Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Firstly, I would like to thank everyone for their help in this matter. Since my last post I have received a reply from Plymouth Council Insurance Team concerning my wife’s accident (please see enclosed letter and photo of the offending Badminton post) which they deny any responsibility for the said accident. I feel that the Council is in breach of their statutory duties under the following acts: The Leisure Centre was negligent in its duty of care and therefore, in breach of the statutory duty owed under section 2 of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957. Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (the Act) to ensure, so far as is reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of all their employees, and others who might be affected by its undertaking, e.g. members of the public visiting the Leisure Centre to use the facilities. The Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 that requires employers to assess risks (including slip and trip risks) and, where necessary, take action to address them. The Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations (PUWER) require the risk to people’s health and safety from equipment that is used at a Leisure Centre be prevented or controlled. I would like some advice to see if my assumptions are correct and my approach to obtaining satisfactory outcome to this matter are accurate. Many thanks   PLM23000150 - Copy Correspondence.pdf post docx.docx
    • Talking to them does not reset the time limit, although they will probably tell you it does, they'd be lying. Dumbdales are the in-house sols for Lowlife, just the next desk along. If Lowlifes were corresponding with you at your current address then Dumbdales know your address. However, knowing that they are lower than a snake's belly, you would be well advised to send them a letter, informing them of your current address and nothing else. Get 'proof of posting' which is free from the PO counter, don't sign it, simply type your name. That way then they have absolutely no excuse for attempting a back door CCJ.   P.S. Best course of action, IGNORE them, until or unless you get a claim form......you won't.
    • A 'signed for' Letter of Claim has been sent today so they have 14 days from tomorrow... Lets wait and see what happens but i suspect judging by their attitude they wont reply 
    • I am extremely apprehensive about burning our files.... I do not know why, so it is becoming an endless feedback loop. Scared to pull the trigger to speak in the desire not to mess up my file. 
    • Hi All, So brief outline. I have Natwest CC debt £8k last payment i made was 7th November 2018 Not a penny since. So coming up to the 6 year mark. Can't remember when i took out the  credit card would be a few years before everythign hit the fan. Moved house 2020 - updated NatWest as I still have a current account with them. Then Lowells took over from Moorcroft and were writing to me at my current address. I did get a family member to speak to them 3 years ago regarding the debt explained although it may be in my name I didn't rack it up then went contact again. 29th may received an email from overdales saying they were now managing the debt. I have not had any letter yet which i thought is odd?  Couple of questions 1. Does my family member speaking to lowell restart statute barred clock? 2. Do you think overdales aren't writing to me because they will back door CCJ to old address even though Lowells have contacted me at current address never at previous? ( have no proof though stupidly binned all letters  ) Should I write to them and confirm my address just incase? Does this restart statute barred clock? 3. what do you think best course of action is?   Any help/advice is appreciated I am aware they may ramp up the process now due to 7th December being the 6 year mark.   Many Thanks in advance! The threads on here have been super helpful to read.  
  • 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 I Ltd / Capital One


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3868 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

  • Replies 69
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

How the hell can Lowell financials client be Lowell portfolio 1?

They are acting on behalf of themselves basically :confused:

Yep. As C1 washed their hands of the matter, Lowell are their own client. Makes you laugh, doesn't it? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 8 months later...

Hampton's Legal are now threatening court again. Remember, even the OC couldn't produce the credit agreement, and Lowell have produced zero.

 

What do people think? Should I respond and point out what they ought to know anyway, or just ignore?

 

The thing is, they are saying they are going to obtain my credit file from Experian. Can they lawfully do this when the account is in official dispute?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hampton's Legal are now threatening court again. Remember, even the OC couldn't produce the credit agreement, and Lowell have produced zero.

 

And Hampton are just another desk in the Lowell office of course.

 

You've done all you need to do. You've requested the documentation, ages ago, the OC failed to provide it. The DCA are just peeing into the wind here. If they did go down the court route, and it's doubtful the Leeds losers would, you have your paper trail to show you did all you could to help them prove you owed them money.

