I don't often post here but I totally sympatise with you and your step daughter. Lowells are the lowest form of pond life out there. They issued a claim form for me back end of last month for a stat barred vodafone debt, which I defended (please get her to acknowlege online and tick that it will be defended) get her to sent CPR 39.14 for documents which they should have submitted to the court.

I did this myself then followed this up as cetain things were not sitting right with me with the way the claim was issued , I called them up (recorded call) and honestly you could not make up what they told me. Thjey admitted that they just went for a claim without submitting correct information to the court, (remember I have this all recorded) and when probing the agent further admitted that they had no information at all and were awaiting for this from Vodafone. He refused to ask for a stay or discontinuation and kept repeating over and over again go through courts. It is now with the managing director of the comany as a massive complaint and awaiting reply.

Dont worry just acknowledge online at MCOL state you are defending (must be done within 14 days of receiving forms) then get proof of them sending correct paperwork to courts. Good luck these **** can and will be beaten.

What you are saying here is extremely interesting and of course the allegations you make are really quite serious.

Frankly I am sorry that you are allowing Lowell's to investigate this themselves. I think that these are the kinds of allegations which need to be investigated by an independent party.

If it does all pan out as you have said, then it amounts to an abuse of the court process – at the very least.

In fact I would have put in a defence which referred specifically to these alleged abuses and to the evidence that I had. I think that a court would want to know more about the way this was being conducted.

It also amounts to unfair treatment.

I'd be very grateful if you could send me your contact details by email to our admin email address and I'd very much like to receive a copy of the sound files that you have so that I can form a view and then maybe discuss some other lines of action with you.

But that's how speculative claims work

will do but apologise first for any shouty bits in the background would you also like for me to delete the personal detasil before I send this

No just send it. Nothing will get shared without talking to you first

ok sending across now should have it shortly

Thank you, I've responded.

I don't often post here but I totally sympatise with you and your step daughter. Lowells are the lowest form of pond life out there. They issued a claim form for me back end of last month for a stat barred vodafone debt, which I defended (please get her to acknowlege online and tick that it will be defended) get her to sent CPR 39.14 for documents which they should have submitted to the court.

 

I did this myself then followed this up as cetain things were not sitting right with me with the way the claim was issued , I called them up (recorded call) and honestly you could not make up what they told me. Thjey admitted that they just went for a claim without submitting correct information to the court, (remember I have this all recorded) and when probing the agent further admitted that they had no information at all and were awaiting for this from Vodafone. He refused to ask for a stay or discontinuation and kept repeating over and over again go through courts. It is now with the managing director of the comany as a massive complaint and awaiting reply.

 

Dont worry just acknowledge online at MCOL state you are defending (must be done within 14 days of receiving forms) then get proof of them sending correct paperwork to courts. Good luck these **** can and will be beaten.

MOJ might be interested in that call recording, it is prima facie evidence of Lowell attempting to pervert the course of justice or even fraudulent claim at the worse, and malpractice at bes.

Anyway as BF has copies of the sound files, I am confident that they will be used to best effect.

will be back as well with another update as we have discovered a few more naughty things about lowells , BF another recording coming your way very soon as we were gathering even more info about thier shennanigans

own thread created for this

think this is correct place got a reply from the guy and he recons thatthat they dont need to submit the documents to the court, for everyones pleasure \I copy and past the e mail

Thank you for your further email; as you have raised additional points I will attempt to respond to all of them below:

• CPR31.14 – This does not apply in Small Claims and we are therefore not obliged to provide you with the documentation you have requested at this stage. We will address the points made in your defence during the course of proceedings.
  

• FCA Authorisation – This firm is not authorised by the FCA, does not claim to be and nor does it need to be. We do not state on our website that we are regulated or authorised by the FCA. I am also unclear as to what you may have read on the claim form that would lead you to conclude to the contrary. Additionally, I should point out that as this debt arises from a non-regulated agreement this would not be a matter for the FCA in any event.
  

• Statute Barred – You suggest that on the claim form we have claimed the date of Default to be ‘August 2012’, this is not correct. No date is referenced in the claim form, apart from the date on which Vodafone assigned this debt to our client, Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd, which was 30th August 2012.
  

