Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • They have defended the claim by saying that the job was of unsatisfactory standard and they had to call another carpenter to remedy. My husband has text messages about them losing the keys a second time and also an email. What do they hope to achieve??? Most importantly,  as far as I have seen online, now I need to wait for paperwork from the court, correct?
    • The Notice to Hirer does not comply with the protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule  4 . This is before I ask if Europarks have sent you a copy of the PCN they sent to Arval along with a copy of the hire agreement et. if they haven't done that either you are totally in the clear and have nothing to worry about and nothing to pay. The PCN they have sent you is supposed to be paid by you according to the Act within 21 days. The chucklebuts have stated 28 days which is the time that motorists have to pay. Such a basic and simple thing . The Act came out in 2012 and still they cannot get it right which is very good news for you. Sadly there is no point in telling them- they won't accept it because they lose their chance to make any money out of you. they are hoping that by writing to you demanding money plus sending in their  unregulated debt collectors and sixth rate solicitors that you might be so frightened as to pay them money so that you can sleep at night. Don't be surprised if some of their letters are done in coloured crayons-that's the sort of  level of people you will be dealing with. Makes great bedding for the rabbits though. Euro tend not to be that litigious but while you can safely ignore the debt collectors just keep an eye out for a possible Letter of Claim. They are pretty rare but musn't be ignored. Let us know so that you can send a suitably snotty letter to them showing that you are not afraid of them and are happy to go to Court as you like winning.  
    • They did reply to my defence stating it would fail and enclosed copies of NOA, DN Term letter and account statements. All copies of T&C's that could be reconstructions and the IP address on there resolves to the town where MBNA offices are, not my location
    • Here are 7 of our top tips to help you connect with young people who have left school or otherwise disengaged.View the full article
    • My defence was standard no paperwork:   1.The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 2. Paragraph 1 is noted. The Defendant has had a contractual relationship with MBNA Limited in the past. The Defendant does not recognise the reference number provided by the claimant within its particulars and has sought verification from the claimant who is yet to comply with requests for further information. 3. Paragraph 2 is denied. The Defendant maintains that a default notice was never received. The Claimant is put to strict proof to that a default notice was issued by MBNA Limited and received by the Defendant. 4. Paragraph 3 is denied. The Defendant is unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served from either the Claimant or MBNA Limited. 5. On the xx/xx/2023 the Defendant requested information pertaining to this claim by way of a CCA 1974 Section 78 request. The claimant is yet to respond to this request. On the xx/xx/2023 a CPR 31.14 request was sent to Kearns who is yet to respond. To date, xx/xx/2023, no documentation has been received. The claimant remains in default of my section 78 request. 6. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of proof of assignment being sent/ agreement/ balance/ breach or termination requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) show how the Defendant entered into an agreement; and (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a default notice pursuant to Section 87(1) CCA1974 (c) show how the claimant has reached the amount claimed for; and (d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim; 7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 8. On the alternative, as the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the consumer credit Act 1974. 9. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.
  • 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

Lowell - Default ? old vanquis debt


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3958 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

Hiya,

 

I am currently paying Lowell for a defaulted vanquish credit card debt.

(No issues there really, I owe it and pay less to Lowell than vanquish with no interest)

 

However Lowell have now decided to add that I am in default with them via the credit reference agencies.

(I have nothing relating to the original Vanquis default on any CRA file)

 

Can Lowell say that I am in default with them even though I pay and am up to date when actually I was in default with Vanquis ?

 

Hope that makes sense?

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

has this ever shown on your CRA file?

 

you say its not there now?

 

how old is this debt

when did you take the card out?

 

what made you start to pay lowlife..you fell for the threat-o-grams?

 

have you ever sent them a CCA request to check they have the LEGAL RIGHT to demand money from you?

 

something smells here

 

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

If vanquis registered a default then all lowell can do is substitute their name .

 

Do you have a notice of assignment to lowell?

 

Did they send you a default notice or intention to file a default?

 

What is the default date on your credit file?

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick replies,

 

I originally defaulted with Vanquis about 12 months ago, But there has never been ANY record of my account with them with the CRA's

 

(I started with a standard Vanquis card then was upgraded to a Gold Card- at this time the original card shows as settled and then nothing else from Vanquis has ever shown on the CRA's reports)

 

I decided to start paying Lowell about 4 months ago (through choice, I owe the money so should pay it back somehow) and a default has appeared on my CRA for May of 2013.

 

 

Yes I did have a letter of assignment etc and it does relate correctly to what I owed vanquis.

