Lowells Customers- Put them on notice!!!

[noomill060]

Or perhaps name both Lowells and the OC as co-defendants.

[angry cat]

I guess that the OFT have their eye on Lowell Portfolio 1;

their CCL is still awaiting renewal!

 

It expired in October '08, still current but not yet renewed?

 

AC

[angry cat]

Or perhaps name both Lowells and the OC as co-defendants.

 

That is the way to go!

[noomill060]

I phoned OFT- Apparently, Lowells did in fact renew their CCL three days before the old one ran out, despite what the CCL register says.

[Toulose LeDebt]

Toulose you have confused me now. I read this earler from you which seems to contradict the above

 

 

Don't worry it is confusing I noticed Lowells Barrister was similarly confused in their representation so from the beginning here goes in plain english (so deliberately simplified).

 

Assignment- The lawful transfer of the burden, interest thereupon and any attached burdens of an account .

Assignor - The person selling the account.

Assignee - the person buying the account

Debtor- The person who is the subject of the account.

 

Deed of assignment- Legally binding contract selling account. Think of it as a receipt for a second hand car. Mr X sells to Mr Y.

Notice of assignment- just that a notice to the debtor that the account has been sold.

 

Important legality.

 

Although the assignor can sell the account to the assignee, the rights to title, benefit and burden on this account do not transfer until the sale is executed as an assignment which requires notice to be served upon the debtor.

 

Lets say Barclays sell an account to Lowells

 

So you see:

1) the assignment must be in writing under the hand of the assignor

The assignment is drawn up and must be signed by Barclays.

 

2) there must be an intention to assign

Barclays must intend to assign the account to Lowells.

 

3) the assignment must be communicated to the assignee by the assignor

Lowells must be given the deed of assignment by Barclays

 

4) 4) notice of the assignment must be given to the debtor

Barclays or Lowells must tell you the account has been sold.

[fiftypence]

 

So I cannot suggest that we all issue litigation but I am of the opinion that correctly presented litigation on this point can not be challenged succesfully.

 

Can't do any harm to start a deluge of 'potential' claims though can it? To clog up their already inadequate admin system.

[angry cat]

Lowell must be poohing themselves, as clearly there is something to hide re:

April 2006!

 

I know for a fact that an OC was flogging distressed debts to another DCA through Eire!

 

AC

[noomill060]

and if Barclays or Lowells cant prove they told the debtor they are up Poo Creek without a paddle or a canoo.

[Toulose LeDebt]

"No Valid NOA = No legal title to benefit or burdens of the assignment."

 

I read this as meaning it should be the OC that I chase for charges/interest.

 

Claim against Lowells purely for unlawful prosessing etc.

 

Quite correct that's what's in my original post on this thread.

 

No valid NOA has following implications.

 

OC still liable for set off or counterclaim.

OC in breach of DPA 1998 for allowing unauthorised usage of data controlled by them

DCA in breach of DPA 1998 for unlawfully processing data.

CRA's in breach in their capacity of Joint Data Controllers with both the OC offences and the DCA offences.

 

Does this underline why Lowells got the big guns out now??

[angry cat]

What about in the case of Novation?

[noomill060]

This also explains what happened in neill1999 tussle with Lowells.

 

The OC in his case coughed up the readies

 

Lowells wrote off the alleged "debt"

 

Lowells removed neg data with CRAs

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/dca-legal-successes/130138-capone-lowells-advice-needed.htm

Edited February 18, 2009 by noomill060

[Toulose LeDebt]

Can't do any harm to start a deluge of 'potential' claims though can it? To clog up their already inadequate admin system.

 

Not for me to say really fiftypence.....

 

But sure as hell it is for me to laugh at.:D

 

 

 

Ha Ha Ha bet Mr. Hunter wishes he'd settled out of Court now....

[Toulose LeDebt]

What about in the case of Novation?

 

It can only be novated with your co-operation ie. You have to agree to the sale and transfer of rights.

Anyone here been asked by Barclays if you would mind signing a form agreeing your account be sold to a Debt Collection Agency?

[noomill060]

no

[Toulose LeDebt]

Quite correct that's what's in my original post on this thread.

 

No valid NOA has following implications.

 

OC still liable for set off or counterclaim.

OC in breach of DPA 1998 for allowing unauthorised usage of data controlled by them

DCA in breach of DPA 1998 for unlawfully processing data.

CRA's in breach in their capacity of Joint Data Controllers with both the OC offences and the DCA offences.

 

Does this underline why Lowells got the big guns out now??

 

Bad form to quote oneself but I forgot one other important consideration.

 

 

The OC will have claimed tax relief from HMRC under the deed of sale.

Since the OC is still title holder of the account where no valid assignment has been effected in law this could mean some very serious implications for the original creditors in these cases.

They have claimed relief for a loss they have not made.

[noomill060]

The same thing was going through my mind.......

 

 

Bad OCs.......claiming losses for debts made up of unlawful charges and interest unlawfully levied thereon.

 

In other words, "creating" debt where none lawfully exists and then benefiting from this unlawful action by claiming it as a genuine loss.

Edited February 18, 2009 by noomill060

[angry cat]

Bad form to quote oneself but I forgot one other important consideration.

