I think I know what has happened! They have settled the old entry, entered a new one and defaulted me on it ALL OVER AGAIN! I give up! What's the point?

I absolutely HATE Lowell's! They are rapidly replacing Mackenzie Hall in the 'dirty tricks' league! It's about time the OFT and the ICO etc. got off their fat, lazy arses and did something constructive to bring these scumbags to task with their methods. I can only summise that their recent 'flurry' of activity and 'bending' of the rules can be attributed to sheer desperation! I for one will NEVER pay Lowell's a single penny! If they produced a CCA that was made of solid gold, had my fingerprints upon it, was enforced by the highest court in the land they would still NEVER see a penny from me, I would rather go bankrupt or go to jail!

NOTHING about this is correct although I cannot recall exactly the original dates, I'm sure I've got them somewhere though! Lowell's seem to have added this nonsense AFTER it was removed about 6 months ago. I have absolutely no idea what they are playing at! How can they close an entry and reopen one for the same amount 6 months later? Surely this is absolutely illegal?

Whoops! Thanks for that! RI

Thanks for that! Yes, It was defaulted previously, removed from my file after Lowell closed the account because they couldn't locate the CCA. They are now trying to say that a crappy spreadsheet containing some pretty sparse and incorrect details constitutes proof of this debt via the 'Electronic Communications Order 2004'. Full story here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?303275-Interesting-Development-In-Lowell-Vanquis-Debacle and here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?302694-Electronic-Signature-for-Online-Applications They have now reopened it and added it again to my credit file! Is this legal? RI

When I looked into this further it would seem that they have added a credit account to my file! Any ideas? Thanks, RI

I got an ALERT from Credit Expert to tell me that Lowell's have kindly SETTLED this account! If they want to use 'screenshots' of supposed data then so can I! RI

The Trading Standards in Northern Ireland are a complete joke! I gave up on them after they took the side of a local DCA who threatened me with a doorstep visit even after being sent a letter. RI

Surely this is 'fabrication' and not just as simple as 'reconstruction'? I can grudgingly understand a CCA being reconstructed IF a signature exists on another unenforcable agreement but when there is no signature or no acknowledgement then a document such as the one above surely MUST be seen as pure fabrication? RI

Thanks comrades! I thought as much! I must be getting old and mushy! It's just the usual Standard Lowell's, Red, Hamptons, Corleone threatogram then? RI Last payment was in 2008, I think! My wife and I had a dispute with Vanquis over REALLY unfair charges and decided to 'not pay' until this was addressed. Next thing we know we were getting DCA letters because Vanquis had passed the accounts on. We are determined that Lowell's NEVER get a penny from us because of the harrassment we have received from them along with the lies and deception. We are quite prepared to go Bankrupt if needs be, extreme I know but such is our resolve!

Hi All, I got this today in the post and I would be grateful of someone could explain it to me who has dealt with similar threats. My first thoughts are that it is just the usual Lowell's threatogram but I just want to be 100% sure before I use it to line the Hamster's cage. Lowell's have recently sent me a demand using the Vanquis 'digital signature application details' spreadsheet and I have been ignoring them because I am adamant that it is garbage and it does not prove I owe them anything. See here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?302694-Electronic-Signature-for-Online-Applications and here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?303275-Interesting-Development-In-Lowell-Vanquis-Debacle Although I have recieved many similar threats in the past I'm concerned by the wording on this masterpiece, namely:- If we are successful in obtaining a CCJ and you still do not reply........ Is there a process that has to be followed or can a DCA get a CCJ 'behind your back'? I ask this because I have heard of this being done before. RI PS The debt is over £1,500.

So, in a nutshell, they can legally 'chase' the debt using this nonsense but if they ever decided to actually bring it to court etc. then they would be required to provide more evidence which would then make the spreadsheet appear ridiculous? Is this correct? RI

