Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Nick Wallis has written up the first day of Angela van den Bogerd's evidence to the inquiry. I thought she was awful. She's decided to go with being not bright enough to spot what was happening over Fujitsu altering entries on the Horizon system, rather than covering up important facts. She's there today as well. The First Lady of Flat Earth – Post Office Scandal WWW.POSTOFFICESCANDAL.UK Angela van den Bogerd, on oath once more It is possible that Angela van den Bogerd and her senior colleagues (Rodric Williams, Mark Davies, Susan...  
    • Thank-you dx, What you have written is certainly helpful to my understanding. The only thing I would say, what I found to be most worrying and led me to start this discussion is, I believe the judge did not merely admonish the defendant in the case in question, but used that point to dismiss the case in the claimants favour. To me, and I don't have your experience or knowledge, that is somewhat troubling. Again, the caveat being that we don't know exactly what went on but I think we can infer the reason for the judgement. Thank-you for your feedback. EDIT: I guess that the case I refer to is only one case and it may never happen again and the strategy not to appeal is still the best strategy even in this event, but I really did find the outcome of that case, not only extremely annoying but also worrying. Let's hope other judges are not quite so narrow minded and don't get fixated on one particular issue as FTMDave alluded to.
    • Indians, traditionally known as avid savers, are now stashing away less money and borrowing more.View the full article
    • the claimant in their WS can refer to whatever previous CC judgements they like, as we do in our WS's, but CC judgements do not set a legal precedence. however, they do often refer to judgements like Bevis, those cases do created a precedence as they were court of appeal rulings. as for if the defendant, prior to the raising of a claim, dobbed themselves in as the driver in writing during any appeal to the PPC, i don't think we've seen one case whereby the claimant referred to such in their WS.. ?? but they certainly typically include said appeal letters in their exhibits. i certainly dont think it's a good idea to 'remind' them of such at the defence stage, even if the defendant did admit such in a written appeal. i would further go as far to say, that could be even more damaging to the whole case than a judge admonishing a defendant for not appealing to the PPC in the 1st place. it sort of blows the defendant out the water before the judge reads anything else. dx  
    • Hi LFI, Your knowledge in this area is greater than I could possibly hope to have and as such I appreciate your feedback. I'm not sure that I agree the reason why a barrister would say that, only to get new customers, I'm sure he must have had professional experience in this area that qualifies him to make that point. 🙂 In your point 1 you mention: 1] there is a real danger that some part of the appeal will point out that the person appealing [the keeper ] is also the driver. I understand the point you are making but I was referring to when the keeper is also the driver and admits it later and only in this circumstance, but I understand what you are saying. I take on board the issues you raise in point 2. Is it possible that a PPC (claimant) could refer back to the case above as proof that the motorist should have appealed, like they refer back to other cases? Thanks once again for the feedback.
  • 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

Lowell Claimform - old Vanquis card debt***Settled Tomlin Order***


jb000
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1764 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

I had a Vanquis card up until late 2012.

I lost my job through no fault of my own and contacted them to start the repayment insurance that I was paying them for.

They didn't call it PPI, they called it something else.

I was told I could not claim.

 

I said what on earth was I paying Payment Protection Insurance for if I cannot claim on it.

I told them angrily at the time that as far as I was concerned, the matter was closed and they would not be getting another penny out of me.

 

I had the usual two dozen phone calls each day all from different numbers, but I just disconnected the phone.

In the end, they got fed up and farmed it out to several DCA's all of which I told to get lost.

 

In November last year, they sold the 'debt' to Lowell and I have had them on my back.

I said that as far as I was concerned, I was mis sold insurance and the amount was mostly made up of illegal charges and exorbitant credit fees and the matter was closed.

 

This is due to be Statute Barred in about December, but I don't think that I could hold them off that long.

 

I have heard that Lowlife now go to Court on their 'purchased' debts.

I just wonder what my next move is and would the mis selling route be the best way to do down if they do decide to go through the Courts.

 

Can anyone help? it would be much appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 132
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

No... Letter of claim is first step before claim form...

And Think you need to read up on Repayment Option Plan...

Provident have been slapped recently hard...

 

We could do with some help from you.

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

**Fko-Filee**

Receptaculum Ignis

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just searched and it was called ROP (Repayment Option Plan).

It wasn't worth the paper it was printed on as I expected it to cover any repayments whilst I was unemployed.

I was furious at the time and just told them that I was not paying the repayments as I was insured and unemployed.

