Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×
Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

FitForPurpose

Registered Users

Change your profile picture
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    55

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by FitForPurpose

  1. FitForPurpose
    If you do sell the car to your partner, remember that you can't sell it "under value" otherwise the receiver could undo the transaction. So if you have a brand new Ferrari and planned to sell it for a quid, that won't work. However, perhaps what would work would be to get a valuation from someone like "we buy any car". Their valuations are very low, but perhaps are likely to be the sort of price a receiver might expect to get in a "panic" sale. This will also give you evidence to support that you got a third party valuation if any one questions it. FFP
  2. FitForPurpose
    The ombudsman won't touch it because the complaint has been going on for more than nine months. FFP
  3. FitForPurpose
    It's related to a case where British Gas sent a large number of bills to a recipient who is not liable for the account.In fact the recipient is not even a British Gas customer! British Gas generally ignored the many disputes about the bills. If this were a CCA debt, one could quote the OFT guidelines to demonstrate that what BG were doing (by not dealing with the dispute) constituted unfair trading. So I was looking for some industry guidance or other trading guidance etc that could be used to counter BG's position that they "thought" the recipient was liable, so it was fine for them to chase payment. FFP
  4. FitForPurpose
    Ok - thanks for the info. I thought there might be another reason why bankruptcy isn't a good idea So the problem right now is "just" your Amex card right? If so, let's look at that. You said it was a corporate card from an old company under which you had a personal liability. Can you explain that a little more? Just wondering if there are any flaws in their claim? Regarding your son's allowances - I would have thought they are just that - your Son's. So I agree they should not be considered part of your income. FFP
  5. FitForPurpose
    Thanks for the response: Not always - energy companies can apply a "deemed contract" if no specific contract exists. An example - the OFT guidance "considered to be oppressive and an unfair or improper practice” by “ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make demands for payment without providing clear justification and/or evidence as to why the claims are not valid”. ...but that theoretically doesn't apply to electricity companies so my question is if any other law or guidance does apply? FFP
  6. FitForPurpose
    Hello, I am very sorry to hear of the situation you find yourself in. The first priority is to look after your mental health. That is priceless. Money is only money - it comes and goes. I realise this might sound impossible, but try to downrate the threats that you perceive to "annoying" rather than "threatening". It is the best way to ensure that demands for money don't send you over the edge. I can see that it is your wish to repay everyone. That is admirable, but you should also seriously consider whether that is viable both in terms of financially viable or whether it is viable for you to suffer the stress of it for years to come. Have you properly considered bankruptcy or did you get as far as thinking bankruptcy would be the end of the world? It is not and for many it is the right thing to do. It exists in law for a reason. You don't own a house or any significant assets that you have mentioned, other than those shares. What is the deal there - why do you think you would loose them if you are made bankrupt and are they really going to be worth anything? FFP
  7. FitForPurpose
    Hello, I have a general question about debt collection standards by electricity providers... The OFT provides guidance on debt collection which seems to only relate to debts collected under the Consumer Credit Act. Debts arising from the supply of electricity seem to be exempt from the act. So my question is, does anyone know whether there are any other acts of law or authoritative guidance regarding debt collection standards for electricity accounts? Kindest Regards FFP
  8. FitForPurpose
    The source of the rather worrying SRA figures was the result of a freedom of information act request. I have published them on my blog along with a link to the original source. CAG don't like me posting a direct link to that blog here, but if you were to google "is the sra fit for purpose" and look for the blog at blogspot then you should be able to find it I am also going to write to an MP or two. I was thinking of writing to the Justice Secretary and his shadow. I really think there is a risk to the public if there is minimal prospect of misbehaving solicitors being held to account. FFP
  9. FitForPurpose
    This is a classic case of a debt being sold on and sold on and sold on. I guess we can look on the bright side - it appears that Lowells have been a bit diddled if they purchased a debt from another DCA who probably knew it was unenforceable when the sold it Another tactic for dragging this out until the finish line of the SB date would be to wait 10 days after receiving a letter from them before writing back acknowledging receipt of that letter and that you will respond in full within 10 days. I learned that trick from a utility company! However, if a full agreement can't be located then the debt is unenforceable anyway. If things do progress, you may need to CCA Lowells. I know you have done this for CIS and they failed to adequately respond, but I'm not sure that would be a defence as the debt is now owned by pursued by Lowells. So I think you might need to show that they can't enforce it. FFP
