Any news from PT or UK26 yet???

[the main man]

Great result! I think firstly UK has to think of settlement for him and him alone and if that comes with strings so be it.

 

I'm sure in time some benefit will come to all:)

[DonkeyB]

Any implications for the next case in line for UK v Experian?

[havinastella]

Hi Stressed,

 

It was to do with Lowells processing his data before they owned the debt.

 

JOgs

[Pinky69]

That's all the rest of us know too. Pt is saying nothing and UK is conspicuous by his absence.

[Stressed150]

Thanks for that havinastella, I c how it is quite a landmark case and I see how it would change things for DCA's and CRA's etc hence the secrecy....

[Stressed150]

Pinky69, u seem really fired up about the whole situation, if I was in your shoes maybe I would be too, but im sure if your in a similar situation u will get some support using the knowledge they have gained from the outome of the case...

[woody1066]

Thanks for that havinastella, I c how it is quite a landmark case and I see how it would change things for DCA's and CRA's etc hence the secrecy....

 

So do I. Perhaps I am being a little cynical here, maybe the benefits of this will be made clear to us in the precedent that has now been set. I sincerely hope that CAGers money has not been spent on a case that only benefits one party and that we will have the judgement and the resulting implications made clear to us soon.

[Stressed150]

So do I. Perhaps I am being a little cynical here, maybe the benefits of this will be made clear to us in the precedent that has now been set.

 

Mabe we just need to give it some time..... its still early days, and if the guys are bound by confidentiality, Im sure if a similar case turns up they will support it with the knowledge/experience they have gained.....

[woody1066]

So do I. Perhaps I am being a little cynical here, maybe the benefits of this will be made clear to us in the precedent that has now been set.

 

Mabe we just need to give it some time..... its still early days, and if the guys are bound by confidentiality, Im sure if a similar case turns up they will support it with the knowledge/experience they have gained.....

 

But if they are bound by confidentiality does that not defeat the whole ethos of asking for donations?

[havinastella]

 

But if they are bound by confidentiality does that not defeat the whole ethos of asking for donations?

 

You guys need to learn to read and chill out.

 

PT is BOUND by confidentialty (to UK26)

 

I'm sure Dave will be along to let everyone know what happened.

 

He's worked his arse off on this case and probably just needed an evening off.

 

JOgs

[noomill060]

UK26 stated that all donations would be returned in the event of a successful outcome, which "would be of great benefit to all Caggers"

 

I believe he needed a lend of around £700 to proceed with this matter. I am sure that he will honour his obligation to return his benefactor's hard earned donations.

 

Donations which many people probably couldnt really afford to give and will be delighted to be reunited with, forthwith as stated.

 

At the bottom of each Paypal payment recieved page, UK, are the words "Return Payment". Click it and the donation will be returned, without any fee to the recipient.

Edited May 18, 2009 by noomill060

[Stressed150]

 

You guys need to learn to read and chill out.

 

PT is BOUND by confidentialty (to UK26)

 

I'm sure Dave will be along to let everyone know what happened.

 

He's worked his arse off on this case and probably just needed an evening off.

 

JOgs

 

For the record I agree with you..... you seem to have misquoted me.

[ODC]

No-one was forced to donate. I gave what I could of my own free will and dont expect it back. I am happy to accept what PT says.

[noomill060]

I didnt donate a shilling, however UK stated that all donations would be returned with thanks.

[DonkeyB]

Think we all need to step back a bit... I'm sure UK26 will get round to posting once he's absorbed the implications of the result of the case and discussed it with PT. Let's give the guys a bit of space.

 

UK, just make sure that whatever you post, you don't compromise the case itself - maybe clear your postings with PT first to make sure you don't step outside the box.

 

I think we're all delighted the case has reached a good conclusion. It's understandable that CAGgers are chomping at the bit for info, but I'm sure whatever has been learned will be of great benefit for the cases of others who suffer at the hands of Lowell et al. We all know that PT gets everywhere on the forum, and helps hundreds of people - the knowledge gained will be well used, I'm sure.

 

It's taken a while to get this far, so waiting another day or two to disseminate the results of the case (inasmuch as UK26 is able to) is no real hardship. In the meantime, congratulations to UK and PT (and others) for taking the b*ggers on, and well done to all the CAGgers who supported the case.

 

Now, Experian anybody?

[Pinky69]

I'm not "chompimg at the bit" nor am I "all fired up." Nor am I bothered about the money. I do care about the non-effects of a case that was supposed to be for the benefit of all and donations asked on that basis when it was nothing of the kind - it was a case that benefited only the pursuer and was settled behind closed doors. Has there been any general affect on Lowells or DCAS or CRAs? No - they will just carry on as they have always done. This was nothing more than another court case with no benefits to anyone else at all. The next time someone comes asking for money on the basis that their case will be for the benefit of all, they will be told where to get off.

