Jump to content


BankFodder BankFodder


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by evelyndarling

  1. they were selling from a pet, not a breeder unfortunatly. it was only when we got home and realised that she was lethargic and constipated we realised there may be something wrong with her. we have always had rescue dogs and this was the first time id bought a dog and as it was a family pet i assumed the best but got the worst. it has been devestating. last night i spoke to the woman i got her off of on the phone and she claimed my vet told her it was my fault and i was told to worm her - which is a complete lie, so i said i was going to take her to court and she screamed down the phone at me. im seeing poppys vet tomorrow to find out about having a report drawn up. so far 12 days of a puppy has cost me over £1000. im not happy, as i loved that little thing and now she has been reduced to a number in cash. thanks for the advice.
  2. i bought a puppy and when we got her home she was lethargic and constipated. we took her to the vets the next day, and were given medicine. she seemed to perk up, but the vets voiced concerns that she was not as perky as a puppy should be. the time scale goes like this - thursday - brought home puppy friday - at vets following monday - dog has first puppy jab, vets still concerned at her lethargy saturday night - emergency vet called as dog is sick (vomiting), gave her an antibiotic injection, could not work out what was wrong. monday - dog no better, admitted into surgery. tuesday morning - barium meal, x-rays, still no diagnosis, 4pm vets call to say that if they dont operate then she is going to die as she is going downhill and the barium travelled no further than her stomach from 9am. operate at 4.30, call later to tell me the following - the dogs stomach was full of big worms. they had eaten into her intestines. they are so inflamed and damaged that they had to remove a 20cm section, which is a lot for a 9week old lhasa apso. they cant believe what is inside her but hope that they can stimulate her gut to work again. as she survived the 2.5 hour op we are all hopeful and the vets are confident. 10pm tuesday, poppy died. her intestines were so damaged that she had no hope. the vet said in her 11 years she has never seen anything so awful and never had a dog die from worms. as we only had her for 12 days from purchase to death, and i now owe £500+ at the vets, i called the seller and asked for te money i paid back to go towards the vets fees.poppy was adored by us and the vets and i made sure with them that in no terms could it have been anything that she picked up in the 12 days with me. they state that either the seller neve5r wormed her or if they did it was with an innefective supermarket product. but they say it is more likely she just wasnt. which is disgusting, but also means that she was doomed before i even got her. i also suspect they knew she wasnt well because the woman couldnt get my money off me quik enough and clained she had a "belly button" when really it ws a hernia that wasnt as pronounced because she obviously hadnt eaten. the seller is being completley difficult and claimed that she was fine when they had her so obviously its my fault she died, and now, after i gave my vet permission to disclose, they claim they wont deal with me because they wormed her but conviniently cant "remember" what with. funny that as its only three weeks ago, and they are currently selling other puppies... i have offered the deal of giving me back £300 as that is what i paid. but as they are being so awful, what are my chances in the small claims court? i will go after the money i paid and all vet fees to date. i am sick of this person, its heartbreaking to lose a pet without someone trying to pass the blame. do you think it will stand up in court? my vets have offered to write reports and pass on records. sorry its long, eve
  3. i am still alive, just moved house and had no net connection. and lowells have gone quiet, only two letters in two months. have filled out and oft disclosure though so they have come to a conclusion, but i dont know what it is. how you doing?
  4. i can scan it up tonight and post the other side of this leaflet for you. its something TS sent me through the post.
  5. 1. the postcard WAS made to look like someone had called, trading standards thought that as well which is why they have forwarded it to the OFT. 2. "letter dated 8th may" is a letter they sent me with a second copy of an application form with the signature box highlighted. this is what i sent to TS and is what they said isnt an agreement and could be disputed in court. 3. the "second letter" they refer to is indeed my complaint, the first letter was merely requesting a copy of procedures. how they tackled that as a complaint i dont know. the further page was just gumph about how this is thier final decision and that i can contact the FOS if im not happy, which im not and which i will. im suprised the fact that even though i clearly outlined the fact that Trading standards were interested in the card issue that they wanted permission to send it to the OFT, they still blah blahed it and claim it is not meant to look hand delivered - it is posted above, please have a look. it does indeed state someone will call at a set time, which as no one "phonecalled" me, then i and any other would take that to mean knock on my damn door. this is laughable.
