Thought i'd let you know, I've received a phone call from 02070603962 and they introduced themselves as being from "CAG" and offering to help me reclaim money on finances i've had in the past 5 years. I did a google search of the number which is apparently operated by Claims Advisory Group. They did not introduce themselves as that but as stated previously by the name CAG. being a member i knew they couldn't be from here so have added them to my blacklist. So i just letting you know what happened so as to advise people they are not from here. Pmahonc

DispsyDoo The banks have been saying their charges are legal all the way along, it's just a scare tactic to put you off claiming. Don't listen to them, just follow the advice on this site. You can go to the omsbudsman or the courts to try and get the money back. as for the debt collectors. once you have started your claim for instance say you are going down the ombudsman route you can then write to the the debt collectors telling them that the account is in dispute and the ombudsman is looking into the matter. That should get them off your back. pmahonc

Undercover-Elsa That truecall unit is really good i purchased it just before christmas and it was worth every penny. Only the people i want to contact me can get through, What peace.

Battyman The same thing happened to me almost as soon as the case was stayed they sent the debt to Lowells, who then started to try to reclaim the money from me. I wrote to them informing them that the account was in dispute and was subject to a court case i had taken against halifax. I also explained to them about the test case. Their answer was "fine we'll put the whole thing on hold until my court case was finished, and could i inform them of any developments". Not heard a thing from them since. so sending your debt collectors the letter that the account is in in dispute certainly can't hurt and will even delay them a bit, allowing for the new POC, guidance to turn up in the meantime. Actually didn't the OFT produce guidance to debt collectors that if the account is in dispute they can't take any action?

Just had a look at Moneysavingexpert page and apparently the OFT are going to make an announcement on tuesday 22nd December about what their next move is going to be in regards to the bank charges.

There is some news on moneysavingexpert, apparently they are holding off releasing the templates, in the hope that the OFT will take up the case.

It was the financial Ombudsman that said to go to the court as they could not get involved. The FSA when i spoke to them suggested that i come to some agreement with lowells and begin to pay them to get them off my back, when i quoted the banking code to him, He seemed quite puzzled and admitted he didn't know the banking code and had to go and look it up. Admittedly i quoted the old Code to him as i didn't realise it had changed, Wonder why they removed the section dealing with Disputes? could it be they left an opening in the old one for us to use and when we started using it they quickly realised their mistake and closed it. I only rang them out of curiosity to see what they say? Also i'm not worried about lowell, I'm very good at winding debt collectors up, as aktiv capita have found out. They once rang me and i refused to answer the security questions and proceeded to wind him up so much that he started to discuss my account with me and after about twenty minutes of "don't know what your talking about, i've never come to you for money how can i owe you any" hung up on Me. LOL. They been trying to get money out of me for must be five years now, and the debt is actually statute barred and has been for two years. Thanks in advance for the template letter. i did actually send off the letter mentioned in #6 by recorded delivery.

23sopwith I've just received the same two letters, think i'll take them down to the court house to see what they have to say about halifax selling off the debt when it is subject to a case on hold, Might even be able to get the judge to remove the stay and award judgement to me. well i can live in hope. For anybody whose interested here's the letter from the Halifax. I've only removed any personal details just in case. Mr Account No: New Reference No: Dear Reference: HBOS PLC, Halifax Current, Account I am writing to inform you that the above account was sold by HBOS PLC to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd on 19/06/2009. This means that the effective owners of the above account are now Lowell Portfolio I Ltd. Lowell Portfolio I Ltd have appointed Lowell Financial as their servicing agent to manage your account on their behalf. All contact regarding this account should now be directed to Lowell Financial. The enclosed letter provides details of how to contact Lowell Financial. I confirm that the amount outstanding on your account as at 19/06/2009 was £XXXX,XX. Yours sincerely This was followed by the letter from Lowell's Opening Hours Mon — Thurs 8.00am — 8.00pm (-ri 8.00am — 7.00pm Sat 8.00am — 2.00pm Email [email protected] Telephone 0844 844 4716 Fax 0845 300 9411 Mr PO Box 172 Leeds LS11 9WS 10/07/2009 / Dear Our Ref: Original Creditor: HBOS PLC Balance Outstanding: £XXXX,XX Original Address: I write to inform you that your HBOS PLC account, reference number, has been sold to Lowell Portfolio I Ltd on the 19/06/2009. Lowell Financial Ltd have been appointed as duly authorised collection agents for recovery of the outstanding balance. It is our aim to help you clear the indebtedness you currently have with ourselves by either agreeing a settlement or a repayment plan. You will find we have many flexible repayment plans designed to suit your current financial circumstances. Please call the number below where one of our experienced negotiators will assist you in finding the ideal option for you. PAYMENT CAN BE TAKEN OVER THE TELEPHONE BY EITHER DEBIT OR CREDIT CARD Please note all future communications and payments must be addressed to Lowell Financial Ltd at the address below: LOWELL FINANCIAL LTD PO BOX 172 LEEDS LS11 9WS Please contact us immediately to discuss your account. 0844 844 4716 Yours sincerely Chief Operations Officer Lowell operates an internal complaint handling procedure. If we are unable to resolve your complaint to your satisfaction you may have the right to refer your complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service. This is dependant upon the type of account held and details will be provided to you once we acknowledge your complaint in writing. Calls may be recorded for training and monitoring purposes. i've posted these so people can see what is going on. Paul

