Jump to content

Showing results for tags 'ours'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums


  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web


  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries
  • Shopping & Money Saving Tips
  • chilleddrivingtuition
  • Homegirlxx


  • The Youth Academy
    • The Youth Consumer Service
  • Miscellaneous

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



About Me


Found 2 results

  1. Hope I can get a quick bit of advice/knowledge from you guys. Lowell have been sending my husband the usual series of threatograms over a Talk Talk account debt and have now sent us a county court claim form. What makes this especially fun is that this debt is absolutely not ours. We have never had an account with TalkTalk. Hubby has even phoned TalkTalk and verified that he has never had an account with them (and they actually confirmed to us that the debt is question is not and never has been registered at our address - but we can't really use that info because under data protection they shouldn't even have told us that much). Hubby has a very common name and I can only assume that Lowell, being unable to find the actual debtor, have just sent out speculative threatograms to everyone they could find with that name in the hope of bullying someone into paying. We haven't bothered replying to the threatograms because, quite frankly, why should we? It's not our debt and we are under no obligation to send them personal and/or financial information (also, in my past experience of DCAs chasing a debt for a previous resident of our address, these companies are extremely reluctant to remove a name/address from their records unless you can provide them with an alternative address at which to chase - they would rather continue to pursue payment at an address they know not to be that of the debtor than have nowhere to send threatograms to). I am submitting our defence to the claim on the website and it's fairly straightforward because it amounts to, Sorry mate, not our debt, sod off. But I would like to get Lowell in as much trouble with the courts as I possibly can for their unscrupulous shenanigans I would like to know what the regulations are (I know there are regulations DCAs are supposed to follow, not that they often do) about chasing debts/issuing court action etc when they haven't even ascertained that the person they are chasing is the actual debtor. Are they in breach of regulations here? Or are they actually allowed to send out threatening letters to everyone with the same name as the debtor they are seeking and take people to court just because they have the same name as a debtor? Any help/thoughts/guidance much appreciated.
  2. Hello everyone, So, back to those reputable lovable rogues Lowell Portfolio.. In September 2011 I obtained my partners Equifax report which showed a debt to Lowell Portfolio 1 for £341.44, dated 10/09/2008, defaulted 21/11/09. OH didnt recognise the debt, Equifax told us it originated from O2. OH contacted O2 by phone on 6th September 2011 to be told they told they could not find any reference for the debt and his ‘normal’ O2 account was completely up to date and always paid on time. They referred me back to Lowell. I then sent a letter to Lowell requesting the original consumer credit agreement. They replied on 8th June 2012 to tell me that “Following investigations we have concluded that the debt is not linked to you. As such we have removed your personal details from our database”. They refunded me the statutory fee. I have this evidentiary letter. I then spoke to Equifax to have the entry removed and Lowell (via Equifax) informed me that only O2 could remove the “incorrect link”. Basically they ech blamed each other. Equifax will not act without theirs or O2s instruction. At the same time I obtained my credit report from Callcredit. There was, as of 15th June 2012, no entry relating to any default whatsoever. Its still to this date not on Experian. We assumed it would go with the deletion of the OHs details from Lowells database. But when we went for a mortgage a few weeks ago, we were refused on the basis of this unsettled debt. We appealed but they wouldnt have it; whilst the debt is still on there they wont look at us regardless of whatever evidence we have. To make matters worse, Lowell have searched the OHs Callcredit file back in October this year, even though the debt was not listed there at the time of their promise to remove his details. Clearly as a last ditch attempt to keep the (now statute barred) debt alive. They have also searched Experian, but not listed the debt. Never any contact with him directly I might add. Surely, in light of the letter stating the debt is not his, we have some legal right of redress to force them to remove the entry and cease the unwarranted searches on his credit file? Any ideas on what to do? I dont want to have to wait a year for this to expire from his file when they cant prove it was his in the first place. I would instruct a solicitor if I thought it would scare them, but they dont seem to behave in a way that would respond to it. As horrendous as this may sound to some, I'd pay it if they agreed to remove the default completely but I doubt they would consider that either! Thanks in advance for your input. Ry
  • Create New...