Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I see the poops are still trying to deflect from their own criminality and and abuses by whinging on about raynors buying her council house - now about election registration - anyone who owns a flat or house understands that you dont give up your and your childrens home just because of a new relationship and while we are on about that ..   lets start with When is jenrick being revisited for both lockdown abuses and self admitted (claims estate is his main home - not the property in his electorate or his london property) 'possible (lol) electoral registration abuses as he claimed he was at his estate 'main home' away from both London and his electoral 'home'  - much of which paid for by the taxpayer     Cabinet Minister Robert Jenrick 'breaks lockdown rules twice' by going to 'second home' - Mirror Online WWW.MIRROR.CO.UK Key Cabinet Minister Robert Jenrick drove 150 miles to his 'second home' after urging the nation to remain in their homes in a bid to...   ... perhaps follow with more self admitted lobbying while in a potion where they shouldn't “A few of us in parliament have lobbied the government – and with the help of the Treasury select committee, the chancellor has listened,” John Baron wrote.   Tory MP faces lobbying questions over Treasury committee role | Investing | The Guardian WWW.THEGUARDIAN.COM Co-owner of investment management firm called for ‘urgent’ post-Brexit changes to City rules at committee meetings     About time labour got in the game and started pressing for these self admitted/bragged Tory abuses were properly investigates.
    • No I didn't I got the dates mixed up.   
    • Sorry about that, TJ. The person who posted it specifically said it was free access. Here's another version of the FT article. https://archive.is/KYrPa
    • Isnt there some indication in there of at least intent to inform arbuthnot? IF he wasn't then it would seem to be Vennells decision to keep him 'uninformed .. Although seems to me if arbuthnot was unaware - he was either incompetent or should have very detailed records of denials. Seems vennells is constantly at the core of all the lying about all these issues though.
    • Paywalled/subscribe HB I'm unaware of the details on this HB but why is it a potential taxpayer burden? Hasn't a judge already ruled port has rights of access - so shouldn't costs be on the private company (South Tees Development Corporation) trying to change established access?     LIVE: High Court updates as CEO gives evidence in access rights row between STDC and PD Ports - Teesside Live WWW.GAZETTELIVE.CO.UK The face-off between the Teesport operator and Mayor Ben Houchen's South Tees Development Corporation continues in the High Court  
  • 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
      • 160 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 / Red / 02 / £4.99 vs drob


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5341 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

8th february 2009

I receive a letter from Lowell explaining that 02 have sold my account to them and in the same envelope i received a notice of assignment allegedly from 02. I say allegedly because on the 02 letter there is a small square barcode thing that actualy corresponds to Lowell.

 

13th March 2009

I receive a letter from Red informing me that they are now pursuing this account an behalf of Red. I wrote to Red and asked them to prove my liability by sending copies of any contract or final bill from 02.

 

16th April 2009

I received a letter from Red and attatched to the letter was a print out of a computer screen shot showing a zero balance. Red explained that this relates to when 02 removed this account from there system for preperation for sale and does not mean that my liability has been removed.

 

I wrote back to Red and told them that this is not what i asked for and does not prove any liabilty. I again requested that they send copies of any contract and final bill from 02.

 

This Morning 28th May 2009

I received the following from Lowell .................

 

Dear drob

Further to your enquiry, 02 advise that they can provide a copy of a detailed final statement at a cost of £4.99, which will be added to the overall outstanding balance. If you wish to go ahead with this request please advise us. Alternatively you may wish to speak with 02 directly.

We will keep your account on hold for a further 30 days, however if the position has not altered at that point we will resume our collections activity.

Lots of Love

Samantha Swallow

I don't now if to laugh or scream!!!!!!!!!!!

 

1.Surely if Lowell have purchased this account they must have relevant documentation to prove my liability?

 

2. Lowell have placed a default on my credit file. I'm sure it's not possible to place a default if they can't prove liability?

 

3. Surely Lowell have an obligation to prove my liabilty and send me the information i have requested and that i should not have to pay £4.99

 

4. Any suggestions as to how i respond to Lowell?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send them this, the onus is on them to prove a debt exists;

 

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Cerberusalert ............

