Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Unsettling the applecart?,  I'm going to be direct here, I know how this works , I've been in far worse situation than your relative, and I can assure you , now that there i likely a default in her name, it makes absolutely ZERO difference if she pays or not. Denzel Washington in the Equalizer , 'My only regret is that I can't kill you twice'... It's the same with a default, they can only do it once and it stays on your credit file for 6 years if she pays or not, and as it stands right now she's flushing £180 of her hard earned money down the toilet  so that the chaps at Lowell can afford a Christmas party. As for the SAR this is everybody's legal right, originally under the Data Protection act 1998 and now under GDPR, it's her right to find out everything that the original Creditor has on her file, and by not doing it the only person she is doing a massive disservice to is her self. As the father of 2 young adults myself, they need to learn at some point.. right?
    • Thank you for your pointers - much appreciated. dx100uk - Apologies, my request wasn't for super urgent advice and I have limited online access due to my long working hours and caring obligations - the delay in my response doesn't arise in any way from disrespect or ingratitude. I will speak to her at the weekend and see if she will open up a bit more about this, and allow me to submit the subject access request you advise - the original creditor is 118 118 loans and from the letter I saw (which prompted the conversation and the information) the debt collection agency had bought the debt from 118 and were threatening enforcement which is when she has made a payment arrangement with them for an amount of £180 per month. It looks as if she queried matters at the time (so I wonder if I might with the FIO request get access to their investigation file?) - the letter they wrote said "The information that you provided has been carefully considered and reviewed. After all relevant enquiries were made it has been confirmed that there is not enough evidence present to conclusively prove that this application was fraudulent.  However, we have removed the interest as a gesture of goodwill. As a result of the findings, you will be held liable for the capital amount on the loan on the basis of the information found during the investigation and you will be pursued for repayment of the loan agreement executed on 2.11.2022 in accordance with Consumer Credit Act 1974"  The amount at that time was over £3600 in arrears, as no payments had been made on it since inception and I think she only found out about it when a default notice came in paper form. I'm a little reluctant to advise her to just stop paying, and would like to be able to form a view in relation to her position and options before unsetting the applecart - do you think this is reasonable? She is young and inexperienced with these things and getting into this situation has brought about a lot of shame regarding inability to sort things out/stand up for herself, which is one of the reasons I have only found out about this considerably later Thank you once again for your advice - it is very much appreciated.    
    • That's fine - I'm quite happy to attend court if necessary. The question was phrased in such a way that had I declined the 'consideration on the papers' option, I would have had to explain why I didn't think such consideration was appropriate, and since P2G appear to be relying on a single (arguably flawed) issue, I thought it might result in a speedier determination.
    • it was ordered in the retailers store  but your theory isnt relevant anyway, even if it fitted the case... the furniture is unfit for purpose within 30 days so consumer rights act overwrites any need to use 14 days contract law you refer too. dx  
    • Summary of the day from the Times. I wasn't watching for a couple of interesting bits like catching herself out with her own email. Post Office inquiry: Paula Vennells caught out by her own email — watch live ARCHIVE.PH archived 23 May 2024 11:57:02 UTC  
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd are after me- please help!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5845 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Hello,

I'm having such a problem with Lowell Portfolio 1 Ltd.

They say i owe £156.13 and are acting on behalf of O2. Though I haven't been with O2 since 2004 and this "debt" may have been from before that.

They sent me numerous letters from Red debt collection services and Hamptons Legal.

In response I sent them the recommended letter where you send £1 and ask for a copy of the credit agreement according to the Consumer Credit Act (CCA) 1974.

However they replied saying that the account agreement I ask for is not regulated under the CCA 1974 and that they are under no obligation to do so.

So now I dont know what to do as they have threatened me with county court proceedings and additional fees for legal proceedings.

If anyone can help, I'd really appreciate it!

Link to post
Share on other sites

CCA's do not normally cover Mobile Phones etc.

 

You need to S.A.R - (Subject Access Request) o2 to get a copy of the contract (if it was a contract phone) and all statements etc, they must provide it within 40 days,

 

also do not talk to Lowells/red or hamptons on the phone (they are all they same firm)

 

Write a letter stating that until they can prove the debt exists then you are not obliged to do anything, there is a template on here that I or someone will post.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is bog standard Lowell Bovine Excrement. First of all they have to PROVE a debt exists. Then if you refuse to pay it they MAY take you to court and if they do they MAY be successful and a court MAY order you to pay the debt and the court MAY award costs to Lowells. If you re-read their threatomatic letter you will see that just as in my reply there are an awful lot of IFs and MAYs in their letters.

 

Rather than spending £10 on an SAR to O2 send this letter to Lowells

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

You have contacted me/us regarding the account with the above reference number, which you claim is owed by myself/ourselves.

 

I/we would point out that I/we have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to (insert company name).

 

I am/we are familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

 

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

 

I/we would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my/our liability for the debt in question.

 

I/we await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

 

I/we look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello All,

 

I dont know if Im even posting in the correct place as Ive just joined. I also have troubl with Lowell Portfolio. I received a letter from them about month or so ago saying that I owed them £356 from Barclay Card. I have not actually had a Barclay Card account for years now. I did call up Barclays and they said they did sell my account (which I had thought I hd paid off anf closed) to Barclay Card was in August 2002 so just under 6 full years.

 

Since then I have received other letters from Lowell saing they will send debt collctors to my house etc if I do not pay them. I rang them today and asked them to prove I owe them anythingas as far as I am concrned I settled my debt with Barclays years ago. They replied by saying... 'the letter we sent you is proof'????? I amost laughed and replied...'so if I sent you a letter saying you owed me x amount of money does that mean you have to pay me?' I stressed I needed some sort of evidence I owe them or that they bought this from Barclays. He said he would send me a letter and that was it.

 

I do plan to write to them aswell now. I honestly do not remember having this debt. How come I have not heard from anyone in the last almost 6 years?

 

Please can someone advise me what to do. What letter should I send them?

 

Thank you

 

From

Stressed Me!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would wait for their next letter and see what these idiots say, the longer it takes the more likely it will reach the 6 year point and be statute barred.

 

If they ring again which they will, just say in writing and hang up, this really gets to them:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was planning on sending them a letter basically confirming what I said on the phone asking for some type of proof. Ill wait for them to write again and see what they say. Just a quick question what exactly do I ask for when I write to them? Proof of what? That they got this asccount from Barclays? What is the correct terminology? Even better a letter template... Please bare with me I am new to this forum and have been trying to figure out how to do things!

 

Thanks

 

Stressed Me :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please excuse my terrible terrible typing above lol. I only just re-read my post and was cringing looking at all my typo errors ahhh! How do I start my own thread? I feel bad highjacking someone elses?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...