  6. see, she stopped getting incapacity as she went into work - she had had an accident that left her disabled in one arm, but has since started work as a carer. thats why it stopped. but the inland rev charged her tax as if she had a second income - ie. the incapacity benefit that didnt exist. the benefits office should have given her a P60 for 2006 but didnt, and this is what the inland rev want. i guess they are not prepared to do any of the running themselves. thanks for the advice, its helpful, but i really could do with something i can attack them with because as far as the IR are concerned they want a 2006 P60 and the benefits have said they DO have it, but the "computer wont release it until the money is paid back". my mother finds it hard to dal with these things so id love to be able to sort it out.
  7. hello, been off as i have moved house. got a reply from lowells saying they stand by their previous letters and denied everything and basically said that TS were lying, i was lying and we are all idiots. i am now going to forward it to the ombudsman. i ma tempted to send them a letter asking how on earth they can call trading standards idiots which is basically what they are saying...
  8. im not sure if any of this is covered on here, but i need a direction to draft up a letter to help my mother. basically she was on incapacity benefit which ceased in about july last year. they then gave her a month extra, which she didnt realise. then, they sent her a letter saying that they had over paid her and could they have it back please, but they stated in the letter they have no lawful right to request nor force back this payment. because they did not inform her though, and they never released her p60, she has continued to pay tax on the amount that she hasnt recieved since august, and was informed by the inland rev that she can get a rebate, just send them the P60. but the benefits office are refusing to release the P60. she cannot pay them back as she cant afford to and has told them that she will on a goodwill basis once she gets the over paid tax back which she cannot do without the P60 but they are saying no money no P60. is there any way i can make them give her the P60? can they really hold it back by law? they have already admitted in writing they have no right to force the money back... if this is in the wrong place or no one knows can you redirect me as this is so important to me to help out my mother. thanks, evee.
  9. the letter i sent to TS, for bgqs, ATT: copy documents FORMAL COMPLAINT Dear Sir/Madam Could you please advise me regarding the following issue? Over the course of the last few weeks I have been in correspondence with the debt collection agency Lowell financial Ltd. regarding an alleged debt they own in my name, sold on by Capital One Bank. The debt is currently in dispute with Capital One due to unlawful charges. I sent Lowell financial a request for a true copy of my Consumer Credit Agreement (as can be seen in the letter I have attached) under the consumer credit act 1974, and received a copy of an undated application form which does not contain the prescribed terms which I believe constitute an “agreement“. I also received a letter dated 23rd April 2007 informing me they had defaulted me even though I was not due to pay them an instalment until 16th May 2007, therefore I feel they defaulted me merely because I requested proof within my rights that they were entitled to collect aforementioned debt. I have included a copy of this correspondence. Lowell financial Ltd. have also sent me a letter stating that they have passed on the debt to themselves, Lowell financial Ltd., from Lowell portfolio Ltd., which in itself is very confusing as all previous correspondence had been with the Lowell financial Ltd., not Lowell portfolio Ltd. Would this constitute as a breach of the Office of Fair Trading guidelines section 2.5, 2.4©? A copy of this letter is enclosed. You can see from my letter I have enclosed that I was exercising my rights under the relevant sections of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 act in asking for a “true copy of the original agreement”, and also enclosed the maximum statutory fee of £1. They have been in no way amicable and have continued to send letters threatening me, and to send agents to my home. Today on june 7th 2007 I received a card made to look like a card which had been hand delivered insinuating that they had