand this topic better.

 

 

However, you do not have to accept this 'recon' and can simply stop making payments until the compliant version of the agreement is produced.

 

 

If the agreement is pre-April 2007 and the creditor cannot produce the valid document,

they have nowhere to turn as the courts cannot enforce or give judgement on the debt.

 

 

Same applies if they do produce a signed document but it is missing certain key information.

 

 

However, if it's dated 6th April 2007 onwards, they can produce what they like and then apply to the courts for enforcement should you not pay.

 

That's the crux of it, but if you read Carey case and a few other related cases you'll get a better understanding of it.

It's heavy reading in parts but worth persevering with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can only say I echo all of what you both say and point out in the above last few posts since your win..

 

 

I know its sometimes irks other members and even those on our siteteam sometimes too...

but I ALWAYS question everything.

and never ever will give up my cry of they are all fleecers.

 

 

the whole banking industry is held up by this nasty DCA web and phishing list buying.

 

 

the quicker the courts get rid of these speculative claims

the better the whole country will be.

 

 

so so many people simply pay a dca at whatever stage they are within their nasty web.

if that money were to be spent by these people on the economy, i'e buying things

the whole country will be better off.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

unapproved ref number showing

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can frame that Mark and put it above your bed:-)

 

Well done.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

Hi Andy and DX bet you thought youd seen the back of me hope all is good.

 

 

I have the most random letter off a "Lowell financial Ltd " headlined YOUR ANNUAL STATEMENT

 

 

underneath please note:

your account is being managed by Fredricksons International Ltd on our behalf.

 

 

As the claim on the account was dismissed on 25th august 2015 surely they cannot sell it on to one of their "sister" companies and pursue it again???

Link to post
Share on other sites

all the same group

 

I would suspect this is the annual statement they must send as they consider themselves the account holder/owner

 

nothing to worry about

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for DX just seemed odd that they have passed it to another company and added interest and charges on top of what they originally took me to court for. I kept everything anyway so if they want to lose again and I would then think of counter claiming for harassment, stress etc. hope people are winning the good fight still.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no its not another company

diff letterhead same printer

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

be a bit silly

 

 

but then again that's a dca for you

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let them add whatever they wish to it...its a terminated discontinued debt...helps to bolster their figures I suppose.... even if not a true reflection of their assets

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...
Have a look at this - you may not want to use all points or maybe you'll change bits. It's up to you what you do. Note the point with regards the first payment.

 

Hi sham , hope you had a good christmas, being going through this thread with interest as i'm in the process of battling with lowell on charges applied to claim amount.

I am unable to access the above file that seemed to do the magic for this particular defendant,. what do i need to do please to view it. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

post 149

we have no idea as we lost all the attachments in an attack last year.

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...