Be good to those who give you advice that helps - click the star to give them your thanks by way of a reputation credit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there Yog :)

 

It seems the low life DCAs are all starting to crawl out from under their stones now the New Year is here :rolleyes:

 

I agree with Hillards 100% - if they knew they had a case against you they would have had you in court by now!

 

I'm pretty confident that searching your credit file will not give them the appropriate documentation they need to take you to court - more hot air and scare tactics.

 

Whether they can actually look at your file while a case is in dispute I am not sure - but I expect another member will pop on here and advise when they see your post.

 

I'd file the letter and forget it for now, because you have done all you should.

 

If you feel really unsettled, send them a copy of your previous bog offs stapled together and tell them to "have a good read of the enclosed" as they've obviously not read the first copies, and you don't propose explaining the situation again!!!;)

 

Love SG x

Please note I am not legally qualified, I am offering advice based on my own personal experience in the hope that it may be of help to others in a similar situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The account has been passed to Red now, who I think are still part of Lowell Group aren't they?

 

They are threatening to file for my bankruptcy at court. First though, they intend to serve me with: "a Statutory Demand for payment under s268(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act 1986 in respect of a debt for a liquidated sum payable immediately"

 

Remember, neither they nor the original creditor have been able to come up with a copy of a credit agreement.

 

I've not had this approach being used before. Anyone know anything about it and has it any solid basis, given the lack of a CA or supporting documentation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

In law, a motion to set aside judgment is an application to overturn or set aside a court's judgment, verdict or other final ruling in a case. Such a motion is proposed by a party who is dissatisfied with the end result of a case. Motions may be made at any time after entry of judgment, and in some circumstances years after the case has been closed by the courts.

 

See http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/courtfinder/forms/n244_e.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello YS!

 

It looks like yet another DCA Threat, the part at the bottom seems to confirm this, i.e.:

 

If you wish to avoid a bankruptcy petition being presented against you...

 

BTW, I'd delete the Barcode, because they can probably scan that and work out who you are.

 

Cheers,

BRW

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

It's been very quiet but now I have a letter from Hamptons, threatening blood and thunder if I don't respond. I need advice really, because not long after my last post, Lowell sent me what they say is a copy of my CCA, a fuzzy photocopy of a C1 credit card app form, dated 2000. That may put a fresh complexion on it.

Incidentally, when I received the alleged CCA copy,. I just ignored it, and it's taken them nearly 18 months to contact me again. The Hampton's letter contains no reference to this.

 

OK, what I want to know is, can they lawfully pursue me for this? It dates from between 2000 and 2003, and the account was in formal dispute with Capquest (not Wescott, as wrongly stated previously).

 

Capquest stated in writing that they were unable to fulfil my s78 request and were passing it back to C1, so as it was in formal dispute, could C1 then lawfully sell it on? In other words, can Lowell legally claim ownership?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone got any ideas about this? If an account was in formal dispute with C1, and thereafter with Capquest, and neither of those companies could produce a valid CCA in response to my s78 request, doesn't that render Lowell's potential action invalid (even though they have produced a copy CCA, by some magic)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone got any ideas about this? If an account was in formal dispute with C1, and thereafter with Capquest, and neither of those companies could produce a valid CCA in response to my s78 request, doesn't that render Lowell's potential action invalid (even though they have produced a copy CCA, by some magic)?

The person dealing with your case at Lowell's would have consulted someone with legal knowledge (Hamptons) and an expert in debt collection (Red) to ensure that the reconstruction of a CCA, probably nothing like the original, is perfectly acceptable by their agents (Tocatto) before fobbing you off, I mean, sending that to you.

 

But, you're right, because you placed the account into dispute with C1, Lowell should not be dealing with this. If you look in the Library, under the Debt Collection section, you'll find one headed "A letter when the account has been passed to another debt collection agency" which should be sent to the Leeds Losers.

Be good to those who give you advice that helps - click the star to give them your thanks by way of a reputation credit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Update, for anyone who's interested:

 

I sent Hamptons the following letter ( wonder if they realise 'Hampton' is an old slang word for c**k?):-

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

 

Date: xx/xx/xx

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Your Reference: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Re. your letter of xx/xx/xx:-

This account is in formal dispute with Capquest Ltd and has been since xx/xx/xx. I have previously informed you that this was the case and am at a loss as to why you are pursuing the matter further.