I would like them to explain 'exactly' what these documents are supposed to represent and exactly 'how' they presume that they are proof of any alleged debt. Also, how they suppose that putting a few details on a spreadsheet and posting them to the induvidual along with some photocopied 'terms & conditions' satisfy a CCA request. Surely they realise that there must be a clear defined link from the induvidual to the document and the terms and conditions et al. I think the 'simplicity' and content of these amateur attempts at an 'electronic signature' will be there undoing. The use of the term 'signature' and 'application' in the title of the document are immediately contradictory and imply that only an 'application' exists but I fail to see what the agreement is from this spreedsheet. It could be argued that the induvidual was only 'agreeing' to 'apply' for credit and nothing more. Whilst it was a good attempt to cover their asses regarding a CCA request, it is way too rushed, too badly designed, too inept, too inaccurate and basically ridiculous, that will doom it to failure. I know that if I was a judge and this was presented to me I would laugh them out of court! Production and legitimisation of this kind of reconstucted rubbish could totally destroy the Consumer Credit Act and open the floodgates to DCA's using these to circumvent the law if they cannot produce an enforcable CCA. In short, this outrageous document has been cunningly and specifically designed with the ONLY purpose being to deceive those who have made CCA requests to Vanquis/Lowell's et al where they have been unable to satisfy the request.

Hopefully, they will go down the toilet like all the rest of these life sucking vermin! Oh what a glorious day it will be! RI

They are all rats in the same cellar mate! They just change the letterheads to 'intimidate' the recipient! I can see no possible way that this document proves that we have even heard of Vanquis let alone agreed to any credit, terms or conditions. The more I study it the more I am convinced that is complete and utter rubbish. It is simply a VERY recently manufactured idea to circumvent the plain fact that Vanquis probably NEVER had Consumer Credit Agreements in the first place. They are basically manipulating personal details in a ludicrous attempt to deceive people into believing that these outrageous spreadsheets are actual 'bonafide' proof of debt! By closer scrutiny of the documents, I am absolutely convinced that they were cobbled together for this reason only! One could even argue that we never had Vanquis accounts, after all, what proof is there if there is no credit agreement? I would guess that 1,000's of these have been sent out to people who have requested a CCA recently! RI

Any joy yet mate? RI

They are Phishing, standard operating procedure for these vermin! IGNORE!

Hi All, In the space of 3 weeks I have received 5 letters from Lowell's regarding 3 accounts that all have CCA disputes on them! My wife and I have just got their spreadsheet style 'digital signature application details' that Vanquis and Lowell's seem to try to be peddling as proof of liability for debt, see here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?303275-Interesting-Development-In-Lowell-Vanquis-Debacle and here:- http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?302694-Electronic-Signature-for-Online-Applications The latest letter is regarding Shop Direct who were CCA'd in 2009 and never responded, they ignored my request and passed the account to Lowell's (whilst in dispute, like this never happens, eh folks!). I then sent the 'Account In Dispute Letter', to Lowell's (this was sent over well over 1 year ago), Lowell's sent the usual tripe for a few weeks which was ignored and then the threatograms stopped. Look what dropped on my mat this morning:- Letter content = Lowell's usual absolute garbage and deliberatle intimidation! YOU ACCOUNT HAS BEEN PLACED ON HOLD, blah blah! FURTHER INFORMATION, blah blah! WE SHALL RECOMMENCE COLLECTION PROCEEDINGS, blah blah! LOL! Yeah right! I soooo worried that I cannot sleep! Remember, the last letter I sent to these vermin was April 2010! What on earth is going on? Surely there is someone that is employed there that has some intelligence? I must say, it is very uplifting to see Lowell's at their finest! I am looking forward to see what nonsense they will send next, I am waiting by the letterbox every morning, am I becoming Institutionalised? RI

LOL! Methinks that they actually believe that this 'crappy old spreadsheet' with extremely sparse and incorrect personal details is proof of liability for debt. NAH, WHO AM I KIDDING! They are just being Lowell's, CHANCERS! Crazy! RI

Don't worry about it mate, I'm busy as hell at the moment but I'll devise a letter and discuss it with you asap. Have a crack at one and see what you come up with! REMEMBER, they are trying to peddle this spreadsheet as proof of liability for debt. RI

Hi All, I got this today! Am deciding my next steps!

Hi All, Just got this 'work of art' today! It appears that Lowell's are trying to follow up on this garbage with their usual 'threats' and 'harrassment'. Could it be that they possibly believe that this tactic, no matter how full of holes, possibly might work? RI

Ok, sorry for the misunderstanding! If you have any advice/suggestions please feel free to comment. This is a sticky one and I dare say there will be a lot more of these being sent out in the very near future. RI

Yeah, I know! One of them is mine! There are a few people needing help with this one, if it bores you or you find it annoying then please accept out humble apologies and leave the thread. RI

Sorry?