  10. FitForPurpose
    Hand over your stool sample shouting "I've taken a load of your sh*t, now have some of mine!" FFP
  11. FitForPurpose
    I also agree that the letter posted by Stu007 should be sent, by recorded delivery to the registered office of the companies who are calling you. The one amendment I would make is to also add that you reserve your right to take direct action for damages caused by their harassment. I have some experience with this after I received around 100 bills and other account documents from a utilities company of which I have never been a customer. When they refused to close "my" account or deal with my complaint, I had no choice but to issue proceedings under the 1997 Harassment Act. That stopped them FFP
  12. FitForPurpose
    Excellent. Well done you! FFP
  13. FitForPurpose
    Hmmm. I think I would stop paying them, on the grounds that "frontier business systems limited" was dissolved in November 2011 and therefore you cannot comply with the court order. I am assuming you have never been told that your "debt" has been transferred to anyone else? Then wait and see if anyone notices. It could be that the bank account still exists but no one accesses it because they know the company is closed. In which case, no one will notice and you will know that your money is probably sitting in a bank account somewhere. Ask your bank for help to get it back perhaps. If someone does notice, then you can ask them how they are entitled to receive the proceeds of the debtors to the company. If they are right, then you can restore your payments using the reasonable excuse that you needed to check the contradiction between the court order and the state of the company. However, if you have never been told about it I suspect that no-one else is entitled to your money without proper processes being observed. FFP
  14. FitForPurpose
    Check on the companies house website whether the company closed because it went bust, or whether it was solvent when it closed and the owners just decided to close it. If it went bust, then there will be an insolvency history link in the details and there will have been an administrator / liquidator. I assume you are paying by direct debit or standing order? In which case, are you paying to the companys LTD company name? Perhaps ask you bank to confirm what the recipient account is. I would have thought that a dissolved company cannot "trade" and so if a former director (for example) is collecting money paid to a company that is not trading, then they would fall foul of company law. If they wanted to continue to collect your debt, they should have gone through the appropriate steps to transfer your debt to another owner. Does the court order specify who you must pay? FFP
  15. FitForPurpose
    If you feel that the amount claimed is definitely what you owe and you can afford to pay it, then yes you should pay it. If you are not sure if the amount claimed is correct then you shouldn't be bullied into paying it. The bankruptcy courts don't like being used as a baseball bat to threaten people into paying debts that they are not sure about. It is not what they are there for. FFP
  16. FitForPurpose
    There's a small risk with the costs. If your application to set aside is successful, then you will be awarded your costs so all good. If you are unsuccessful, it is normal for costs to be put "in the petition" which means that the creditor has in effect increased their claim to include their costs. So the risk only comes up in the scenario where (a) your application is dismissed and (b) you are able to settle the debt. This is because the debt has now increased. If you can't settle the debt, then the costs don't make much difference because you can't be more bankrupt than just normally bankrupt! The costs can't be unreasonable, because there is a whole other tier of court just to deal with disputes about costs! FFP
  17. FitForPurpose
    I take your point, but my point is that it is reasonable for an alleged debtor to have written account information delivered to them so they can properly decide whether a debt is valid or not and take advice as to their position. Remember that CapOne is not the creditor as they sold the debt to Lowells. So it would still be true to say that the creditor (Lowells) have not provided any information to satisfy the query as to whether the debt is statute barred or how the debt is made up. FFP
  18. FitForPurpose
    I think your letter needn't go into the detail that you think the debt is statute barred. You could simply say that you have been provided with no information about what the debt is and now demand that information. Mention that you have asked several times and your requests have been ignored, as then this letter reads well in court Don't get confused between a CCA request (£1) and a SAR request (£10). The subject access request should be sent to the original creditor (cap one) as it is they who can provide you with all the statements related to the account, so you can see when the last payment was made and what transactions makes up the debt. A CCA request is a different thing and this can be sent to Lowells. This effectively forces them to show that they have their paper work in order. If they don't, they won't be successful in any court because they won't be able to prove their case. It's worth sending both because either might provide you with a defence. Either the SAR will show the debt is statute barred or not (or show that the debt contains disputed sums), or the CCA request will expose that Lowells can't push the debt anyway. FFP