Not only is this a breach of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and the OFT Debt Collection Guidelines, but it is also in breach of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and Data Protection Act 1998.

My previous dispute from xx/xx/xx has not been answered.

 

As Capquest are in default and have also committed a criminal act, by failing to provide an adequate response to my Consumer Credit Act request, and have also, by passing personal data connected with the account to a third party (ie yourselves), breached s10 Data Protection Act, I consider this account to be in serious dispute.

 

As you are hopefully aware, whilst the matter remains in default, for the reasons outlined, enforcement action is NOT permitted, and under s127 CCA this constitutes a complete defence at law. Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both unlawful and vexatious.

I would respectfully suggest that this account is returned to the original creditor for resolution of these defaults and breaches, as Lowell Portfolio /Financial Ltd/Hamptons cannot lawfully pursue any enforcement activities in relation to the matter.

 

If Lowell etc choose to ignore my dispute and do attempt enforcement, then I will respond with appropriate action and file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards Authority, Office of Fair Trading, Information Commissioners Office and Financial Ombudsman Service and potential action via the courts.

 

I hope that this will not be necessary.

 

I would appreciate your due diligence in this matter.

I look forward to hearing from you in due course. Please ensure that all correspondence is in writing, dated and signed by a responsible person.

 

Yours sincerely

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Update: after I sent Hamptons the above letter, in July 2011, it all went quiet.

 

Until yesterday, that is, when I received a letter from Lowell, headed YOU HAVE NOT REPAID YOUR ACCOUNT, and going on to inform me that the account will be sent to ScotCall, who they say are instructed to "pursue me ... to recover the full balance". It does not specify what this will entail, and I am not familiar with ScotCall.

 

It also does not say whether they have sold it on, or ScotCall are acting on their behalf, and refers to them as "one of our approved debt collection agencies".

 

As the account is technically still in dispute with Capquest (see above), surely Lowell shouldn't even be doing any of this?

 

Oh and btw, who are ScotCall and what are they like?

Edited by Yog sothoth
Link to post
Share on other sites

... Hamptons...Lowell...Red...Tocatto...ScotCall...Capquest...Lowell...

 

It's a bit like Wimbolden, but with more than two sides playing - they just bash these debts about between themselves, hoping to find someone who'll take pity on them and pay something. The fact that you've not heard much in all this time is adding to the argument that ignorance is bliss when it comes to these companies. Ignore them and they don't bother you much, send them letters and they think they have you worried and a little bit more intimidation will make you crack !

 

Oh and btw, who are ScotCall and what are they like?

 

ScotCall are about as low down the chain as you can get with debt collection. They threaten to come and visit you to talk about repayment. Yes, they have been known to do so in a couple of instances, but it's always been a local guy. They recruit them as 'home collectors' and send them round to try and persuade you to cough up, or they'll be back. Chances are, if you tell them to 'go away' once, you'll not see them again.

 

Then again, most of the time they don't call, so don't get the cream buns in especially as they are more likely to let you down and not turn up on the day they say.

 

As you say the matter is in dispute with Capquest and you've informed Lowell of this then I'd say it's down to Capquest to deal with the dispute. Lowell, Red, Tocatto and Hamptons are all the same company, they just use the different names to try and confuse you.

 

If you want to take action against them now, as you said you would if they continued to persue, then now is the time to do it. Otherwise your threats are as empty as theirs.

Be good to those who give you advice that helps - click the star to give them your thanks by way of a reputation credit.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lowell have probably bought the debt.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well yes, Lowell's did buy it, from Cap1, but I think they may now have sold it to ScotCall.

 

Incidentally, the debt is now ten years old and counting. Does that have any significance? I saw something on another thread about old debts being 'statute barred' debts but not sure what that means.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Scotcall are the threat merchants, lowell use to do the dirty work. They only are ever used for lemon debts.

Edited by citizenB

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...