• Harassment – On behalf of this firm and our client, I refute your allegations of harassment. Our client has attempted to contact you repeatedly regarding this debt since they took assignment in 2012, further, this firm wrote to you on two separate occasions before the claim was issued notifying you of our intentions and inviting you to contact us to discuss any dispute. My client informs me that they have no record of any contact from you on a single occasion prior to their instruction to us, I can also confirm that this firm has no record of any contact from you prior to proceedings being brought against you. My client has therefore been left with no alternative but to rely on its legal remedies by issuing this claim at a cost to them.
  

• Complaint – You contacted me by email on the 11th April 2017, as evidenced in the email chain below which I took as a complaint. You were unhappy with the telephone conversation you had with one of our employees. I arranged to have the call listened to and I do not believe that this call was handled inappropriately, despite the difficult circumstances presented to our employee as a result of interference, background noise and both you and your husband engaging with him on the call at various stages, I believe our employee acted entirely appropriately, reasonably and in good faith. Our employee correctly informed you that as a result of your defence, our client is seeking certain information from the original creditor, Vodafone, and this has not yet been received. Your defence will be responded to in the course of proceedings.
  

• Various allegations of misconduct made towards this firm – I refute all of your allegations that this firm has acted inappropriately, illegally or has abused Court process. Given the nature and tone of your allegations I do not believe this firm need make any further comment.
  

When my client receives further information from Vodafone we will be in touch.

Yours sincerely,

James Riley

Operations Director

31:14 applies as a that stage its not allocated to any track until the n180- allocation stage

they did send a n180 not replied as yet as wanted the documentation, (only received yesterday)

is it me (or am I barking up the wrong tree) are they trying to pull the wool over my eyes

so according to him, (mr whiney oops riley) they can ask the courts to issue a ccj without any proof or correct information,

whilst they have already admitted they do not have these documents as are awaiting contact back from fraudafone .

Should I complete my n180 including they refuse to comply with the cpr31.14 request.

Also he recons that they have written to me continually about this when all I have received was this claim form .

I think we need to resit this for all concerned

fill this in please:

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-2016**

and post up the defence you filed.

IMHO regardless to these other issues shall we say

you need to deal with the claim in the tried and tested method

instead of writing or calling them and touting them for want of a better description.

that can be dealt with later.

dx

claim form issued on 16th march

What is the value of the claim? 456.23

Is the claim for a current account (Overdraft) or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? mobile phone

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? 2010

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. lowells

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? no

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? no

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? no

Why did you cease payments?

the contract was missold I was refused a payg because I wanted to keep my old number as needed as solicitors were in contact about the sale of my old house and had no landline, vodafone rep told me either contract or do without.

What was the date of your last payment? october 2010

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? yes but was met with toal ignoring.

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? no as was not the case.

I put in the initial defence of not reciept of paperwork, stat barred and incorrect dates.

date of claim issue

who is the claimant

full POC

text of your defence

dx

claim form issued on 16th march (not recieved until 23rd march)

claimant lowells porfolio ltd

I know i am being stupid what is POC as for the defence

when I acknowledged the claim I ticked defend in full ands gave the reasons. sorry for being so silly

I am defending this due to claimant submitting no information other than claim form

and being stat barred

particulars of claim from the claim form please

you filed a defence on mcol following your ack [aos] of the claim - ticking defend all.

we need to see the full text of what you filed as your defence.

dx

I've experienced this behaviour from Lowells -In 2012 Lowell/BC legal issued a stat demand upon me for an alleged Barclaycard credit card debt. This was completely out of the blue - no previous communication from Lowells and although I previously did have BC the account number on the stat demand did not match the BC I did have.

In 2009 I sent a CCA request to BC and they sent me a photocopy of their T&C but no agreement, nothing with my signature etc, so I disputed the debt which BC responded to and acknowledged my dispute.

A few months later BC sent it onto Cavells and they tried pushing for payment and I sent them a "in dispute so send back to BC letter" which they did. I never heard anything regarding this until a gentleman turned up at my house at 7pm in December 2012 to serve a Stat Demand from Lowell/BC Legal.