visited my home when I was at work and would visit again that evening, a copy of this card is enclosed. It caused a lot of distress as I live in a block with many other residents and my partner called me whilst I was at work worried that he’d either missed someone and I was in trouble or that one of the other residents had answered the door. I do not think that this is anywhere near in line with the OFT’s guidelines regarding fair debt collection practices and would appreciate any advice. I would be very grateful of any help you can give me in response to this situation, in regards to whether they have fulfilled their duties under the consumer credit act 1974, and also wether they are adhering to the OFT debt collection guidance 2003, or the use of “look alike letters” 2000. thank you for your time. Please treat this letter as a formal complaint in regards to this matter. Yours sincerely
  10. maybe your letter was a bit too detailed? i wrote mine in the mind that i know enough, but they would know more so pretend to be the little consumer, not the big fight for my rights-er (which i am really) i would suggest that because youve put in so many technicalities and all the details of prescribed terms etc. maybe they might have thought you were being smart? contest it, but be more simplistic, dont put in what the prescribed terms are, make them look for them, then at least they HAVE to do comparisons, also state that other people have been sent pretty much the same thing and that their respective TS have agreed. make sure they know your the innocent one and you need help, not that your the know it all that needs conformation. i will post my TS letter and the reply on my thread so you can see what i sent and recieved.
  11. okay then! i'll take that part out! thanks guys, i put it in because TS said they will be given more rights to revoke the licensces of DCA's who dont comply with CCA requests properly, but true, its not really that relevant right now....
  12. going back over your thread, there is no way that that document constitutes an agreement. one of the things TS have said in the letter they sent me is that there was no address of the creditor amongst other things. there is nothing on that, not a jot. you need to fight this, i think what you should maybe do is inform them that they have not complied. i dont see how that can possibly stand up in court.the TS's are too conflicting, it seems its area dependant. im going to look into this further because i want to know how these guys make up thier minds. it looks as though yours didnt even bother to check what the prescribed terms are. im going to see if i can find out how watertight the prescribed terms issue is. my TS are passing my report onto OFT, so maybe you should put something together and go straight to OFT? seeing as they will be dealing with other lowells issues, yours will fall under the same terms. what exactly did you send to TS? if you dont want to post it in the thread you can email it to my personal address and i'll send you the amended version of mine i sent TS. see if there are any similarities. because technically you got sent even less than i did so im guessing it cant just be that your TS dont care....maybe its something in the correspondence...?
  13. i fear that if you just send the info to leeds TS they will do what they did to me and say "we aint dealing with it, send it to your own TS" its very strange that yours and others TS's have acted in this way yet ive been lucky in that mine agree that the CCA was not properly executed. im going to just scan your post and see what if you posted what it was they sent you as an agreement... ...okay. i cant see whats on it, is there any way of getting a clearer look? can you email it to me in BIG form so i can pull it up in photoshop? if i can help and it doesn't constitute, then maybe you can use a little of my letter from TS to your TS as conflicting evidence, as we are in much the same boat. it seems as though only Dmdave and i have had positive responses so far, but daves was already in dispute when it was sold, whereas mine wasn't, as i SAR cap one and CCA'd lowells at the same time. my TS have basically said that the form they sent is not applicable but also that it could end up in court, which im happy to do if theres a chance i can bring lowells down to thier knees. let me know if i can help anymore - i know im not an expert but im learning, an in the same leaky boat!