  19. FitForPurpose
    Hello, My advice remains the same as I posted on the 28th January. Basically, I don't think you should be paying a debt, or admitting a debt by making a part payment, if you think there is a chance that the debt is statute barred, or if you are not 100% sure of what the debt comprises of. For all you know, perhaps the majority of the debt is payment protection insurance, which should now be credited etc. You need to assure yourself that the debt is genuine and you have tried to do this by asking by telephone for account information. As expected, they have refused to provide it because it is not in their interests to do so. By ignoring your request, they are hoping that you will run out of time to have the SD set aside in which case, either you will crumble and pay them money that might not be due, or they can file for your bankruptcy. The only way you can force them to provide account information is by sending a subject access request under the data protection act. They cannot ignore this as the law requires them to provide the account information, which will include statements and amounts, within 40 days. Clearly this is too late for the 18 day SD set-aside limit. But that is exactly the point. A bankruptcy court is not in a position to decide if a debt that is disputed on genuine grounds is or is not valid. So upon you disputing the debt on genuine grounds, there is no choice for the court other than to set aside the demand and award you costs. Your genuine grounds for the dispute are that you believe the debt to be statute barred and the creditor has refused to provide any written evidence to the contrary. Neither have you been given any information as to what the debt comprises of and therefore you cannot consider whether or not a debt exists until this information has been provided. You have tried to get this information, but with the creditor being obstructive you now have to resort to the Data Protection Act to receive the account information. It is therefore entirely inappropriate for the creditor to pursue a bankruptcy until the debt is substantiated. As long as the paragraph above is true and the creditor can not show that you have already been given the account information, send that SAR and apply for the SD to be set-aside. FFP
  20. FitForPurpose
    oh and.. 4. check the other credit agencies as they don't all hold the same data.
  21. FitForPurpose
    I think the case is that you can't propose to settle this debt because you are not entirely sure whether it is statute barred and if not, what the debt comprises of. So I think your to-do list would look something like this: 1. Immediately write to lowells to (a) send them a CCA request with the £1 statutory fee and (b) ask them to detail all the dates and amounts of each transaction and charge that makes up the debt. Tell them that because they have issued a statutory demand, you need this information within seven days and if they cannot comply in time, they should withdraw their statutory demand. Its probably not worth speaking to them on the phone, because whatever they say you can't later rely on as evidence. 2. Send a subject access request under the Data Protection Act to Cap One, demanding a copy of all your statements. Include the £10 fee. They have 40 days to comply. 3. Neither Lowells nor CapOne will respond in time, which gives you your reason to request that the statutory demand is set-aside. Your reason is that you believe the debt is statute barred and have sought evidence of this from the creditor, who has failed to help. In any case, you dispute the entire debt because the creditor has been obstructive (as above) in providing any information that would allow you to consider your lawful position. FFP
  22. FitForPurpose
    ok - enough is enough! They clearly believe you won't take any action against their obvious harassment. By all means provide all these details to the OFT. But you should ask your solicitor to write to them quoting the Protection from Harassment Act 1997, demanding that they immediately cease contact with you and that you are now seeking damages. If they choose not to agree, you will issue proceedings against them. You should be able to push that point quite hard because they WONT want to go to court. I am currently taking a utility company to court for harassment, so am someway down that road! FFP
  23. FitForPurpose
    You could email it. Ask for an acknowledgement of receipt and if they don't give it, post a letter also. FFP
  24. FitForPurpose
    You have shown two letters that are very clear you have an appointed representative and neither letter admit liability. As per my previous post, write to the DCA to remind them of this, if for no other reason than to have evidence you told them of the fact recently. I'm sure they are aware - they are just trying to harass you because they probably know the debts are statute barred. FFP
  25. FitForPurpose
    As per DonkeyB's question, do you recall being provided with any statements of account over the last few years? You mentioned that you ignored some letters because you obviously had other more substantial concerns, but do you recall any statements as such?

Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...