Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Bit unfair to come back here the day it's due to be filed.... Looks like london1971 one?  I'm not sure if they did Inc point 5, let @AndyOrch confirm it should be there before filing please A day late won't hurt Dx
    • Last month was confirmed to be the hottest-ever May on record, in terms of global average temperatures, completing an entire calendar year of month-by-month records.  The average temperature last month was 1.52C above the pre-industrial average, according to the Copernicus Climate Change Service, known as C3S. The average global temperature for the 12-month period to the end of May was 1.63C (2.9F) above the pre-industrial average
    • This time you do need to reply to them with a snotty letter to show you'd be big trouble for them if they did try court. We will help this evening.  
    • Hi, I just wanted to update the post and ask some further advice  I sent the CCA and CPR request on the 14th May, to date I have had no reply to the CCA but I received a load of paperwork from the CPR request a few days ago. I need to file the defence today and from the information I have read the following seems to be what is required.  I would be grateful if some one could confirm suitability. Many thanks   Claim The claim is for the sum of £255.69 due by the Defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a PayPal account with an account reference of xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)  The Defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which has not been complied with. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 15-09-21, notice of which has been given to the defendant. The claim includes statutory interest under S.69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £0.00. The Claimant claims the sum of £255.69   Defence  The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature. The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made. 1. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have had financial dealings with PayPal  in the past but cannot recollect the account number referred to by the Claimant. 2. Paragraph 2 is denied. I am not aware of service of a Default Notice by the original creditor the Claimant refers to within its particulars of claim.  3. Paragraph 3 is noted. On the 17/5/2024 I requested information related to this claim by way of a Section 77 request, which was received and signed for by the claimant on 20/5/2024. As of today, the Claimant has failed to respond to this request, and therefore remains in default of the section 77 request and therefore unable to enforce any alleged agreement until its compliance. 4. Therefore it is denied with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant, and the Claimant is put to strict proof to: (a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and: (b) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice Pursuant to s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. 5. Paypal (Europe) S.A.R.L is out of the juristriction of English Courts. 6. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed. 7. By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed, or any relief.
    • Thanks @dx100ukI followed the advice given on here... then it went very quiet!  The company was creditfix I think then transferred to Knightsbridge (or the other way around) The scammer independent advisor was Roger Wallis-having checked his LinkedIn profile just this morning, it does look like he's still scamming vulnerable people... I know I was stupid for taking his advice, but i do wonder how many others he has done this to over a longer period of time (it came as a  massive shock to him when our IVA suddenly failed). Lowell have our current address (and phone numbers if the rejected calls over the past couple of days is anything to go by!) No point trying the SB because of the correspondence in 2019? Thanks
  • 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

Advice on Lowell letter


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5601 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

Mr Anchovy. Do not get yourself too concerned as to whether or not the Leeds Losers signed for the letter or not. Its safe to assume that they would have got it two working days after you sent it. The Courts accept that letters sent by 1st Class post are deemed delivered after two working days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

You can now expect a letter saying they are preparred to offer anything between 60 to 80% off the debt amount......when that doesnt work, they will close the file :)

 

From personal experience very recently I can confirm the above as a true and accurate statement. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

From personal experience very recently I can confirm the above as a true and accurate statement. :D

 

I opened one of their threatograms recently addressed to the previous occupant offering a whopping 80% discount....i couldnt help myself with the laughter after i read it :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can now expect a letter saying they are preparred to offer anything between 60 to 80% off the debt amount......when that doesnt work, they will close the file :)

I can confirm that you will get this once in a lifetime wonderful offer twice before they admit defeat. They have diddly squat hence the apparent discount offer. 80% of nothing = nothing

Link to post
Share on other sites

You can now expect a letter saying they are preparred to offer anything between 60 to 80% off the debt amount......when that doesnt work, they will close the file :)

 

Yup, I went through the exact same series of letters from the Leeds Losers.