  14. this is what im planning to send to lowells. yes or no? if any one wants to help amend this id be very grateful because im not too sure if this is all okay. Dear Sir/Madam Attn: FORMAL COMPLAINT Re:- Account/Reference Number I would like to draw your attention to the fact that under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 78 you have not fulfilled your duty to supply me with a copy of my consumer credit agreement. You have defaulted under the given time scale. The document you sent me, twice no less, does not contain many of the prescribed terms that are part of a valid consumer credit agreement. I am in receipt of a letter further substantiating this from Trading Standards. I also wish to draw your attention to the sending of the “calling card” which was intended to look as though you had visited my home. The card was unclear, it is obviously worded to appear that a visit had been made, there is no prior “warning” to this proposed false visit, and therefore I wish for you to consider this letter as a FORMAL COMPLAINT in the actions of Lowell Financial Ltd. And Lowell Portfolio Ltd. To clarify, this complaint is regarding the failure to present to myself, within the given time scale, a copy of my Consumer Credit Agreement, and also the use of misleading, unclear correspondence with intent to cause fear or unease. I also wish to inform you that this matter will be taken further and please find enclosed a copy of the guidance I was sent by trading standards, and take note, though I’m sure your legal quarters will be aware, of the OFT ‘s powers which will come into effect in 2008. I look forward to your response. Yours sincerely then this enclosed... any advice is appreciated!
  15. ive been in contact with TS and one of the things ive queried is these kind of vague cards, and they have pretty much said that they are possibly in the wrong, keep hold of it, because it might be worth looking up the OFT guidance for debt collecters which states that they " must not act in an unclear or threatning manner" which these cards are completley unclear...
  16. i have had a reply from TS. its interesting, and also makes me think that your TS didnt quite get what you were stating, i mean if mine and DMDaves agree then yours must be wrong. go and have a look, ive posted it in my thread.
  17. TS have responded. its quite a good response, a bit confusing but it makes me feel safer....what shall i write to lowells now? i was going to send them a letter saying HA HA BLOODY HA but i want to be formal.... TS say... (i have picked out the key bits. the rest just clarified what id sent)... and, ANY views and opinions would be great, as im not sure where to go now, do i sit back and let them take me to court? i will let TS send the report to OFT and i find it interesting that the calling cards could indeed be unlawful - so if you have one damn well keep it - if we can prove this then we could even get thier licensce revoked!!! eve
  18. hmmm. i wonder why they sent it back then? maybe they are in cahoots!
  19. well i think that if the TS outcome is that they think lowells have done what they were supposed to do then that will be the only route. im going to send lowells a complaint letter outlining that they have not complied in my view, in response to thier "we will take money out of your bank or send a bailiff round and mean nasty stuff like that" letter i got yesterday (im sure youve had this one by now, we seem to be running along side each other) then i will cease contact. if they take me to court i will make sure i am there by any way possible -(don't they sometimes run CCJ's through without you there?) because what is the worst that can happen? a judge declares them right and i pay them approx £2.50 a month for the rest of my life, and a red credit mark for a few years? or at best i bring them to their knees. i wonder if anyone has got as far as contesting a CCA in regard to a DCA in court? maybe we'll have to be the first ones to try.
  20. leeds TS sent me a letter saying they wont deal with my complaint and have forwarded it to my local TS. what a run around. so im guessing this is not much help to you. i dont know what to suggest now. apart from seek further advice on the legalities. they did not comply with the CCA surely, so there MUST be something in that? i mean just cause you local trading standards dont agree, but then another counties does, there must be more to the whole situation. why are the TS's not agreeing, if they are technically the same body?
  21. just a quick update - leeds TS have said they will not deal with my complaint and sent it to my local TS. recieved a "thankyou for your letter" letter today and will now await a reply.
  22. just to let you know im still waiting..... but you saw the letter lowells sent me right... i wonder if that means a lot more people are complaining than we realise and they are changing tact... i hope TS agree with me, but in my letter (i edited it from the one i posted on my thread) i tried not to play on the CCA just in case they said that lowells had been right in what they sent, so i touched upon that as a short section and also mentioned the stuff up they made by saying they'd passed me over from thier "client" when they were the ones id been dealing with anyway. i found an OFT law regarding that and asked if it was in line with it, and i then also asked whether the sending of the "calling card" was in line with the OFT guidlines 2000 on use of look alike letters. basically, i am hoping they will agree on one of three things, not none of one. the CCA would be amazing, but if they say that lowells were correct but not in another area i will have something to stand in court with, because i will damn well take this there if needs be.
  • Create New...