 

Cheers

Edited by enrico.balazar
Link to post
Share on other sites

I knew I'd ready something somewhere (From Lowells website) .

It is likely that your original creditor will have registered a default with regard to the outstanding debt on your credit file.

When the account is purchased by us, we are legally required to transfer the default into our name.


So if there was no registered default by Vanquis - then Lowell cant add a default as long as I am within my agreement with them ?

Who do I contact, Lowell or the CRA's ?

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

are you saying the account was NEVER on your cra file?

 

and IS now showing

please be clear.

 

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

Clarification please, in post 5 you state the original card show as settled (on CRA Files?), and now shows on CRA with Lowell?

 

The ''settled'' entry will have been when Lowell acquired the debt after which the original entry would be removed and Lowell will report to the CRA and must show the original default.

 

So as far as I can see the entry is correct.

 

Out of interest which CRA are you using.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Brig, if the default is recorded as happening in May 2013 it cannot be correct, as the account at this time would have been owned by Lowell. Lowell were not in a position themselves to default the account.

 

But it’s best to check with enrico again – can you confirm that Lowell have recorded a default that BEGINS in May 2013, rather than simply taking over an old default? What is listed as the actual default date – is it May 2013, as you stated? This is important.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So the true default date is 30th April 2012 as shown above NOT December 2013

 

You are reading the status history the 2013 is the start of th is years status history NOT a later default date and has not yet been updated with this years status from January 2103 onwards.

So the entry appears correct!

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am confused as hell. Where does it say April 2012.?

I think that what the op was saying is that when his card was upgraded they marked his original account as settled. Not the time of sale.

Has a post been removed?

 

If not maybe the OP could post his credit file entry.

Any opinion I give is from personal experience .

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am confused as hell. Where does it say April 2012.?

I think that what the op was saying is that when his card was upgraded they marked his original account as settled. Not the time of sale.

Has a post been removed?

 

If not maybe the OP could post his credit file entry.

 

I would appear that the OPs post showing the CRA file details has been removed, it clearly showed the APRIL date.

 

May have had personal data???

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

No posts have been removed by the Site Team although the OP did edit his post #11.

 

Thanks ims, it's just left later post out of context.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never mentioned April 2012 ! I edited post 11 for date accuracy.

 

Simply put, the default has never showed on my CRA files until May 2013 when it has been added by Lowell with a default date of 30th April 2013.

 

Account type

Credit Card

Account number

************9415 0

 

Account start date

24/07/2008

 

Opening balance

£ 3,522

 

Repayment frequency

Monthly

 

Date of default

30/04/2012

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last entry above clearly shows default date 30/04/2012 not 2013 what you are reading is the status history as previously advised, December D. 2013 D history not up dated.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry - Just realised it said 2012!. Old age creeping in

 

So, Its OK for Lowell to show that I have a default with them even though I never had a default registered by Vanquis?

 

I only started paying Lowell about 4 months ago and have not missed any payments with them (if that makes any difference)

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vanquis are not known for selling accounts with out them being defaulted, the dates seem right for default and sale D.D April 2012.

 

My intuition tells me that between the settled card and the reporting of the upgraded card the default was placed and the account sold.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm,

I think the settled card is a bit of a red herring - It's marked as settled in Aug 2009 when I did a balance transfer between my old Vanquis card and the new Vanquis card that then defaulted.(different account numbers)

However since the settlement in 2009 the has been no record of ANY vanquis transactions on my CRA's - its as if I never has the new card!

Hence my query about Lowell adding the default now

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vanquis always when upgrading cards mark credit files on the 'original' card as settled when the balance on the old card ids transferred to the new card.

 

I don't think there is any further I can advise, unless you seek archived credit reports for the period the data is missing, the default will have already been place before Lowell acquired the debt.

 

You could expend £10 on a SAR to Vanquis.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK thanks but as a last throw of the dice, I keep a reasonable eye on my CRA files, and I know that there has been no recorded activity at all (even when I was paying them) for this defaulted card and no default ever registered by Vanquis - So if I can prove this, then Lowell have acted improperly by registering a default in their name for an agreement that I never had with them?

 

Thanks for your advice. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK thanks but as a last throw of the dice, I keep a reasonable eye on my CRA files, and I know that there has been no recorded activity at all (even when I was paying them) for this defaulted card and no default ever registered by Vanquis - So if I can prove this, then Lowell have acted improperly by registering a default in their name for an agreement that I never had with them?

 

Thanks for your advice. :-)

THE SAR is your way forward!!

Good luck, please keep us posted on developments.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...