Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks once again dx! Your advice is greatly appreciated. I think you forgot the bit where you say "In future contact CAG first." At least I would have saved £69 but I've learned a lesson way more valuable and that's not to ignore a debt just hoping it will go away after 6 years. Here's hoping as a gesture of good will they actually remove it. Although theoretically they could also put a satisfied default on my file as well. The irony is that I only found out because I wanted another contract with EE. They told me I'd never get another EE contract with the AP markers on my file until it was paid off, so that's why I thought it would be resolved. Interestingly Lowell put up a proper fight after their account dropped off the CRA but you're correct. It wasn't written off! They ended up agreeing in writing "to no longer enforce the debt"
    • I'm further confused, in your defence you stated: 1.  The Defendant is the recorded keeper of [motor vehicle] And not only that, this started out as you putting the wrong registration number in, you PAID for the parking, you just made an error putting the wrong reg in? ... de minimis? That was the crux of the case, what did the judge say about that?
    • My emailed letters to P2G have been received and considered by David Jeremia Schnur who is P2G's 'Escalation and Complaints Adviser'. His response is attached. 19Apr24 David Schnur Linked In page.pdf 19Apr24 P2G email to me confirming my emails received.pdf
    • Fraudsters copy the details of firms we authorise to try and convince people that their firm is genuine. Find out why you shouldn’t deal with this clone firm.View the full article
    • Not prosecuting in the public interest seems to be bandied about on forums frequented by students. I don't think I've ever seen a prosecution not go ahead because of that. You would have to define why it isn't in the public interest to prosecute someone who isn't paying their way and is costing other travellers more. I can't think of a reason. HB
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Stautory Demands - An Update And More Help Please!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5243 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

An Update. I previously posted about a DCA called Connaught Collections, who wrote threatening me with a Statutory Demand. As ever, the advice I got from this site was excellent, and on 2 Jan 07 I sent the standard CCA request with a £1 postal order. Lo and behold, I got home from work yesterday to find a letter from Connaught returning my postal order and saying that the account had been returned to 1st Credit Ltd on whose behalf they were acting (funny how quickly they can react when the pressure is put on them). This is good news in the sense that it brought the Stat Demand thing to a halt - and very ironic in that Connaught Collections are owned by 1st Credit............. Can't wait to see what happens next - but I thought this would be worth relaying for everyone.

 

More Advice Please! In the same batch of post was a Stautory Demand from Hamptons Legal, who are a 'trading style' of Lowell Financial - of whom more on this site. On the Connaught thread I had previously been told here that:

 

'the Statutory Demand has to be served on you personally by a process server to comply with the Insolvency Rules. They are almost certainly bluffing but might it be a good idea to be careful about answering the door in the current circumstances:shock:. Also process servers will often try to trick you into signing for served documents so be very wary of unexpected special deliveries:shock:.'

 

If that is so, does sending the Statutory Demand through the Royal Mail standard post count as being served on me personally? After all, Hamptons/Lowell have no proof that I have received the document. By way of background, the debt (old credit card) was apparently assigned to Lowell on 13 Jan 06. I had sent the CCA request with £1 postal order several times, but had never received anything other than a poor photocopy of the original agreement. The last contact I had from Lowell was early last Summer.

 

Grateful for more help please!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Is it for you personally or for a business debt. If it is personally they cannot post it to you it has to be deemed 'served' on you i.e. handed to you by a process server. If it is for a business debt just has to be sent recorded delivery to the registered office. Hope this helps.

If a personal one ignore it as is not deemed served.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

your connaught one will be passed to Reliable, 1st credit, Robinson Way(all the same folks). I had dealing with them and of all my creditors they were the hardest to deal with, ,mine was for £30 that I didn't even owe. I sent cca to everyone of them as they came in and they credited £1 to the account!!!eventually I complained to Trading Standards and only now after 6 months is it resolved. but hang in there and just send your CCa's plus £1.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks - the amount in question is £3,167.64. Now not certain what to do..............I have read the link you gave me, which is useful, but am a little panicked about the situation, I have to admit. My inclination is to apply to have the Stat Demand put aside on the basis that the charges involved were either partly or wholly illegal - or simply to cave in and talk to the Creditor with a view to trying to come to some sort of agreement. My concern, obviously, is that without a full settlement they will petition for bankruptcy............. Look forward to hearing back!

