Thanks Brig, much appreciated. MUTT1

Tony3x Many thanks for the info re: V14 T&C's very useful. MUTT1

Ok expert leave it to you. Oh and by the way I have been to court as a defendant umpteen times up against barristers and solicitors and have not lost a single case yet. MUTT1

You what? And who do you think you are to tell me to start my own thread? I am not hijacking anyone's thread just trying to assist tony3x and at the same time hoping that tony3x can assist me with specific info requested. If you have nothing constructive to say or are actually involved in the Cap 1/ Lowell situation then I suggest that you refrain from posting here and go give your advise elsewhere. MUTT1

Don't know if the last two posts were in response to my last post but if they were then you still do not know where I am coming from. I certainly know what my plan of action is going to be. MUTT1

No problem, acknowledgement or not you work it out. I will give you a tip LoPA.

tony3x Hang fire on the CCA request until you receive a second letter from Lowell's then make your request without making any reference to the letter you have already received. There is a valid reason for doing this. MUTT1

Hi tony3x, Thanks for the info, FOI to Lowell's or Cap 1 would not apply. I have my own ideas and will pursue this at a later date after I have received further letters from Lowell's. Keep your eye on the ball just in case you do get a Stat Demand which, as I have said, would need to be dealt with and ultimately be set aside. Whatever you do make sure that you do not acknowledge any alleged debt to Lowell or Cap 1. MUTT1

tony3x Thanks for the info, could you tell me when you received V14 of the TC's I am trying to establish what period V10 would relate to ? A Stat Demand is just that, and needs to be dealt with in a precise and swift manner should you get one. I would hang fire about contacting Lowell's until you get a second letter then you should CCA Request them regardless of having received one from Cap 1. Just see what Lowell's provide and how it compares with what you already have. Do not mention or give any reference to having received a NoA from Lowell's or Cap 1. I would advise that the account was in dispute with Cap 1 and as far as you are concerned remains as such and, perhaps ask what gives Lowell the legal right in asking you for payment of a debt that you do not acknowledge. There are plenty of us in the same boat and my intention is to avoid any contact until at least letter number two or three. The first letter as far as I am concerned does not exist. Perhaps you might want to consider this. MUTT1

tony3x I, (and like a lot of others) find myself in the same situation. Could you tell me when the account was opened and could you confirm that the T/C's that you received were version 5? Mutt1

Nivagey, Will wait and see what I get in the post, (or not) and intend making my move soon before the court papers arrive. This shower have got no chance.

Hi All, In the same situation, just wanted to know if anyone has received a NoA from Lowells or Cap 1?

Hi AGHurst, If you posted your letter via recorded delivery then you could use the Royal Mail Track & Trace facility on it's website. You can obtain info as to which R M office the letter was delivered from and also a signature of the recipient. You could use this as proof that a letter was, indeed, sent to the gym. Regards MUTT1

Hi apple, I think what was confusing was the statement in post 3331 when alisono said that the judge had ordered all costs would be awarded including PC costs to the Claimant if the application failed. The way you put it is the way I understand it to be, but as caro has rightly said, it depends if the judge wants to award costs to either side, there is definately no guarantee. MUTT1

apple, timetogoram, Thanks for the comments. Now a question, how could the judge in alisono's case award costs for the PC in favour of the Claimant? This does not make any sense, the case has yet to be heard by the PC and, surely only the PC can award costs if any costs are to be awarded, to whichever party that is successful in the application put to it? MUTT1