Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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

Lowell statute barred


ziggy68
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5637 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

I have had a letter from Lowell Portfolio 1 informing me that they have purchased an Hsbsc bank account which I may have had.

 

I am 100% certain that this debt is older than 6 years and that I have not had any contact with anyone about this either.

 

I would like to know if I should send of a statute barred letter straight away or should I wait until they contact me again.

 

Thanks for your help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if its over 6 years old then send the statue barred letter via recorded delivery. lowell seem to specilize on statue barred debt. they will soon be saying thier goodbyes to you and live up to thier name the leeds loosers

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Ziggy,

I don't see how waiting will achieve anything so my advice is to send the SB letter

 

fox

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

Acc/Ref No 1xxxxxxxxx

 

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 Limitation Act 1980 Section 5 “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”

 

I would also point out that the Office of Fair Trading say under their Debt Collection Guidance on statute barred debt that “it is unfair to pursue the debt if the debtor has heard nothing from the creditor during the relevant limitation period”.

 

The last payment of this alleged debt was made over six years ago and no further acknowledgement or payment has been made since that time. Unless you can provide evidence of payment or written contact from me in the relevant period under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, I suggest that you are no longer able to take any court action against me to recover the alleged amount claimed.

 

The OFT Debt Collection Guidance states further that “continuing to press for payment after a debtor has stated that they will not be paying a debt because it is statute barred could amount to harassment contrary to section 40 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act 1970”.

 

Your last communication is a notice of intent to issue a county court claim.

 

The OFT guidance states that you should not attempt to mislead me by saying you may take legal action against me when you cannot.

 

The FraudAct2006. “Fraud must give a gain of money or property”

The Act creates a new general offence of fraud with three ways of committing it, one of these is:

Fraud by false representation

Section 2 Fraud by false representation

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he-

(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b) intends, by making the representation-

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A representation is false if-

(a) it is untrue or misleading, and

(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.

(3) "Representation" means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of-

(a) the person making the representation, or

(b) any other person.

(4) A representation may be express or implied.

(5) For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

 

Your letter dated 31/10/07 in which you state that you are preparing papers for court to be served upon me is a breach of OFT rules and the guidelines of the Civil Court Users Association, of which you are a member. The letter is also an attempt to enrich yourselves by making a false representation in that you may use the Civil Procedures to take action against me. Such behavior could be fraud as defined above.

 

I await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed and that no further contact will be made concerning the above account after that last letter.

 

If you continue to harass me I will take action against you in the County Court for damages, and costs in dealing with this matter.

 

I will also lodge a complaint with the OFT, Leeds Trading Standards and the Financial Ombudsman. Whilst I appreciate this would not deter you from your potentially illegal actions there is the chance that if enough consumers make valid complaints you may get your Consumer Credit License revoked.

 

Additionally you are required to remove any default or registration with any credit reference agencies which you have made. If you fail to comply with this within 28 days, I will take action in the County Court against Lowell Financial and Lowell Portfolio I Ltd for breach of the Data Protection Act.

 

 

Finally any attempt to use civil procedures to obtain monies from me will be vigorously defended as an abuse of the legal process. A counterclaim for damages will be issued together with a claim for full costs.

 

I look forward to your reply.

 

Yours faithfully

just in case you need it

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...