Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

79 Excellent

1 Follower

About The_Grumlin

  • Rank
    Basic Account Holder
  1. I haven't got access to those at the moment but will ask her, I do have the text of the court mediation settlement agreement (removed any data that might identify) MEDIATION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT Name of court County Court Money Claims Centre Claim No. Name of Claimant The Lowell Group Enterprise Name of Defendant On the xx September 2013 the parties agreed that: Terms:- 1. The defendant will pay the claimant the sum of £350.00 in full and final settlement of this case the payment to be made by instalments of £50.00 each month begi
  2. You will notice from the letters they say Three obtain a CCJ, but it was Lowell who issued the original claim that was paid off! attachment .pdf
  3. First thing we did was check her credit file - NOTHING, did a check on Trust Online again -NOTHING as I thought. They issued the claim form and it was addressed to my house - she defended and settled. She already had correspondence at her previous and current address to/from Lowell at the time so they had correct details, they obviously tried to get default judgment as this was a previous address (and is associated by being on the mortgage). I know they are chancing their arm as they are asking for the original amount, not the amount they claimed on th
  4. This is not for me but for my ex partner In 2013 she got a claim form for on old Three debt (sent to my address she she had not lived for 12 plus years) I helped her with the claim form and to cut the story short she went into mediation and agreed a settlement. Which she paid by DD to the account as specified by Lowell/Howard Cohen. So all paid up and completed, no CCJ, no action, no more letters. Now jump forward to 2017, letters start coming through my letter box from Lowell for her, which I pass on. They claim the debt is still owed, they have CCJ and no
  5. So they haven't supplied a DN? I see they claim they don't need one? Are they claiming the whole balance or just the arrears?
  6. Plus you have left your address in that para.
  7. First problem page 2, para 1.3 very pee poor for solicitors. It should be law of property 1925 section 196 for notices of assignment. Nothing to do with CCA1974. Muppets.
  8. http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/213936-ge-money-me.html Read the letters attached in the first post, you will note GE do not say sold. They say transferred to their debt recovery agency.
  9. Sounds very par the course for Link. I would be careful when you come before the Judge as the first one I had was very much in the "you owe it you pay it" camp, luckly his attitude changed when it became apparent that Link had NOT supplied any documents or a witness statement before the hearing. I found there is a mixture of Judges, I was lucky to have in the hearings after two other Judges who were up to speed on consumer law. I'll try and track down the link to the thread with letter from GE to this particular CAG member, it was very interesting reading. In regards to my own
  10. What documents have been supplied and what is missing? Link are likely to turn up (an agency sol). They may want to talk to you before the meeting/hearing cos they haven't a clue about the case. You need to have your speach worked out for the Judge the reason why is essential that you get all the documentation. For example the conflicting information on the ownership of the alleged debt, so a need to ensure Link have full legal title to the debt by way of contract/deed would be essential. I have seen other threads where GE have called Link their "collection agents". You will ne
  11. Right from my reading you have removed the offending software as per the the take down request and have taken measure to prevent it happening again. As it stands as a provider you have done your best to ensure that material has been removed as per the take down request. It would not be in your interest to sign an undertaking that you can not enforce i.e. where members upload material anonymously where that material break your terms and conditions. You would only know after the event occurs. I think your first letter should not have been sent "WITHOUT PREJUDICE" as it could have been used
  12. Did you at the time of the infringment have posted terms and conditions of use for your members i.e. no copyrighted material to be upload?
  13. Magda Got your PM, but I though I would answer here. The best scenario would have been if they had supplied a duff DN, however in your case I was think exactly along the line of 42man as this would be the simplest course of action to you and lower risk than trial (Link could produce another one of their special reproduction DN's). Link have had enough time to supply the DN and their actions are not in the spirt of CPR is my own though when starting the action they should have had any document they were going to use to hand or confirmed that they existed. They have had ample time to p
  14. First thing, you have to file your hold defense (get one off here now and amend as required). Do it now. If you need help there are many on here to take your pick from. Secondly, if Link have asked for some proof they can take a running jump. They have issued court action against you, they know very well who you are as you have responded to that action. Thirdly there is no hold as it is subject to court procedings, they are looking to get a default judgement by you doing nothing. Do not take any thing that they tell you to be true or correct. Act now before it is too late and you ha
  15. Unfortuantely this how DCA's work and in particular LINK. Never ever trust anything they say in regards to delivery of documents for court cases. You might be able to get this set a side, also check the statements from Link and look closely at the charges that have been applied to the account. You may be able to reduce the balance by recliaming as such unlawful charges.
  • Create New...