Copy of a letter i'm just about to send to Lowell. I've used several sources i think from templates i've found on CAG. last time i used it was 28th MAY 2008 so can't quite remember where the sources are. but if it is acceptable perhaps other people can use it. Lowell Group Enterprise House 1 Apex View Leeds LS11 9BH Reference NO. XXXXXXXX Dear Sir I notice from viewing my credit report that you have performed a search on me on the 7th July 2009. I phoned your offices on Saturday 11th July 2009 to find out why you had performed the search as I did not give you permission to do so. Your operator informed me that I owed some money to the Halifax and that Lowell had bought the debt from the Halifax. I informed him that the debt was in dispute and was the subject of legal action taken against the Halifax by myself. And therefore should not been handed over to yourselves. To which your operator replied that just because it had gone to court it wasn’t in Dispute, I also informed him that the OFT had issued guidelines to Debt Collectors to which he replied that as Lowell had purchased the debt The OFT has no Jurisdiction over Lowell. What I Require from your company is the removal of the search record on my credit report. Also be advised that the account is in dispute ( Court case NO. XXXXXXX) despite what you say. And therefore comes under the OFT Debt collectors Guidelines Section 2.i Failing to Investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued. Section 2.k Not Ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed Debt. Further I WILL NOT be making any Payment to you. I WILL NOT be calling you. This is because I do not carry out any financial business on the telephone, all business between us must be in writing. You MUST NOT telephone me either at my home number, my mobile number or any of my employers numbers, any calls from you will be recorded and construed as harassment, and will put you in breach of section 40 of the administration of justice act 1970, and the protection from harassment act 1997. Any phone calls will in breach of the communications act 2003 s.127 and I will report you to OFCOM, meaning that you will be liable to a substantial fine, I have already informed Consumer Direct and the FSA about your Company and about Halifax’s Behaviour. You MUST NOT threaten to send collection staff to my residence as again this will be construed as harassment. TAKE NOTE that any implied right of access that may have existed to my residence and grounds is withdrawn from you and any of your agents apart from Royal Mail, to this effect, for you to send a door stop collector will be considered trespass and harassment and you will be held liable and reported to the relevant authorities. Paul

Just been speaking with the FSA who seem to be interested in the Halifax's actions and will ring me back, Also the Consumer direct people are going to hand it over to trading standards who will ring me back as it is a complicated case. From what i've read on the forums, Lowell seem to be in a bit of trouble with various organisation.

missmorningstar i'm in the same position as you but thought i aught to let you know that although my claim is in court and has been for a year, doesn't necessarily mean that they will call the debt collectors off, with me they keep playing a little game whereby i'll write to the debt collector saying account is in dispute, halifax recalls it from the debt collector and then passes it on to another and the whole cycle starts again. Don't be intimidated by the debt collectors, there is a letter somewhere on this site that you can send off to them that means they can only write to you if they want to chase the debt. If they do chase and you keep all the correspondance it can only strengthen your case against the Halifax. Paul

Actually just seen in the thread below mine the name Blair, Scott and Oliver, thats the name of the in house debt collectors. paul

Sallysas I don't think they are the in house debt collectors for the halifax as i seem to recall that it was a three name company. I reported the halifax to the FSA about a year ago, because one of their little tricks is to hand the account to a debt collector and then when you tell the debt collector that the account is in dispute, they recall the account and the issue it to a new debt collector, forcing you to go through the whole process again. I'm on my fifth debt collection firm at the moment. Paul

Just a quick question? I was checking my credit report and noticed that a search had been done by a company called lowell financial ltd, I rang them to find out why they had done a search on me and they apparently have bought a debt (approx #2400.00p OD) from halifax (i'm one of the ones who have their case against the Halifax for approx #2600 on hold with the court for about a year now). They say that as they have bought the debt they are not subject to the oft guidelines for debt collection . They are going to send me a letter which i requested detailing the account along with a demand for payment. does this mean i can now apply to the judge to remove the stay from the case. Also who do i report this conduct to? FSA? OFT? Thanks in advance Paul

Buzby got me thinking, i tried a search with 192.com on one of the names from the site you mentioned, typed in the location as glasgow and got two hits with the electoral register? Also tried with my name and got not only my address but my home telephone number (i'm ex-directory) and a list of other people at my address and a map showing the house. Now to get in touch with the phone company to find out why i'm listed in the directory. pmahonc