 

75% discount (for one day only)

 

another about two weeks later- the 75% discount was still avialable. (Sorry, we're still looking for the agreement)

 

The about 6 weeks after I sent the CCA request O got a letter confirming that they didnt have the agreement and wouldnt contact me again.

 

(Thats what they think- they also bought £4000 of unlawful charges, plus interest when they bought my account!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel robbed - I only got a 63% discount!

 

:-D

 

But got the offer twice and then they conceded defeat and closed the file.

 

Thats what they think - they got the letter asking for money back, defaults removed, etc and they replied with "Case Closed".

 

They are now in receipt and processing my Formal Complaint - they've had that 2 weeks now - they have 4 weeks and must reply. Wonder what they will say?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In ten days you will get another saying exactly the same.

 

 

 

 

****NOTE to Lowell Guests watching. Time to tell Andy B to rewrite the threatomatics. We are wise to his silly games*****

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

****NOTE to Lowell Guests watching. Time to tell Andy B to rewrite the threatomatics. We are wise to his silly games*****

 

Apparently the mysterious Andy B doesn't read anything he signs :rolleyes: According to one of his threat monkeys anyhow. Won't lower himself to speak to the great unwashed either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Letter received 10/11/08 but dated 3/11/08

 

(My CCA request sent 11/10/08)

 

"I can confirm our client has yet to furnish us with your agreement"......

 

....."there will be no further correspondence from us until the agreement has been received at which point we will require payment in full"

 

 

Is this them giving up?

 

Can I expect anymore bull from them?

 

Do I get my £1 postal order back?

 

Mr A

Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't get my pound back! Hasn't stopped me hassling them for it though. My last correspondence to them was that I was sending my request to my pre-litigation department :D I am quite willing to issue court papers for this pound, however, they have promised to send me my pound next week. We'll see.

 

Just as another note, Alison Sheppard of customer services who is handling my request for my quid also never takes calls from the public :-x Do any of these people who sign letters ever speak to outsiders?

 

PS Your letter sounds as though they are dragging it out towards the inevitable conclusion of a closed file - fingers crossed.

Edited by fiftypence
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Back again!:confused:

 

Letter received today (21st Jan) from Lowells, with "original credit agreement" enclosed. I requested CCA from them 11/10/08 and eventually received the "file closed" letter on 02/12/08.

 

The "original credit agreement" is a very shady photocopy dated 2001.

 

Anyway, why are they pestering me again? I thought they had 10+2 days to find the CCA, it's been more than 70 days now. Should I now find out if this "debt" is indeed statute barred?

 

......or just ignore them for a while again.

 

regards

Mr A.

Edited by Mr Anchovy
Link to post
Share on other sites

You dont have to send the Account in Dispute letter. Clownells are so called professionals and as such should be aware of their LEGAL responsibilites. Its time enough sending the dispute letter if they send any more begging letters without complying with their Legal duty.

 

If you send them the Stat Barred Letter then this places the onus on them to prove otherwise

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Mr Anchovy Its a completely different letter. Are you living in Scotland now? If so send them this

 

Dear Cretins or Dear Sir/Madam

 

Your Ref : xxxx

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOU OR ANY COMPANY YOU MAY REPRESENT

 

I refer you to your letter dated xxxxxx

 

I note that you have established that my account will fall under the jurisdiction of Scottish Law.

 

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

 

I would point out that under The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 Part 1 Section 6 "If, after the appropriate date, an obligation to which this section applies has subsided for a continuous period of 5 years:

 

(a) without any relevant claim having been made in relation to the obligation, and

(b) without the subsistence of the obligation having been relevantly acknowledged,

 

then as from the expiration of that period the obligation shall be extinguished:"

 

The last acknowledgement of this alleged debt was made over five years ago. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written acknowledgement from myself in the relevant period under Part 1 Section 6 of The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 , I would respectfully suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against myself to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

 

yours etc

 

 

 

If you are now living in England or Wales then send letter M

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...