 

I have already sent a very similar letter when i first requested Lowell to prove my liability.

 

I am looking for something a bit stronger ...... I might go issue a notice to stop processing my data and remove the default until they prove liability. And i will not be paying them £4.99 for the privilege

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Only £4.99 for information our clients hold on you (which should be free of charge to prove any alleged debt, but we're betting you don't know that)" ROFLMFAO...Is this what the leeds losers are doing to make money now :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will be putting my reply together over the weekend so if anyone has any pearls of wisdom that i could add to my letter please let me know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8th february 2009

This Morning 28th May 2009

I received the following from Lowell .................

 

Dear drob

 

Further to your enquiry, 02 advise that they can provide a copy of a detailed final statement at a cost of £4.99, which will be added to the overall outstanding balance. If you wish to go ahead with this request please advise us. Alternatively you may wish to speak with 02 directly.

 

We will keep your account on hold for a further 30 days, however if the position has not altered at that point we will resume our collections activity.

 

Lots of Love

Samantha Swallow

 

 

?

 

Dear Mistress Swallow

 

You claim I have to pay £4.99 for information to prove the debt actually exists, sorry but it is Your responsiblity to prove said debt not for me to disprove it therefore please submit the £4.99 yourself and send me the information requested previoulsy, or close the file and do not bother me again.

 

If your next correspondence does not contain the information requested then I will report your sorry ass to the OFT and TS and FSO and anyother legal body I can think of (OK you can leave this bit out)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leeds, UK-based debt purchasing company Lowell Group has strengthened its management team by recruiting Samantha Swallow to fill the new role of Customer Service Manager.

 

She will manage a fast-growing team, currently 30-strong, which is responsible for dealing with correspondence and queries from holders of newly acquired accounts.

 

Samantha joins the company after 17 years with National Australia Group, during which she gained experience in a variety of operational management roles, working in Leeds, Glasgow, New Zealand and Australia.

 

The new position of Customer Service Manager has been created as a result of Lowell’s ongoing growth. Over the last 12 months the number of customer accounts managed by Lowell has almost doubled from 2.0 million to 3.7 million.

 

Samantha takes over day-to-day management of the team from Head of Operational Support Neville Megaw, who commented: “The Customer Service team plays a key role in post-sale administration of all accounts we purchase. We are delighted to have appointed Samantha Swallow to head the team. She is a proven team leader with a strong track record in performance management.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could of course charge them £15 for every letter you have to write....she'd be spitting then.....

 

 

I might add that to the end of my letter.......

 

*Please be advised that if i find it necessary to write to you again regarding this matter i will add a £15 administartion charge"

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok ......after careful consideration this is my reply to Lowell

 

Dear Sir / Madam

I Do Not Acknowledge Any Debt to Your Company

I refer to your letters dated the 21st May, the contents of which are noted.

You claim that I have to pay £4.99 for information to prove that the alleged debt actually exists, sorry but it is your responsibility to prove said debt not for me to disprove it therefore I will not be paying £4.99

As you are fully aware, you are legally obliged to send me full details of any alleged debt, including a full statement, which you claim that I 'owe'

I also noticed that you have placed a default on my credit file I would be grateful if you would explain as to why you have been processing my data before establishing a debt exists and most importantly before you owned the alleged debt.

Please note you may also consider this letter a statutory notice under Section 10 of the Data Protection Act to cease processing any data in relation to this account with immediate effect.

I again would ask that no further contact be made concerning this matter unless you can provide evidence as to my liability for the alleged debt in question by supplying the relevant documentation. The document you have sent does not prove any liability to this alleged debt.

If you are unable to provide evidence as to my liability, I 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.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Letter is great, however, as Lowell's letter in post #1 states that O2 have sold the account to them, Lowells are therefore the owner of the debt and should have been provided with all relevant information regarding the same.

 

Therefore, in my opinion, it is a matter for them to take up with O2 that although they have purchased the debt, it would appear that O2 have not provided all the information required for them to reasonably deal with a creditor.

 

I would make a point of making them aware of this point of view, because how can they make a charge against you, when they have supposedly purchased and paid for, all the account information!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Update

 

I have received a response from Red in reference to the £4.99 charge to prove my liability, they seemed to have changed their tune a little.......