Naturally I defended the stat demand and asked for it to be set aside.

When we got to court I was immediately approached by the Lowells hired legal help for the day who informed me they were asking for a 3 month stay as Lowell didn't have any paperwork confirming the alleged debt. When I told them to get stuffed the hired help had the audacity to tell me that the judge would give the 3 month stay as my views didn't matter!

Fortunately the Jugde didn't agree and gave the hired help a roasting for issuing a stat demand without having the paperwork to back it up. I was awarded costs as the judge agreed Lowell had wasted the court and my time. Only negative was that the judge stated they didn't know much about CCA etc so gave Lowell a six week stay to submit the required paperwork/evidence.

Lowells then started to play very dirty and things got very messy and stressful, Lowell didn't follow any of the court's instructions - they failed to submit all the required paperwork and what they did supply demonstrated the debt was unenforceable - they never did find the default notice that they allegedly had sent me! However they still tried to bully me into a repayment plan. It was obvious I wasn't going to be able to fight Lowell without legal input and luckily a solicitor took my case as a CFA. On the day of the hearing - in fact 3 hours before the hearing Lowell agreed to sign a consent order and withdrew their stat demand. They had to pay costs to me from the first hearing and also the solicitors cost - these costs were actually more than the alleged debt was for so it was a very expensive bloody nose for Lowells and one I loved delivering.

I did make numerous complaints about Lowells behaviour but sadly they had not affect upon Lowells and they still continue to behave in such an unethical and appalling manner.

has no real bearing other than we know it goes on all the time

but in 40yrs the system has never done anything about such abuses as the debt buying industry is worth more money than the banks themselves

if everyone was to stop paying DCA's tomorrow

the whole industry would collapse

till then...sadly we have to suck it in..

the OP needs to deal with the claimform not go down nefarious routes to counter it.

dx

will sent the text later as it was done on hubby computer as mine is misbehaving badly.

I know how bad these companies can be from reading up on them,

and also correct me if I am wrong but I did hear from october this year the way court claims issued is changing

( which is probably why there are so many claims being issued at the moment.

I havre found this.

Bit late for me LOL as I am taking dx's advise but it may help others.

link removed - dx

we are quite aware or the changes

and we are quite aware the questions have been asked in parl'mt regarding the system whereby 760'000 speculative claims per year are being issues by the likes of DCA's and private parking companies.

however, and this tends to be a trend through your time on CAG that you look for some legal magic bullet that makes claims against you possibly wrong for one reason or another.

concentrate upon the claim you have

and answer the questions outstanding that have been asked.

the other stuff might play its part later in the proceedings IF necessary..........

as Requested the claim form defense submitted, personal details removed

Defence and Counterclaim

Claim number *******

Claimant Lowell Portfolio I Ltd

Defendant toofiegap

How much of the claim do you dispute?

I dispute the full amount claimed as shown on the claim form.

Do you dispute this claim because you have already paid it?

No, for other reasons.

Defence

Disputed with original owner back in March 2010 when wanting to

cancel service and refused, behind my back renewed contract

despite telling I would not be renewing, therefore refused to use

due to mistreatment. No letters from claimant or agency received.

Have not been known as 'previous name' since Jan 2012, default date on

form incorrect. No notice of action. Disputed in full, as Lowells

were more than aware that this was in dispute with original

creditor.

Signed

I am the Defendant - I believe that the facts stated in this form are true

toofiegap

I would of hoped having been here all these years you would have done a better job than that

Particular s of claim please from the claim form please

POC as follows:

1) The Defendant entered into an agreement with Vodafone under account reference *********('the Agreement').

2) The Defendant failed to maintain the required payments and the service was terminated.

3) The Agreement was later assigned to the Claimant on 30/08/2012 and notice given to the Defendant.

4) Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of £343.73 remains due and outstanding.

And the claimant claims

a) The said sum of £343.73

b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.075, but limited to one year, being £27.50

c) Costs

apoloies for not being very good at this, more at the time being so livid, as I followed the same methods previous with my last claim form which was discontinued back in 2009 I believe