Lowell/Hampton Statutory Demand *** WON + COSTS ***

[citizenB]

Can I have the scoop as I'm a journalism student please?

 

I've sent a brief precis of the case to Watchdog this morning.

 

You think the local BBC would be interested?

 

Got to be worth a short - I'd go with the line "Debt Collector unable to pay its own debts"

 

Out of curiosity has anyone here recovered money on a judgement from Lowell?

 

Dont be mean, let babybear have the scoop

[HighFly]

Go for it babybear; after all, you've been here from the beginning !

[babybear39]

PM me your basic details such as name, age, marital status, location etc and I'll contact a few papers for you. The brief precis you sent watchdog would be most helpful as well

 

Do you have a preference of publication?

Edited September 4, 2009 by babybear39

[HighFly]

Do you have a preference of publication?

 

The one with the biggest circulation !

 

I have a feeling the tabloids feed on such stories, as they know people can relate to them on a personal level, whilst I suspect broadsheets might relegate it to a paragraph on a business/consumer page..... ?

 

I've PMed you.

[babybear39]

Tabloids it is then...I'm busy this afternoon but can look at it for you over the weekend

[ODC]

Go for it BB. Bet you just wish it was the Reigate shower. Still by the looks of things it wont be too long before they get a sever kicking from the OFT;)

[babybear39]

Go for it BB. Bet you just wish it was the Reigate shower. Still by the looks of things it wont be too long before they get a sever kicking from the OFT;)

 

If it was Reigate I'd be camping outsite their offices with a camera

[babybear39]

The one with the biggest circulation !

 

I have a feeling the tabloids feed on such stories, as they know people can relate to them on a personal level, whilst I suspect broadsheets might relegate it to a paragraph on a business/consumer page..... ?

 

I've PMed you.

 

That'll be The News of the World then I've met their editor personally

[spitfire650]

You might want to try the Daily Mirror too - they had a half page story on 1st Credit's problems a few months ago.

[babybear39]

ARGH! NOFTW not interested...Said more of a regional piece

 

What region are you from Highfly and what's the name of your best local paper?

[HighFly]

PMed you babybear

[babybear39]

Thanks, replied

[HighFly]

No news to report re: media interest or anything from the bailiffs.

 

I did write this letter to Lowell though on August 20th (another one thanks to this fabulous site):

 

August 20th 2009

 

 

Lowell Portfolio I Ltd

Enterprise House

1 Apex View

Leeds

LS11 9BH

 

 

Dear Sir/Madam

 

I DO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE ANY DEBT TO YOUR COMPANY.

 

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

Acc/Ref Nos xxxxxxxx and xxxxxxxx

 

You have failed to respond to my legal request to supply me a true copy of the original Consumer Credit Agreement for the above accounts.

 

On 1st August 2009, I made a formal request for a true signed agreement for the alleged account under consumer credit Act 1974 s77/8. This was signed for as delivered on the 4th August 2009.

You have failed to comply with my request, and as such the account entered default on 20th August 2009.

 

The document that you are obliged to send me is a true copy of the executed agreement containing all of the prescribed terms, all other required terms and statutory notices and was signed by both your company and myself as defined in section 61(1) of CCA 74 and subsequent Statutory Instruments. If the executed agreement contained any reference to any other document, you are also obliged to send me a copy of that document. In addition a full statement of this account should have been sent to me detailing all debits and credits to the account.

 

Furthermore, you are aware that the Consumer Credit Act allows 12 working days for a request for a true copy of a credit agreement to be carried out before you enter into a default situation.

 

This limit has expired.

 

 

 

As even you are no doubt aware, section 78(6) states:

 

If the creditor fails to comply with Subsection (1)

 

(a) He is not entitled , while the default continues, to enforce the agreement.

 

Therefore this account has become unenforceable at law.

 

As you have failed to comply with a lawful request for a true, signed copy of the said agreement and other relevant documents mentioned in it, failed to send a full statement of the account and failed to provide any of the documentation requested, you will also be aware of the CPUTR 2008 and the OFT's guidelines on debt collection which state under the title Deceptive and/or unfair methods - Examples of unfair practices are as follows - 2.8

 

(i) - 'Failing to investigate and/or provide details as appropriate, when a debt is queried or disputed, possibly resulting in debtors being wrongly pursued'

 

(k) - 'Not ceasing collection activity whilst investigating a reasonable queried or disputed debt'

 

Consequentially any legal action you pursue will be averred as both unlawful and vexatious.

 

Furthermore I shall counterclaim that any such action constitutes unlawful harassment.

 

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

 

This means you must remove all information regarding this account from your own internal records and specifically from my records with any credit reference agencies.

 

Should you refuse to comply, you must within 21 days provide me with a detailed breakdown of your reasoning behind continuing to process my data.

 

It is not sufficient to simply state that you have a ‘legal right’; You must outline your reasoning in this matter and state upon which legislation this reasoning depends.

 

Should you not respond within 14 days I expect that this means you agree to remove all such data, and steps will be taken to ensure compliance. This has now expired

 

Furthermore you should be aware that a creditor is not permitted to take ANY action against an account whilst it remains in dispute.

 

The lack of a credit agreement is a very clear dispute and as such the following applies.

 

* You may not demand any payment on the account, nor am I obliged to offer any payment to you.

* You may not add further interest or any charges to the account.

* You may not pass the account to a third party.

* You may not register any information in respect of the account with any credit reference agency.