 

Dear drob

The administration charge of £4.99 referred to us in our previous letter related to itemised bills showing date, time & telephone numbers called. This level of detail is not relevant to our collection activities and so it is not made readily available to us.

Our obligation, if requested is to provide statements to the account showing charges and payments made to the account to demonstrate that a debt accrued. This has been requested from 02 and will be forwarded on receipt.

THIS IS WHAT I REQUESTED IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!!!! all this "too me" "too you" between Red & Lowell would make the Chuckle Brothers look competent!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Update

 

The idiots from Red have sent me, again the screen shot of some sort of account with 02. Red now inform me that they are now entitled to a full payment!!!!!

 

I just can't get over the stupidity of these people. I have asked 4 times for ....

 

1. Copy of any contract relating to this alleged debt.

2. Copy of the final bill clearly stating the amount owed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We had a similar problem with *3*

 

You might like to amend the following letter and send it to Red and 02

 

An email to Matthew Key, Chief Executive 02 [email protected]

might not go amiss

 

 

Dear Sirs,

 

 

Following your email copied below:

 

Thank you for your e-mail

We are currently looking into your enquiry and will respond to you as soon as possible. Please be assured we will try to answer and resolve your query at our earliest convenience.

 

Unfortunately I am unable to give you an exact date as to when this will be as our enquiries can take time, as we often have to retrieve information from the original client or external bodies.

 

What I can guarantee is that your enquiry is being dealt with and you have no need to e-mail again.

 

If you want to speak to someone in our Customer Service team then please do not hesitate to call on 0844 844 4722

 

 

 

I have today received an extremely threatening letter from yourselves, which I trust was sent in error?

 

My response is as follows:

 

Dear sir/madam

 

Further to your recent communication, I write with great concern regarding '3G Mobile' behaviour and the subsequent harrassment.

 

You state that I am indebted to your company to the sum of £11.08 I can categorically state that this account was cleared by virtue of a direct debit to 3G Mobile prior to me transferring my account to O2. Indeed, 3G have asked me to return to their network on many occasions - why would they do that if I had an outstanding debt?

 

Should you wish to/or are able to supply me with an invoice number and the date of the alleged default I will happily instruct my bank to delve into their archives and provide a copy statement to prove this 'alleged' debt was paid - if it ever existed, which I seriously disbelieve.

 

Please note that I am fully aware of the Office Of Fair Tradings guidelines on debt collection in line with CPUTR2008, I am (as I am sure you are) also aware of the recent case of Ferguson vs British Gas which in basic terms stated that it is unlawful (and possibly criminal) to harass somebody either verbally or in writing when no money is owed.

 

 

Your letter has obviously caused me a great deal of unnecessary concern,and worry, resulting in me having to take third party advice, undergo law and internet research, and take time out from my employment.

 

If this matter persists - without proof of the 'alleged' debt, I will be forced to take the liberty of charging you the sum of £15 per response, which I will add to my costs against yourselves.

 

Also please note that if it becomes apparent that any adverse default information has been placed on my files, I will in no uncertain terms, take immediate action in the courts. You may also be aware of Durkin Vs DSG?

 

I now require in writing your company's official complaints procedures within 12 days, confirmation that no further action will be taken and an apology from both corresponding Managing Directors of your companies.

 

Please note that any further correspondence from myself will result in your company being charged a further £15 per letter/email correspondence.

 

I would also point out that I intend to maintain my legal right and if necessary, file reports with the appropriate authorities, including, but not limited to, Trading Standards, Office of Fair Trading - including Otelo, Information Commissioners Office, Gareth Thomas (Undersecretary Of State For Trade And Consumer Affairs), my local MP and possible court action, including the High Court.

 

I trust this outlines my position very clearly.

 

Yours faithfully

 

Please help us to help you. Download the CAG tool bar for free

HERE and use the search option for all your searches. CAG earns a few pennies every time !!!

 

Please don't rush, take time to read these:-

 

 

&

 

 

This is always worth referring to

 

 

 

 

 

Advice & opinions given by me are personal, are not endorsed by the Consumer Action Group or the Bank Action Group. Should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...