Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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.
    • 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.
    • Well barristers would say that in the hope that motorists would go to them for advice -obviously paid advice.  The problem with appealing is at least twofold. 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.  And in a lot of cases the last thing the keeper wants when they are also the driver is that the parking company knows that. It makes it so much easier for them as the majority  of Judges do not accept that the keeper and the driver are the same person for obvious reasons. Often they are not the same person especially when it is a family car where the husband, wife and children are all insured to drive the same car. On top of that  just about every person who has a valid insurance policy is able to drive another person's vehicle. So there are many possibilities and it should be up to the parking company to prove it to some extent.  Most parking company's do not accept appeals under virtually any circumstances. But insist that you carry on and appeal to their so called impartial jury who are often anything but impartial. By turning down that second appeal, many motorists pay up because they don't know enough about PoFA to argue with those decisions which brings us to the second problem. 2] the major parking companies are mostly unscrupulous, lying cheating scrotes. So when you appeal and your reasons look as if they would have merit in Court, they then go about  concocting a Witness Statement to debunk that challenge. We feel that by leaving what we think are the strongest arguments to our Member's Witness Statements, it leaves insufficient time to be thwarted with their lies etc. And when the motorists defence is good enough to win, it should win regardless of when it is first produced.   
  • 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 PAP letter now claimform - Vanquis card debt


puma85
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 1312 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've received the following letter from Lowell solicitors regarding a default from 2012 for about £1700.

 

I've previously tried to negotiate a settlement figure but got very little response. Although I have found a letter they sent last year offering a 60% reduction in the debt.

 

Any suggestions on my next course of action?

 

 

 

PAP LOC (1).pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also understand that any huge reduction offer by Lowell means the debt is unenforceable. Don't go offering or accepting any settlement without checking they can actually legally enforce the debt.

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

What date is the pap letter?

Go read other pap letter threads

Use the search cag box of the top red toolbar

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

  • 2 weeks later...

I need to reply to the PAP this week as it will be 30 days on Friday.

 

I replied to Lowell and offered to repay the same amount as they offered me last year (this is roughly the same as the charges on the SAR + interest etc).

 

Their reply is..

 

Quote
Dear xxxx

 

Our Client: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd

 

Reference: xxxx

 

Balance: £1'xxx

 

Thank you for your email.

 

We have been instructed to recover the full outstanding balance and are unable to offer a discount or accept your settlement offer.

The settlement letter you have attached was sent to you by Lowell Financial Ltd and is no longer valid.

 

You should now contact us to set up an arrangement to repay the outstanding balance. When responding please confirm your offer of payment, the date each month you will make the payment and which method you will use from list below.

 

· Direct Debit: This can be set up online at https://lowellsolicitors.co.uk/payments/.

Alternatively, you can telephone 0113 335 3334 or email us at [email protected] with your account number, sort code, the account holder’s name and the date you wish payments to be debited.

 

· Debit card: One off card payments can be made online at https://lowellsolicitors.co.uk/payments/. Alternatively, you can telephone 0113 335 3334. Please do not send these details by post or email.

 

· Standing Order or Bank Transfer: Our client’s bank details are as follows: sort code 60-00-01, account number 39543749. Please quote your reference number as the payment reference.

 

· Pay in any NatWest bank: using their paying in slips and the bank details as seen above.

 

· Cheque or Postal Order: Made payable to Lowell Financial, Address: PO Box 1419, Northampton, NN2 1BU

 

Please ensure you contact us to reach a resolution to avoid a Claim form being issued to you with further costs incurred.

 

You can now manage your account, make a payment and set up an arrangement by registering with our website: www.lowellsolicitors.co.uk

 

This was the offer letter I previously received

 

lowell 60% discount letter.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

write not ever email.

give them a free way to harass you.

 

its a letter of claim under the pre action protocols

its not an N1 claimform from THE COURT.

 

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

I thought what they sent me was a claim form?

 

OK sorry, and thanks.

 

My only concern is that this is the only default on my records and it only has 1 yr 6 months left. If I wait for the N1, does this add another black mark, or would that only happen if it went to court and I was ordered to pay, i.e CCJ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

who says you'll get an n1..

 

it could only harm your file

IF you lost the courtclaim …

IF you failed to pay within 28days.

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

  • 1 month later...

Ive recv'd the exact same form today, following the PAP protocol

 

Have you heard anything? i had the same from 2 other debts after PAP sent, it went nowhere as in no N1 to date, as DX says its not the N1, and even then you can defend in court, and after that you have 28 days. They are pushing harder because its drawing closer to the end date of the default, im on a similar time frame to you.

 

I also had a reduction letter then my PAP now states full amount.

 

Im curious what did your CCA look like? mine was literally a computer form with my details and 2 pages of terms and conditions.

 

Keep us updated and good luck!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

its not a letter its a claimform pack from northants bulk court.

 

please complete this:

 

 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Lowell PAP letter now claimform - Vanquis card debt
  • 2 weeks later...

