Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 160 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

Old Lloyds OD - Lowell 'prove it' response - help!


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2460 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

Lowell recently sent me a 'letter before claim' giving me 14 days to contact them regarding a debt from 2011 or they would take me to court.

 

This debt relates to a bank account, with NO overdraft facility that ended up going overdrawn. I received some advice and sent them a prove it letter and after a few weeks received the following as a response - imgur (dot) com/ a /E7JuE

 

Along with the above letter they sent a copy of my bank statement from 2011 but there was no notice of default included in the package, which they state they did send but have not.

 

Is there anywhere else I can go with this now? Any help appreciated!

 

EDIT - Cannot post link to image. The letter basically says "Please find enclosed a copy of the statements and default notice as requested from the original creditor. As this account is a current account it is not regulated by the consumer credit act therefore the original creditor is not obliged to provide you with a copy of the agreement"

Edited by loopyle
Link to post
Share on other sites

Scan the image as a pdf and upload it here please

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also that isnt a response to a prove it letter. Thats a response to a CCA request, and theyre quite correct to say they dont need to supply an agreement.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

upload as a PDF follow the upload

 

 

what date was your last payment or use of the account please

and the defaulted date from your credit file please

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

oh and you fell for the oldest trick in the book?

a letter before claim is not a letter before action [re pre action protocols]

 

 

and the letter doesn't say WILL anywhere go read it properly.

 

 

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

apparently very little as ive been shown...https://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/procedure-rules/civil/protocol/prot_jrv#claim

 

 

just that one of the old Lowell ones had the same title before the above so would be interesting to see it..too

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

Hi all, thanks for the responses.

 

So I sent a useless letter to them, great!

 

I have converted the image to PDF so hopefully it has worked. I did not want to ignore their 'letter before claim' because my sister recently did decide to do that when they came after her with the same letter and they did then take her to court and I want to avoid that.

 

The account went over drawn and was last used 27th jan 2012 and Lowell added the default the 22nd May 2012. - a bit later than I thought so it isn't barred yet then. :(

Lowell response letter.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also that isnt a response to a prove it letter. Thats a response to a CCA request, and theyre quite correct to say they dont need to supply an agreement.

 

What ever happened to the argument that an overdraft on a current account is credit and therefore an agreement would be required unless the bank relied on a part V exemption?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple. OD's are not covered by the CCA because theyre exempt from part V

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

can we see the original letter please.

lowells did not default the account

they cant do that

the OC would have done that upon sale

 

 

get an sar running to Lloyds.

 

 

the letter you have says MAY not will

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

Found the original letter and uploaded it. Noticed it is a 'letter of claim' rather than a 'letter before claim' not that I assume it makes much difference.

 

May I ask what a SAR to Lloyds would do, could it hold Lowell off for longer?

 

Thanks for all the help so far!

lowell letter of claim .pdf

Edited by dx100uk
14Mb file reduced to <1Mb
Link to post
Share on other sites

well the letter says by 27th april else we will issue a claim without further notice

they haven't, just continued willy waving.

 

 

the sar wil give you all the info to p'haps counter a claim IF that happens.

 

 

like its 99% penalty charges & their interest added.

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...