Red/Lowell DCA re:Alleged Mobile Phone Debt

[Robot81]

Hi All,

I expect I am writing a duplicate post about this company as having done searches I can see many people have posted about them too. However, I can’t find a post which answers my exact question so here I am!

 

I received a letter from Red Debt Collection Services dated 22nd March 2009, regarding an alleged £225.82 that they claim is owed to them as they are now the legal owners of an account previously held with O2. The disconnection date was 08/05/2006, with the last payment having been made on 03/04/2006. I have since moved house twice, and only to this address in November 2008, so I assume they have searched for my details on the electoral role.

 

It’s possible that this money is/was owed as my financial situation was very poor in 2006, and resulted in my entering into an IVA. However, I don’t know for sure and am certainly not going to pay without requesting evidence.

 

I did not, and will not call them and instead sent them the ‘Prove it’ letter on 27th March 2008, requesting response within 10 days. They received the recorded letter on 28th March 2008, so 10 working days past this would have been 13th April 2009.

 

Today (17th April 2009) I received a letter from Lowell Financial dated 14th April 2009, thanking me for my correspondence and advising they are currently looking into my query and will resolve the matter at their earliest convenience. They say they are unable to give me an exact date as to when this will as they often have to retrieve information from the original client or external bodies. They comment that there is no need for me to write again in the meantime, but please call if I wanted to!

 

So, I obviously know now that I should sit tight and wait for their next letter (if this ever materialises) but I want to be prepared. In my eyes there are two ways it could go. 1) The ‘evidence’ they send me is clear and I am in fact liable or 2) that the evidence is ‘airy fairy’ and I am still in doubt.

 

My question is how do I respond in each situation?

1) I guess I would have to settle, though would possibly try to offer less than 50% of the outstanding amount.

2) Who knows?!

 

Finally, was Red/Lowell actually obliged to respond within the 10days I requested....? I’m sure I read somewhere that if they didn’t supply the required information within the timeframe I could dispute the alleged debt simply on that? I know that mobile phone accounts aren’t subject to the CCA, so I’m quite ‘stuck’ on that front but any further advice would thankfully received.

[cerberusalert]

First they've got to prove a debt exists so send them this;

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Account no:

 

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

 

I/we would point out that I/we have no knowledge of any such debt being owed to (insert company name).

 

I am/we are familiar with the Office of Fair Trading Debt Collection Guidance which states that it unfair to send demands for payment to an individual when it is uncertain that they are the debtor in question.

 

I/we would also point out that the OFT say under the Guidance that it is unfair to pursue third parties for payment when they are not liable. In not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonably queried or disputed debt you are using deceptive/and or unfair methods.

 

Furthermore ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment amounts to physical/psychological harassment.

 

I/we would ask that no further contact be made concerning the above account unless you can provide evidence as to my/our liability for the debt in question.

 

I/we await your written confirmation that this matter is now closed. Otherwise I will have no option but to make a complaint to the trading standards department and consider informing the OFT of your actions.

 

I/we look forward to your reply.

 

**Edit to suit**

 

Remember, don’t sign the letter.

[cerberusalert]

Sorry I've just noticed that you've been in contact with them. Just sit tight it's not at all unusual for them to just pass these types of debts back to the original creditor when proof of the debt isn't forthcoming.

[Robot81]

Thanks for quick response - nice to have a bit of reassurance!

[cerberusalert]

Lowells are a little sensitive when it comes to collecting mobile debts, see; BBC - Watchdog: Lowell - chasing debts

[Robot81]

Hi all,

 

I'm writing with an update. Red (not Lowells) have written again - letter rec'd 27th April, dated 22nd April requesting payment within 7 days from date of letter.

 

Attached they have a computerised statement of transactions re : "Mr X" (my surname). (This isn't even a statement for services used showing what each amount corresponds to - it's purely a credit and debit sheet.) There is no address, no mobile number nor indeed any information to actually link this to me other than my surname (which probably means it could also apply to 1000's of other people in the UK too!)

 

In my reply to them I will obviously point out that unless I receive information confirming the debt is owed by myself I will not be paying, but I'd also like to mention a couple of other points:

a) In my original letter to them I requested they reply with the appropriate information within 10 days; to date 21 days later I don't feel I have received this information. Aren't they obliged to reply with the necessary information within the required timeframe?

b) Am I dealing with Lowells or Red? I know that they are indeed one of the same company, but I feel their swapping and changing is inappropriate and is somewhat confusing for their 'client' eg. me!

 

I'll gladly draft all of this into a letter myself but hoped that someone may have some appropriate paragraphs of information to save me a headache with getting the wording right.

 

Many thanks in advance.

[PrettyPaula]

i think i would now request a copy of there formal complaints procedure and again advise them that the account is dispute.

They havent provided anything at all. bunch of cowboys!

some clever person will be able to post a letter.

[sam614]

lowell

red

lowell financial

portfolio 1 & 2

hamptons legal (illegal more like)

 

different monkeys,different desks.same building.

threatograms on a disputed debt is a no no,by changing the letterheads they think they can get away with it.

report to oft and ts.

 

SAM:pLOWELL DETESTER

 

 

still getting threatograms on a disputed debt