[angry cat]

Right, I am going to step in here!

 

Having been involved in two cases were an amicable settlement was reached;

one being a class action;

Confidentiality Documents had to be signed.

 

It would be extremely unfair to expect the individuals involved to reveal the outcome.

 

Sorry, but that is the way it is, like it,or not!

 

AC

[pt2537]

FFS,

 

I cant believe what im reading from some,

 

Yes people donated , concede that point, but i have to say that the confidentiality issues with UKs case are specific to the case.

 

I was on record in a professional capacity although i was acting pro bono yesterday as UK will clarify so i have a professional requirement to remain confidential between client and myself!!!!

 

 

what i can say without stepping into the confidentiality issues is this

 

UK sued Lowells

 

The assignment was conceded as being bad if im honest, but due to the fact that they were being sued and not seeking to enforce the debt by way of legal action, even if the assignment was not absolute falling insdie the Law of Property act 1925 the assignment would have fallen into equity and therefore would have given right to process data by virtue of the equitable rights

 

However, if it were the other way round, a point which was conceded , and they had sued UK, then the case could have most likely failed as to sue there is a requirement of the person holding title to the debt and as Harrison & Burke shows, the claim would have failed in UKs favour.

 

as i say, each case is different,

 

the people who are screaming for repayment, i think we should wait for UK to come back to us first and let us know what is happening with the donations, lets not forget that there is also the experian case on the go and aslo there are two other claims that i am aware of ,

 

The info will filter through from this case i am sure but it will be in general terms and not specific to UKs case due to the reasons ive already given

[Pinky69]

Angrycat, we know what a confidentiality clause is - we are not expecting any information about the case now, which is just as well because we are not going to get any.

[volvodriver]

FFS,

 

 

the people who are screaming for repayment

 

PT I think that's a bit OTT.

 

I dont think anyone is screaming.

 

I do think that there was an expectation, created at the beginning, that if people donated the whole secret thread, warts and all, would be put into the public domain- for the greater good.

 

People eagerly awaited the results - we celebrate wins for a very good reason - and we seem to be hearing that all is not exactly as it was supposed to be.

 

I counselled waiting for UK to appear, and I still do, but that does not detract from other posters concerns and disappointment.

[babybear39]

Well done pt2537 and UK26

[pt2537]

Angrycat, we know what a confidentiality clause is - we are not expecting any information about the case now, which is just as well because we are not going to get any.

Have you not read my posts? have they gone completely over your head? im sorry i have to ask as this post really makes little sense if you had read them:mad:

 

You cannot expect UK to tell you the issues which lead to settlement. however, the case will be for benefit of others, especially those who are vulnerable and are being sued by Lowell group as there will be non confidential info which will filter through as a direct result of this case, you just need to give a little time for this to happen as i need to talk to UK to ensure we know the limits of what can and CANNOT be talked about

 

Just because your need for gossip cannot be satisfied, does not mean that the case was of no use , there is a lot which will help others such as my post above!!!!!

[sam614]

FFS,

 

I cant believe what im reading from some,

 

 

nor me.

donations,help,advice or any capasity the people were involved was for UK26

If PT says they got a result,then that should be good enough,at the end of the day are we not here to help if we can.

SAM:pLOWELL DETESTER

[dannyboy660]

I think if you read post #71 carefully, PT has given a pretty strong indication of how things went.

 

If UK26 wants to go further, that would be his own choice.

 

What knowledge was gained from this will surely be put to good use for others in the future, and I think that's what CAG is about...isn't it????

[pt2537]

 

I do think that there was an expectation, created at the beginning, that if people donated the whole secret thread, warts and all, would be put into the public domain- for the greater good.

 

People eagerly awaited the results - we celebrate wins for a very good reason - and we seem to be hearing that all is not exactly as it was supposed to be.

 

I counselled waiting for UK to appear, and I still do, but that does not detract from other posters concerns and disappointment.

Volvo,

 

i think that you have to appreciate that, the case yesterday, had we have gone to trial and won completely, then i have no doubt that the thread would have been made public. i understand that was wholly the intention, however sadly that was not to be

 

I understand the disappointment but i can say that i am happy to assist anyone defending an action from the opponents as i can assit ion telling you what to look for and where to look etc, so in that respect it is not a complete loss.

 

If i said that yesterday there was a Solicitor and Counsel in a small claims hearing, i think that really tells you the importance the other side placed upon this case and as i say, if you knew all the circumstance, you would understand the difficulties we encountered and why we can not tell you tooo much about UK26s case

 

however as i said, it still has the use and benefit to help others, on that point i am certain

 

however i think it best that we wait for UK to pop in and let you all know whats what before we speculate any further