* removed * I was not aware lowells are welcomed to operate on this forum.

* removed * I was not aware lowells are welcomed to operate on this forum.

* removed * I was not aware lowells are welcomed to operate on this forum.

* removed * I was not aware lowells are welcomed to operate on this forum.

* removed * I was not aware lowells operate on this forum.

* removed * I was not aware lowells are welcomed to operate on this forum.

Tmobile emailed me with details of the charges and I mailed them back saying i dont know what they are. They removed the charges and put in writing they will not be associated with me. Result

To be honest i forgot about it, those years in my life are a blur. It only clicked when I set up the new account and saw it on the screen. Ill pay it as soon as the bill comes in, not a problem. As long as they cant flag it as a default now thats all im worried about.

I had a debt with tmobile from over 6 years ago. I recently took out a new contract with them and they accepted me, but have added 260 pounds of my old debt onto my first bill. If I pay this, does this mean i acknowledged the debt and a new default or settled notice can be logged on my credit report? If i send the phone back and terminate the agreement under the 14 day cooling off period, can they say i made contact and log a new default?

Just a quick update to this, we have gone through the cycle of letters, from final demand to final final demand etc and havent heard any more for the last month.

thanks for the help

Thanks So any loan taken out online before then must be signed? If its not, whats the status?

What year did using a tickbox when applying for a loan become classified as having given your signature? Was it 2004?

* removed * I was not aware lowells operate on this forum.

so coming back to the OP, any way for a DCA to get a court order requiring thie third party PO box to disclose my real mailing address?

thats true, but i dont want to wait the year if i can help it. The debt is mine at the end of the day and id rather pay it and clear it out. In paying something off the debt, the 6 years starts over again, right?

I want to negotiate with a creditor from a long time ago, without revealing my current address. Im very close to the 6 year period and dont want to start the clock again if i can avoid it, and they also dont know where the hell I am. However, the debt is a debt from a long time ago and I want to offer them a 50% full and final settlement on the proviso they remove the defaults from my credit record. If i use one of those online mail services (who are not a publicly owned body, they are a private company) who provide a PO box then scan/email me my postal mail, is there any way the debt collectors can force the company to hand over my real address? The company has said no FOI requests will result in my personal information being revealed and neither will a DPA request. They have specifically stated only a court order will allow them to reveal my address to any third party. What is the likelyhood of a creditor getting some kind of order to reveal my true address? Is it possible, or would that only apply in a criminal case? Perhaps they would have some kind of swing with a civil court given they have not been able to contact me for years (was overseas) thanks

Ive noticed a bit of an irregularity in the Roxborough/Graham white letters. Originally, the NCP PCCN's were from 'national car parks limited', details of which (taken from their company number on the letters) are : Now what has gave me pause for thought is that the Roxburgh letters specifically stated they were acting on behalf of NCP Limited. The Graham White letter states they are acting on behalf of Roxburgh UK Limited, who are acting on behalf of NCP Limited. Now, why would the initial 'PCCN's come from National Car Parks Limited (reg 253240) but the roxburghe and GW letters be acting on behalf of NCP limited. It is worth noting that NCP Limited and National Car Parks Limited, while in the same offices - are two completely separate legal entities with differing company numbers. So, I wonder if National car parks limited is selling NCP limited the 'debts' for Michael to chase up. This then raises another question, if thats the case, why is NCP Limited registered as 'dormant' with companies house? Id be very interested to see those accounts/returns when they are filed in december/october 2010 (respectively). (by the way, the return they filed in october 09 has to state if the company is dormant or not, so while the accounts are from march 09 stating dormant, the return in october 09 also has to state that) So, while im sure someone else here may notice something ive overlooked, I was wondering why a solicitors are acting on behalf of a dormant company. Sure it could have become non dormant since October last year, but that doesnt explain why the PCCNs came from 'National Car Parks Limited' then the threatening letters start turning up on behalf of 'NCP Limited' I could see if maybe National car parks LTD had sold NCP Ltd the debt, who then pursue via the usually collection procedure, but only time will tell that when their accounts come out in october. If any roxburgh or graham white letters have gone out to anyone before october 2009 acting on behalf of 'NCP limited' then someone could be in some hot water, either NCP with companies house for declaring themselves 'dormant' while collecting revenue or GW/Rox (specifically michael) witht eh law society for claiming they are acting on behalf of a client which could not possibly have instructed them. If Michael were to use a defence that National car parks were trading as NCP limited, as I understand it, would mean that National car parks could be in hot water for trying to pass themselves off as another (dormant) legal entity (ncp limited) As far as I can tell, this applies to any debt notices sent before october 09, and unless NCP limited has become non dormant since october 09 and 'buys' the debts of National car parks limited, anything since then. But what would be the point of doing that way other than a front operation to protect the core business? Either that or National Car Parks are using a trading style for recovery which deliberately confuses with the NCP Limited dormant company. If anyone has any letters from roxburgh or GW acting on behalf of NCP or national car park from any time in the last 12 months, id very much appreciate scanned copies (especially if they mention NCP limited before october 09 (or even better) before march 09). The other half is an ILEX member and a fellow of the law society and she is seriously considering going after Michael for his practices (via her contacts there) and im hoping there is something in this that can be taken further. Of course, if anyone knows for sure im p**sing into the wind here, then let me know before i make an arse of my self any further Thoughts?