As far as I was concerned, they were a bunch of crooks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they send a letter before the County Court form.

I will wait then until I get that.

 

I was thinking a while ago as it wasn't called PPI,

I wouldn't be able to make a claim,

however, if I can, I sure will.

I would love to get my own back on those robbers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

go find out when your last payment was

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

my experience with lowell/vanquis,

they passed on to solicitors,

they eventually sent court papers,

with the help of CAG ,

i filed a defence,

their solicitors told me my defence was weak and urged me to settle for a reduced some,

 

i declined and they never paid the court fee,

it was evetually struck out,

 

i received a few letters from solicitors over a few months

then a letter sthey are dropping the court claim,

 

lowell then wrote to advise they we writing the debt off, by this time it was well and truly status barred.

 

they also had a further 2 credit card debts that they purchased,

but have failed to pursue after getting nowhere with court.

.. i also had ROP and i havent gone down the claim route yet

 

hope that helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks to everyone who has replied.

I made the last payment in September 2012 because I was made redundant at the end of that month.

 

The default notice was sometime around December 2012 because I looked at my credit history a couple of months ago when all of this kicked off again.

 

I was definitely mis sold this ROP because I was told that it would cover my payments if I lost my job.

When I tried to claim on it when I lost my job, I was told that was not possible.

I was paying for, and being charged interest on something I could not claim on and wasn't worth the paper it was printed on.

I told them that this was breach of contract and I was paying them nothing, as I was insured to cover these repayments.

 

I have received the Pre-Legal Assessment today from them, they are threatening all sorts.

 

I intend to fight Lowell every inch of the way as that amount is mainly made up of ROP, illegal charges and extortionate interest. Just wondering where do I go from here?

 

Any help and suggestions would be gratefully received.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then reclaim this RoP.

 

All that BS from lowlifes about 'pre-legal' is nonsense and IMO dowsn't merit a response, it's simply computer generated garbage they spit out.

 

Get that RoP reclaim in.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only thing is that I have very little paperwork with it being almost 6 years ago.

 

Do you think I should SAR them before putting the claim in, so I have all of the written evidence.

 

However, it wouldn't surprise me that these crooks would probably put anything to do with the ROP straight through the shredder.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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

It is a letter before legal action.

It was dated 15 February and they have given me up to 1 March to respond.

 

I am going to CCA Lowell and SAR Vanquis.

We’ll see what they come up with.

 

I fully intend to reclaim on this ROP because they were taking peoples eyes out with it and from what I have seen on the net, people have had quite good payouts. But before that, I want to get as much info off them before it suddenly goes “missing”!!.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Just to report back,

I have finally got the CCA back from them.

 

This has took nearly 3 months from when I first requested it.

They sent me the agreement (with no signature) just an online tick.

That agreement looks like it has been knocked together by an 8 year old.

 

It also could have been put together at any time by simply typing my name and the date on one of their agreements.

It looks very amateurish.

 

I was also send a ream of transactions.

If you add up all of the ROP, interest and the penalty charges, it is more than 3 times the original balance (sure that can't be legal).

 

I have started to become bombarded with letters again from Lowlife.

The last one I received yesterday was them very kindly advising me of how long it would take for the "debt" to be settled versus how much to pay.

Well I am paying £0.00 per month, I wonder how long that will take.

 

I am ignoring the threatograms, and waiting for their next move.

 

Could anyone who has had dealings with this lot please advise me the likelihood of them actually going to Court with this as I am thinking that some Judges may not take their business model too kindly and are fed up with dealing with cases brought by them.

 

Many thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

scan up the CCA return to ONE multipage PDF

read upload

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

lowells are litigious,

they hope you cave in,

they push it to the last minute and if no prospect discontinue before they loose their money/fees,

 

they hope for an unopposed case to up their accounting books figures.

 

other threads and you will see how they operate.

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

dx100uk - I don't have a printer scanner, but I am looking taking pictures on my phone and doing it that way. I will find a suitable app to do it and scan them up asap.

 

Old Cogger - Just had a look though a few threads both here and elsewhere. You are so correct, they do try it on don't they and when it becomes serious, suddenly back down. It's a case of who cracks first. I don't have any intention of backing down due to a) being conned by Vanquis in the first place and b) standing up to repugnant bullying vermin such as Lowell.

 

If they want a fight, they can jolly well have one. I'll have my day in Court if it is their desire.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...