Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I had some contact with this company earlier in my working life but I'm afraid there's not a lot I can suggest that you haven't already done. During your grandfather's time  British Celanese was a subsidiary of Courtaulds. Courtaulds was subsequently acquired by Alzo Nobel. They in turn closed down the Spondon site and sold it. I have no idea what the number is that you are trying to call. It's a Derby (Spondon) area code but the number appears not to be allocated. From my slim knowledge of the history of the company I would have expected your grandfather's pension to be in the Alzo Nobel (CPS) Pension Scheme.  But Willis Tower Watson are the Pension Scheme Administrator of that scheme and would be the people who would know if your grandfather had contributed. Is your grandfather certain he contributed? Joining pension schemes wasn't compulsory in those days. Or might he have got his contributions returned when he left them? That happened sometimes in those days. Sorry not to.be of more help.      
    • I am sorry I am not aware of this report from IAS assessors? The Court will consider my application at a online hearing in June. The Court instructed me to send Bank copies of my sons condition proving he could not have been the driver I have heard nothing further. My son is not aware of any proceedings I have not involved him to avoid causing him distress, he has been sectioned a fair few times and I need to avoid this happening.
    • I am very pleased that the Court has taken the decision to allow you to  represent your son and hope that he is happy enough with that to relieve the stress he will also be feeling. I do agree that Bank parking are so insensitive, greedy, horrible etc etc to continue proceedings considering  in what it is a very minor case of a wrong number plate . Even their  own  IAS Assessors, who are normally hopelessly biased in favour of their members, went out on a limb and said  " The Operator's evidence shows no payment for the Appellant's vehicle, or anything similar. It does show two payments for the same registration in quick succession. I would take a reasonable guess, based on the circumstances described, that the person paying has paid for the registration of the person they assisted again." That is damning evidence and you must take that report with you as well as including that in your Witness Statement which we will help you with. I would expect that Bank would discontinue the case at that point.  But I am sorry to say  that you should not count on it.  
    • Evening all,   I have deliberated over this offer for two weeks and I have decided to take their offer. I do understand that some may prefer us to go to court and receive a judgement but with our personal circumstances and my current military commitment that could become an issue. I am so grateful for all the help and support you have all offered me over the last few months. I will continue to monitor this site and push all those that are being wrong to get in touch.   Thank you! what you all do is truly amazing!
    • When I first responded to the PAPLOC, and received that 29 page junk back it was accompanied with a letter saying that they had already responded to my request back on Feb 18th 2023,(I never received it). I was just clearing out some paperwork today and found a letter from Lowell, dated Feb 17th 2023, explaining that they were still waiting for the documents from PayPal, and my account was on hold  until further notice.  Does this mean they were lying and can it be used against them if this goes any further? I have now filed my defence, and have had an acknowledgement from Overdales and the court. A little threatening from Overdales , explaining that part of my defence was invalid because they have now complied with the CCA, and they were still waiting for the Default notice from PayPal.
  • 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 Group - and its not me!!


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5672 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

Hi everyone! I am new here, I am at my wits end and wanted to see if any of you can help me out.

 

I have received a letter from Lowell Financial of Leeds to my home, but with a slightly different spelling of my name (and the title is different). They are demanding I repay a debt from a company I have never heard of, which was on an address I have never lived at.

 

I have ignored the first 2 nasty letters as I am of the opinion that I don't have to prove I am not that person, they have to prove that I am - but now they are threatening to send a debt collector round. Can this affect my current credit rating (which is OK, I have checked!). As mum to a small child I don't want anyone knocking on my front door demanding money with menances, and from what I can gather they have no legal right to chase such a debt anyway. What should I do? Should I contact them and tell them that it isn't me? Or do I just continue to ignore their bully boy tactics and instead contact my MP about it?

 

Any advice would be gratefully received and thanks for reading this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a personal opinion, but I suggest you ignore them completely.

 

If you contact them they will try to argue that you ARE the person they looking for without doubt, and you MUST make a token payment to avoid further action and to protect your credit record, and you may lose your home/job/sanity/hair if you do not.

 

Alternatively, go to CAB or your local TS/OFT office with proof of ID, and if possible your credit file, along with this latest work of fiction from the UK's best tracers.

 

Once it has been established they, once again, have missed the cows a**e with a banjo, you will be asked to sign third party mandate allowing the OFT/TS to act on your behalf.

 

Then it's just a case of whether you want to turn the tables and make a few quid out of them.

 

 

The best thing....least stressful??.....continue to ignore them.

 

They can't take you to court. They can't win anyway.

 

It only takes a minute, to bag it, and bin it. (recycling, of course)

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lowells talk about their Licensed Field Agents. These agants are invisible and only exist in the imaginations of the Muppets who run Lowells and send these silly letters out.

  • Haha 1

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Got to tell you my update - just got home from work and I have received (what I think is) a hand delivered postcard from a representative of Lowell Group!!

 

All the postcard reads is that they have been trying to contact me and will do so again - But I can only assume that someone has been to the house, which I didn't think they could do?

 

Should I just give in, ring them and tell them they have totally the wrong person as I am now starting to feel a bit intimidated and the dam debt isn't even mine or ever was.

 

Any advice folks? Thanks in advance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got to tell you my update - just got home from work and I have received (what I think is) a hand delivered postcard from a representative of Lowell Group!!

 

 

 

It was delivered by the postman. It's one of the oldest tricks in the book.

 

Next comes Hampton Legal, but don't worry - it's just Lowell using a different name.

 

Yoy don't have to prove anything, they do.

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Being female I have now decided to throw a wobbly about this and have just contacted the Trading Standards in my area to see if something can be done.