 

 

The OC will have claimed tax relief from HMRC under the deed of sale.

Since the OC is still title holder of the account where no valid assignment has been effected in law this could mean some very serious implications for the original creditors in these cases.

They have claimed relief for a loss they have not made.

 

Exactly!

[PaulR17]

Doesn't his open up a big black hole for all NOA's then, if I've read this correct, with two clear points, not sure if its good or bad though..

 

1) By sending a copy of a letter by normal post from the Assignor, along with a letter from themselves, - the Assignee, in the same letter they are not following procedure. In my case Lowells sent a letter from 'Abbey' and one from themselves in normal post to me - IF so, what can we do exactly, what it the point of law we argue and to what effect

 

2) Surely when we complain, they just reissue the NOA's properly? so we achieve a delay of a few days

 

or am I missing something?

[havinastella]

Doesn't his open up a big black hole for all NOA's then, if I've read this correct, with two clear points, not sure if its good or bad though..

 

1) By sending a copy of a letter by normal post from the Assignor, along with a letter from themselves, - the Assignee, in the same letter they are not following procedure. In my case Lowells sent a letter from 'Abbey' and one from themselves in normal post to me - IF so, what can we do exactly, what it the point of law we argue and to what effect

 

2) Surely when we complain, they just reissue the NOA's properly? so we achieve a delay of a few days

 

or am I missing something?

 

 

Paul, my understanding is, If they have defaulted you whilst not legalliy owning the debt, they are open to claims for damage under the data protection act, thats just for starters.

[worried parent]

Do I understand that you must receive a notice from the creditor that gave the loan, overdraft or whatever in the first place and that this must be by recorded delivery.

 

If so have many DCA's are hounding people without such notices being issued.

 

If this is the case would not that stop a DCA's hounding people with debts that do not exist.

[dannyboy660]

If this is the case would not that stop a DCA's hounding people with debts that do not exist.

 

"32.2.4. Assignment of debts

 

Assignment is a process whereby debts are sold on to another organisation, and is common practice within the industry.

For an assignment of a debt to be legally effective, it is necessary to assign both the rights and the responsibilities of the creditor under the agreement.

Partial assignment which, in effect, assigns the right to enforce but not the associated responsibilities will be invalid and will preclude the assignee from enforcing the debt.

There are two types of deed of assignment - equitable and absolute. The first assigns the right to pursue the debt to the assignee but not the obligation of the OC. The second assigns both the rights and obligations of the assignor to the assignee. However, in order for this to be legally binding you as the debtor would have to give your consent to such an assignment.

 

If the notice includes an amount demanded that is incorrect it renders the notice legally invalid (e.g. unlawful charges or DCA admin/collection charges).

Even if the amount doesn't include charges but is misstated it is still invalid.

If the date is incorrect it is legally invalid (i.e. does not tie in with the deed of assignment - the execution of assignment should be the same as the date shown on the notice).

The case that supports this is W.F.Harrison & Co Ltd v Burke [1956] 1 WLR 419"

 

 

 

Unashamedly stolen from a post by Rory32 many moons ago. I hope he will forgive me for my idleness by not doing the research myself.

[Alex_DeLarge]

Lowells sent me a NOA for a credit card debt I had with HSBC (this is now done and dusted due to me winning SD set aside hearing), it was received via normal post.

 

I had been making payment for a few months then stopped after they defaulted after failing to supply my CCA.

 

The original default date was 2005 but as I had stopped making payments to them I am convinced they will have placed a fresh default on my credit file which will not drop off for another 5 years.

 

For obvious reasons I do not want to register to view my credit report, but would like to know if there is new default on there (which Lowell had no right to add), because if there is I will be making a claim for damages against them.

 

I am sure there are many others in the same position as me, is there a way to find out without giving all my current details to a CRA?

Edited February 18, 2009 by Alex_DeLarge

[Toulose LeDebt]

Do I understand that you must receive a notice from the creditor that gave the loan, overdraft or whatever in the first place and that this must be by recorded delivery.

 

If so have many DCA's are hounding people without such notices being issued.

 

If this is the case would not that stop a DCA's hounding people with debts that do not exist.

 

 

The notice can come from either the original creditor or the debt collectionagency but if it is posted other than by recorded or registered delivery it is not pursuant to the requirements of Sec196(4) Law of Property Act 1925 and the assignment is not valid.

[mysticpols06]

Thankyou Toulose very much indeedy!! Am subbing and will be rechecking all paperwork the next couple of days (Am assumming will apply to all DCA's Not Just Lowells, from what just read?).

 

Will definitely keep their 'in tray' full i would have thought for a while.

 

Many thanks again, Take care, Mpols x

Edited February 18, 2009 by mysticpols06
ps. Hi guests :-) Come on in, the water's lovely ^-^

[ODC]

The notice can come from either the original creditor or the debt collectionagency but if it is posted other than by recorded or registered delivery it is not pursuant to the requirements of Sec196(4) Law of Property Act 1925 and the assignment is not valid.

 

If you admit to a DCA getting a Notice of Assignment by ordinary post would this not then 'rectify' the service