Thanks Weird Al Yankovic It was about a month in the public domain before it was dropped. what you say makes sense, i was tending to think that it might be the county court that put the information out. Now all i have to do is try and get our name off this list somehow. The phone calls alone are annoying enough, let alone all the letters. Thanks Pmahonc

Thanks buzby i got in touch with my lender and they assured me that because of the data protection act they are not allowed to pass on any details. I phoned one of the companies and i have to wait till monday to be able to speak to a manager to find out how they got the information. we don't have any loans or credit cards so we haven't given permission to anybody to pass on information. there are only two places i can think of were they could get their information 1. the county court. 2. by doing a search on our credit file. If it's 2. don't they have to have permission from ourselves before they can do a search? pmahonc

I was wondering if anybody knows about how the credit firms get hold of information about court repossession cases. Just recently got into trouble with my mortgage lender but was able to work things out with them and the court action was dropped. Since then we've been getting letters and Phone calls from the credit companies offering "Solutions", and they are annoying me. they normally start by saying "I'm writing to you personnally as i understand that your home may be under the threat of repossession". I've rung one of them to see if they would tell me where they get their info from but had no joy. If anybody can help it would be appreciated. TIA pmahonc

Camdenite can't you file the AQ and then ask the court for time to prepare your paperwork stating the reasons that you are now dealing with the case yourself. When i did my AQ it was about a month later after the AQ was handed in that the court bundle had to be handed in, Mind you i was fast track. pmahonc

pathfinder Just keep following the court direction as they are issued, i got my phone call just on the deadline for the court bundle. I think the court will next issue directions including submitting your court bundle. pmahonc

cheatedgeoff you only mention interest in your requests if you are claiming contractual. The statuatory interest is mentioned in the N1 Court form. pmahonc

shadowx When filling out the N1 you only mention the statuatory interest in your particular of claims. Have a read up on the step by step guide and FAQ'S about court fees. you should be able to find information about court fees there or a link there. reagrds pmahonc

Shutterz Section G I would include the draft directions if i was you it cant hurt to do so. You dont have have to include any documents if you dont want to it's only to give the judge help in deciding which track it should be allocated to ie small claims or fast track. if you feel like adding any documents that you think would help then do so. As livelylad says you can amend your claim using the approiate form or once this claim is out of the way starting another claim again for what they added on since you started yours. PS they did the same to me and if you look at my post it was only after my claim was ended that i found out they had even added charges while the claim was in progress, when i challenged them over it threatening another court action the only reply i got was "that was up to me, goodbye". regards pmahonc

Thanks lula it was just horrendous seeing the proceeds all going on bills which i had been unable to pay due to the charges. Apart from the payout I would like to think that it gives hope to others seeing that i've received some payment from them {all of the charges up to the start of the case, plus costs plus above statuatory interest not contractual interest approx 20% simply interst} and that i got them to reverse the default notice.

And another one. Lloyds TSB has become the first bank to win a court case after being sued by a customer for imposing supposedly unfair overdraft penalty charges. District Judge Cooke, at Birmingham County Court, dismissed a claim for £2,545 from Kevin Berwick. Mr Berwick argued Lloyds TSB's charges for having an unauthorised overdraft were illegal contractual penalties. But Judge Cooke decided the bank's charges were in fact legitimate fees for servicing an overdrawn account. As such, the judge said they were legal. "Having held that the charges complained of are not charges for breach of contract but part of the price of the services provided by the bank... he has not satisfied me that he has any ground in law for recovering from the bank the amount of any charges which he has paid to it," he said. Lloyds TSB said it was pleased with the ruling. "It appears to acknowledge our position in respect of current account service charges," said a spokeswoman. "The court has agreed with us that these are charges for a service and not default or penalty fees as has been argued by others," she added. Blow to claimants? As this judgement has come from a district judge, it is not binding on any other court, in the way that a High Court judgement might be. READ THE JUDGEMENT Approved judgement [424KB] Most computers will open this document automatically, but you may need Adobe Reader Download the reader here Was victory an accident? However, as the first judgement of any kind in this sort of case, it could be a blow to the hundreds of thousands of people who are still trying to claim that they have been overcharged by their banks for running unauthorised overdrafts. So far, many claimants have been successful because their banks have settled their cases before the issue came before a judge, precisely in order to avoid an adverse legal decision. Now, the first decision in which a judge has given an opinion on the law has gone in a bank's favour. Marc Gander, of the Consumer Action Group, a leading bank charges campaign, said he was very disappointed. "We feel the judge has not considered the fact that disguising penalties as a fee for a service is a very common device for circumventing established law. "The judge appears not to have looked behind the words on the contractual document," he said. Possible appeal Although Mr Berwick turned up at the original hearing in Birmingham to argue his case and was questioned by the judge, Lloyds TSB chose not to attend and relied simply on a written defence which it had submitted in advance. Neither did the bank have any lawyers present in court when the judgement was handed down. Mr Berwick said he was annoyed by the outcome of his claim. "I was expecting to win as I made a good job of arguing my case," he said. He is now considering an appeal after the judge gave him leave to do so.