A few questions if you guys and girls have a second? In a job offer letter which contains the following 'Full details of terms and conditions of employment will be in the staff handbook, which will be given to you within 4 months of commencement of employment' is this section enforceable later? If a job offer is implied which has certain terms and conditions, do not all of those terms and conditions have to be available at signing time? Would it mean, should the offer be accepted, any terms and conditions not available at offer acceptance (or even contract signing stage) are enforceable later? Also, would this not also imply that the terms and conditions of any separate contract are null and void as it stated 'full details of terms & conditions of employment are in the staff handbook" ? What is the scope of restrictions after employment. For example could a company restrict me from working for any of their competition for a set period, and if so what is 'fair'? Inventions / IP agreement - if I work for the company and have signed their agreement they seem to be implying that anything I invent outside of company hours is still theirs, even if its not in a related business field (for example, lets say i make a new game for facebook, they could claim it is theirs even though i made it in my own personal time and their business activities are say, a phone company. Is this enforceable? Thanks!

Hmm, i recall seeing these guys on TV when i was visiting mum a few years back, i thought they were cowboys - now from dx's link maybe they are/were. I think the key thing here is to look at the contract - can you post it? PM me it if you dont feel comfortable sending it in a public forum. I know im pretty new here, but im quite legal eagle minded, both myself and my fiancee are both reading law at uni (her 4th year, me 1st - but with a lot of 'amateur' yet 'fun' legal eagle work behind me both in the UK and the USA - not that USA applies here at all) If this is what i think it is, a standard education contract with a educational loan to back it up, unless there is some kind of implied agreement in the contract that was not delivered upon then there isnt much to go on. But if you post/PM the original agreement and contract there is very possibly a loophole in it somewhere. If there isnt, then i doubt there is much to go on based on the other posts i have seen on this forum). Is there *anything* in the contract that they should have done for you that they did not?

P.S. send everything special delivery. Yes its £5 a time, and thats a lot, but nowerdays it seems the DLA people 'lose' recorded delivery letters as much as they take a c**p. send it regular post and you havent a hope in hell. recorded delivery just means it got in the door, but it can get 'lost' easlity after that. special delivery means a person accepted it and took responsibility for that letter, ensuring it will get to the right person. A load of crap, i know - it certainly doesn't work the other way around (if they send you something second class post, you received it in their books, regardless of if you didnt get it). I look at this to mean either one of two things - they have so many appeals they cannot cope, or they are intentionally ignoring things that do not come special delivery.

from what i hear that is standard procedure. It seems the DLA payments are going through a government mandated 'change' (read: f**k as many people over as you can to save us cash). This includes getting in doctors who overrule your own local GP/social worker reports based on key words. the standard advice from people that i know right now is whatever you are awarded, dont fight it, especially if it contains the word 'high' anywhere - you will get less as the 'appeals' people are more ruthless then the initial assessment people. something is rotten somewhere and it will blow up this year (hopefully before the election, but im guessing its being buried for now), until then we all have to deal with it. My sources: 2 kids on high rate care, low rate mobility. Wife on low rate care, hight rate mobility (care allowance reduced on appeal). Mother in law working full time for age concern who now has 100% of her time working on DLA appeals for people who cant even get out of bed and live in their own **** for several hours per day - instead of her being a 'benefits advisor'. Sister with multiple sclerosis for over 15 years now also fighting DLA/ESA who think she can work (even though she cant see out of one eye, let alone do her housework, cook herself meals or ever walk more than 2 ft.) and a mother who is so manic depressive for the last 20 years she has the crisis team visit her every night just to make sure she hasnt topped herself (who the ESA people have said is fit to work as well).

--removed

Are you though? If the debt hasnt been sold, its still owned by Amex, regardless of who is 'representing' them on a legal front - be it their internal collections or external solicitor. I hope your court case plays out well, i think at least you have some grounds to fight the £1k per letter charge during that case surely? I vaguely recall some precident a long time ago saying there was a max charge per letter. Ask them for a full breakdown of the charge and what it entailed maybe?

wages