Link to post
Share on other sites

toddle2u, I am inclined to agree. Hamptons cannot prove that I have received this since they only sent it through the normal post. Everything I have read (including the detail within the Insolvency Act) suggests that a SD must be served by a Process Server and that the Creditor must be able to prove to a court that this has been done. On that basis alone, my gut instinct tells me that they are wrong since I have not signed for anything - but obviously I am taking this seriously and want to be right in how I do or do not respond!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

BottomBurp, no this has not gone anywhere near court yet and there certainly is no date. The SD has appeared out of the blue, and as I say I have had no previous contact from Lowell since early summer last year. I note from the guidance you provide that the SD can be delivered by mail after previous attempts to serve personally have failed. Hamptons/Lowell have made no previous attempts to contact me in any way about the SD and certainly haven't attempted to serve by way of a Process Server. I see no way that these people could formally confirm that they had done all they could to serve on my person - and thus be compliant with the direction you have provided.

 

I am really grateful for all your help - you cleary have your research well done!

Link to post
Share on other sites

It isn't the sum total of the debts and is at least partly made up of penalty charges (old credit card debt). There is no court quoted, so I would not know where Hamptons/Lowell would have applied for substituted service. My suspicion about all this is heightened by the text in the letter that says: 'we MAY (my use of caps) be in a position to present a bankruptcy petition against you if you fail to respond accordingly.' They then 'urge' me to contact their office as a matter of urgency to disucss - and in the text of the SD, it not only suggests I phone them to find out the location of my local County Court (as if i would phone THEM to find that out), and also exhorts me to phone them for 'advice'!! Yeah right. Either they're barking mad or they think I am. Should I phone them and ask about the location of their application for Substituted Service? I'll take further advice from you, but this whole thing looks dodgy - I do have a solicitor; perhaps it's time to engage him.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't told anyone that the matter is in dispute as I only received the SD on Friday! Prior to that, I had sent the CCA letter several times and not received the full detail back from them, after which the trail went cold - as I say, from early last summer. I am tempted now to launch the S.A.R and write in parrallel to Hamptons to say that the matter is in dispute. Again, grateful for more thoughts - and thank you for your time on this one. If I was a cynic, which I am, I would think that Hamptons/Lowell had sent out a whole batch of these things to people after Christmas when they are feeling their most financially vulnerable and most likely to be panicked into knee-jerking

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bottomburp,

I don't seem to have seen Norfolkboy state anywhere that he has had a letter stating that they have tried to serve him personally with the SD and that they are doing a substituted delivery. Beleive I deal with these on a daily basis - Norfolkboy is wasting his time even bothering to get it set aside. Until they try to serve it or use a substituted delivery it is unenforceable

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just got one too! - Dated 15/12/06 yet not arrived til after 1st Jan.

The debt is in dispute

The CCA turned up a rubbish copy of the application form (which states it IS the CA) - which didn't appear until over 30days of the request

the date of birth on the CA is incorrect

Lowell were advised by letter (recorded delivery) of all this and when called they "have not received it yet / not on the system" :?

and now I have the same from Hamptons -

Guess I should start a new thread.....

 

D.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are the DA's still committing an offence by not providing the Crtedit agreement within 30days if I never gave them the £1 ?

 

What next then? I'm considering calling them to give them another mouthful regarding the letter I sent recorded delivery, that was delivered and yet they say is not received! - As I really don't see the point in writing to them if this is what happens to the letters.

Will also request the SAR - hopefully by then the 6yrs will be up and we'll say goodbye.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...