I'm not sure sure what route to take. 

 

The guide you posted is very thorough, but focuses on making a complete defence. 

I dont dispute the claim and have tried a number of times to negotiate a settlement fee with Lowell. 

Should I be defending the complete amount? 

 

Date of Issue ?

22/08/2019

 

Name of the Claimant ?

Lowell Portfolio I Ltd

 

What is the claim for –

1) The Defendant entered into a Consumer Credit Act 1974 regulated agreement with Vanquis under account reference
(the Agreement')


2) The Defendant failed to maintain the required payments and arrears began to accrue.


3) The Agreement was later assigned to the Claimant on 24/06/2015 and notice given to the Defendant.


4) Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of £1,750.29 remains due and outstanding.


5.And the Claimant claims
a) The said sum of £1,
750.29
b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.384, but limited to one year, being £140.02 
c) Costs

 

What is the total value of the claim? 2075.31

 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC ( Pre Action Protocol) ? yes

 

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? Yes

 

Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? Yes


Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Credit Card

 

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

 

Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Online

 

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/ Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes

 

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. Debt Purchaser

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Yes

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? Yes

 

Why did you cease payments? Could not afford to pay

 

What was the date of your last payment? Jan 2015

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? Yes

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.
.
 register as an individual
 note the long gateway number given
 then log in
.
 select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.
.
 then using the details required from the claimform
.
 defend all
 leave jurisdiction unticked
 you DO NOT file a defence at this time
 click thru to the end
 confirm and exit MCOL.
.
.
 get a CCA Request running to the claimant
https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/
 leave the £1PO blank and uncrossed
.
.
 get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant]
.
.

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/
.
.
type your name ONLY

no need to sign anything
.
you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.
you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count]
 

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

So I'm now defending my claim. I have until the 17th September to submit my defence (12 days).

 

How do I go about this?

 

Lowell have previously sent me an offer of £1000. although when I made contact with them some time later they would not accept my offer of £1000 to close the debt. 

Should I pursue this with them?

 

The last thing I want is a CCJ/default to come out of this. 

If it goes to court, I agree to pay, will this happen?

Edited by puma85
Link to post
Share on other sites

already defaulted. can only have ONE.

the rest as post 28.

 

partly admitting claim will mean guaranteed CCJ.

 

plenty of Lowell card claimform threads here already with the std holding/no paperwork defence

have a go post it here 1st.

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

OK thanks DX I understand that I can only have one default, just keen to avoid the CCJ!

 

I have already completed the AOS as you instructed, sent for a CCA and CPR 31:14 

The nest step is to submit my defence. 

 

I think I'm just getting mixed up on the terminology and struggling to understand the full picture. 

I assumed 'defence' was effectively saying I do not know anything bout the debt/its not mine etc. Where as I know the debt is mine and have previously tried to negotiate a settlement figure. I know this and so does Lowell. 

 

So what would my reason for defence be?

 

If I loose Would I get a CCJ?

 

Edited by puma85
Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you pay within 28 days it would be registered yes.

 

No good keep asking questions if dont go read a few threads as advised in post 37

 

you've been here since 2012 so should know how to search.

 

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Defence

 

 

1. The Defendant entered into a Consumer Credit Act 1974 regulated agreement with Vanquis under account reference xxxxxxxxxxxxx (the Agreement')

2. The Defendant failed to maintain the required payments and arrears began to accrue.

3. The Agreement was later assigned to the Claimant on 24/06/2015 and notice given to the defendant.

4. Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of £1,750.29 remains due and outstanding.

5. And the Claimant claims

a) The said sum of £1,750.29
b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.384, but limited to one year, being £140.02 

c) Costs

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

2. Paragraph 1 is accepted in as much as I have in the past had financial dealings with Vanquis. However, I do not recall the precise details of the alleged agreement and have sought clarity from the claimant by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a section 78 request. I am unaware of what account or contract the claimant refers to.

 

3. Paragraph 2 is noted but not admitted , the claimant is put to strict proof to evidence any breach and service of Notice of Arrears and  Default Notice pursuant to section 86c and 87 of the CCA 1974.

 

4. Paragraph 3 of the claim is denied I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served in June 2015.

 

5. The defendant submitted a request for documents pursuant to CPR 31.14. on 1st September 2019. The claimant has failed to comply.

 

6. The defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged agreement pursuant to s78 CCA 1974 on 1st September 2019. The claimant has failed to comply.

 

7. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, the Claimant has failed to provide any evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31.14, therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to;

 

   (a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and

   (b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a Default Notice

   (c) show how the Defendant 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;

 

8. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

9. On the alternative, if 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.

 

10. 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.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a few tweaks and I have added you  a new point 3 in blue.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHER

 

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group - The National Consumer Service

If you want advice on your Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

quite std for lowells to do this

have you not been reading Lowell claimform threads in the downtime to see why they try to intimidate defendants like this....

 

await your from the court.

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...