 

I have been reading several posts within this forum and it seems that Lowell Financial are appearing again and again. Is there not something we, the people can do to get them to stop harassing us mere mortals? I dislike bullies and threats and am happy to send a letter to any organisations if it helps rock the boat a bit.

 

I will post when and if I hear anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for you!

 

I think that many others have complained to all and sundry about this despicable firm but another complaint to Leeds TS won't do any harm whatsoever!

 

CAG POWER.

 

PV :-)

LOWELLS-Stat Demand Set Aside-No CCA & Statute Barred-£1800-Gone Away-April 2008

 

Scotcall on behalf of Cabot-£2200-no CCA returned to Cabot-file closed-March 2009

 

Cabot-Court Claim issued despite no CCA and Stat Barred-Claim discontinued-March 2009

__________________________________________

 

IF I HAVE BEEN HELPFUL PLEASE CLICK MY SCALES. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont worry about Lowells - there are enough people on here who are "dealing" with them just fine ;)

Lowells wont send anyone round to you home as its a waste of their time & they can just be told to go away & the police called if they dont for breach of the peace.

The name on this card wasnt a Mr Green or Mr White or Mr Brown was it by any chance? :cool:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello everyone, update on the situation.

 

I have received a reply from the tranding standards offshoot, ConsumerDirect and they are advising me to write to Lowell Financial, telling them that the name is incorrect and that I never lived at that address, and if possible providing proof of this.

 

However, I am still in 2 minds about doing this - surely if I write and give them this information then they have more of a stick to beat me with? I am not convinced at all they will suddenly leave me alone, after all they didn't check whether they had the right person in the first place so how is saying that I am not that person going to make the slighest difference?

 

I know I shouldn't be doubting the advice from trading standards but I want to know what you guys think before I do anything, so any advice would be gratefully received.

 

Thanks in advance

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would keep it short and sweet

 

Dear Cretins

 

I am not the person mentioned on your threatogram with the reference number 123456.

 

Please be advised that I will not be entering into any discussion with you about this matter whatsoever. If I am forced to respond to any letters from you I will invoice your compant £25 for each communication. Replying to this letter will indicate your agreement to these terms.

 

All correspondence from your company will be copied and forwarded to, Trading Standards, the OFT, the FOS and my MP. I trust I make myself clear. If you do not understand this letter I suggest you seek legal advice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldnt suggest writing to Lowells giving proof of anything personally.

I do question the consumer direct sometimes & wonder if the advice they give is actually genuinley in your best interest or not :confused:

My advice is to simply tell Lowells to get lost, they will anyway eventually even of you dont tell them that, but its always nice telling them that they havent got a leg to stand on without going through the county court 1st :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you got as far as the Hampton Legal stuff yet??

 

You've had your home visit from Casper T Spiritcard, so I think you may already be getting near the end of the auto threatomatic cycle.

 

I wouldn't even bother to contact them at all, you will only restart the cycle and encourage the destruction of the rainforest. Just put them in the shredder unopened put it out for recycling, and enjoy life. You have no obligation to inform Lowell you are not who they are looking for - and they won't believe you anyway.

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I shouldn't be doubting the advice from trading standards

 

You should be doubting the advice from anywhere, even here!

 

It never does any harm to get second and third opinions.

 

Trading Standards are still as useless as ever. Did you report Clownells to the Leeds TS as well as your own? They must have a file big enough to sink a battleship by now, but nothing changes.

 

As there is no way on Earth they can possibly prove the debt is yours, because it simply isn't, a letter similar to ODC's is clearly in order.

 

It is not your job to provide proof of anything. If they want to chase people for money, the burden of proof is theirs.

 

The only thing I would add to ODC's letter is to consider this the initiation of a formal complaint. If they keep harassing you without proof, it can then go to the FOS.

 

SH

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the advice guys.

 

I have just sent a letter to them, recorded delivery, along the vein of the template that ODC kindly gave me (thanks for that). So at least I have taken the advice of consumer direct and in theory they will take further if I continue to be harrassed.

 

I didn't send any proof of who I am and didn't sign the letter, in fact I just put my home address at the top and then ended it with "The Occupier" so they don't have any more information than they did before.

 

Lets see if it actually has the desired effect - I will keep you all posted and thanks again for all your time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Afternoon all.

 

I have had another letter from our favourite people, this one is threatening that they are going to send my case onto the legal department who will take me to court (didn't think they could do that out of the statute of limitations, even if the debt was mine). This will result in them taking my homes contents, selling my daughter on Ebay, you get the picture.

 

Is this another threat in a long line of persuasion or should I be worried? Is this to scare you into thinking that they really can do this to you?

 

The letter I sent recorded delivery will have arrived this morning I imagine, so do I just ignore this or is it serious?

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another standard threatogram, with as much authority as toilet paper quite frankly :rolleyes:

They are simply powerless to do anything unless they go through the county court system & because it will cost them money to do that, not least all the legal rights you have that comes with the CC system - the clowns wont go there & they darn well know it :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Mr Ton. This is BOG standard drivel from the Leeds Losers with BOG being the operative word. You will probably get a letter from their silly so called Legal Department which goes by the name of Hampton Legal. Its basically just another desk in the Leeds Threat Centre that uses the same empty threats on different headed paper. By using the word Legal in their name they try to make themselves sound important. They are as much use as an ashtray on a motorbike

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys, I was starting think it was another ploy to scare me - they even used capital letters in some of it!!

:)

 

In theory I shouldn't hear anything more now I have said that if I have to write again I will charge them £25.00 per letter. Is that actually enforcable? I just wondered if "we" (the people) could actually enforce such a thing.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...