* You may not issue a default notice related to the account.

 

I reserve the right to report your actions to any such regulatory authorities as I see fit.

 

You have 14 days from receiving this letter to contact me with your intentions to resolve this matter which is now a formal complaint. This has expired

 

Yours faithfully

 

So where are we up to?

 

• No CCA (requested August 1st)
  
• No Default Notice
  
• No acknowledgment of letter advising them account denied and even if mine, statute barred anyway
  
• Statutory Demand set aside at County Court
  
• Costs awarded, but not paid
  
• Warrant of Execution issued against Lowell for non-payment of costs and passed to Leeds C.C. Bailiffs
  
• Nothing removed from my Credit File, despite the above request
  
• Experian have placed two notices of correction on my file warning in dispute, but cannot do any more until Lowell reply to them, which they haven't
  

 

What can I do now to force Lowell to remove these two accounts from my credit file and is it worth me pursuing them for the damage they have done to my credit rating?

 

HF

[HighFly]

I've been adding to, and updating, my complaint to the OFT as things progress,and today received this:

 

Dear Mr X

 

Consumer Credit Act 1974 (the Act)

 

Complaint Against: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd

 

Licence No: 544015

 

 

Thank you for your email dated 2 September 2009, further to your earlier letter, updating us about the problems you are still having with the above mentioned trader.

 

We will take into account the further information you have helpfully given us as we continue to monitor this trader’s fitness to hold a credit licence.

 

Thank you once again for taking the time to write to us about this matter.

 

Yours sincerely

 

Enquiries and Reporting Centre

Office of Fair Trading

 

HF

[spitfire650]

What address this you write to for the OFT HF?

 

I have a complaint which I think they will consider relevant to lowlife's suitability to hold a CC licence as well.

 

Hopefully other readers of this post who have had experienced Lowell's disreputable business methods will also write to the OFT.

[HighFly]

collection complaints

 

If you are an adviser or third party organisation and you would like to complain to the OFT about the debt collection practices of creditors and/or their debt collection units, as well as external debt collection agencies, please download and complete the complaint form (Word 123 kb) and return it to the OFT at the following address:

 

Enquiries Centre

Office of Fair Trading

FREEPOST

London

EC4B 4AH

 

The Office of Fair Trading: Debt collection practices

 

I sent my initial complaint to the address above. The form is very simple to fill out, and costs nothing to submit. Supplementary information has been sent via email.

 

It's incumbent on any of us who have been wronged by these sharks to complain, complain and complain again, preferably also bringing it to the attention of your MP.

 

HF

[HighFly]

It's a busy day at chez High Fly.

 

I emailed a request to Experian to have the two accounts removed from my credit file as they were showing up as defaults and were either not mine or statute barred:

 

Dear Sirs

 

Reference Number: XXXXXXXX

 

RE: XXXXXXXXX

 

 

ENTRY NUMBER: C11

company name: LOWELL PORTFOLIO I LTD

Account type: Credit card / Store card

Started: 02/01/1996

Default Balance: £2,567

Current Balance: £2,567

 

Defaulted On: 18/11/2004

File Updated for the Period to: 01/03/2009

 

 

ENTRY NUMBER: C12

company name: LOWELL PORTFOLIO I LTD

Account type: Credit card / Store card

Started: 22/04/1993

Default Balance: £2,783

Current Balance: £2,783

 

Defaulted On: 25/11/2004

File Updated for the Period to: 01/03/2009

 

 

I request you remove the above entries from my credit file.

 

I request that you add the following note of correction to my credit file and to include a copy of it whenever you give anyone any of the information I claim is wrong or any information based on it.

 

Note of correction.

 

I deny any liability for these two accounts. At xxxxxxxx County Court, a Statutory Demand for these accounts was ordered to be Set Aside on August 6th, 2009, and costs awarded to me, on the grounds of no valid credit card agreement being presented and that if these debts were mine, which is absolutely denied, they were absolutely Statute Barred on the grounds there had been no account activity for atleast 6 years, in accordance with The Limitation Act 1980 Section 5; “an action founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued.”

Lowells have been instructed by me to remove these entries. However, Lowells have failed to supply me with a Credit Card Agreement, failed to attend Court, failed in any way to prove the debts as mine, failed to prove any activity on the accounts over the past 6 years and have failed to comply with my request to remove the entries.

 

That was emailed on August 27th. Now, bearing in mind I have been waiting over a month to hear from Lowell regarding my CCA request, my statute barred letter, or anything to do with the Statutory Demand, I was surprised to see how quickly they have responded to Experian's query to them.

 

This is Experian's email to me this morning:

 

Further to our recent correspondence, I have been contacted by Lowell Portfolio. They have advised the following:

 

 

"We have raised details of the customers concerns with the original creditor and are awaiting their response. We cannot amend or remove the default entry unless the account is confirmed as fraud."

 

Unfortunately I am unable to amend this information without the authorisation of the company in question.

 

The 'Notice of Dispute' will remain on your report for 28 days. It will then be removed, unless I receive further notification from you:

 

"THE CONSUMER HAS DISPUTED THE ACCURACY OF THIS ENTRY AND WE HAVE THEREFORE ASKED THE PROVIDER TO INVESTIGATE IT. GIVEN THAT THIS DATA IS DISPUTED, PLEASE TAKE CARE IF MAKING AN ASSESSMENT OF ANY KIND THAT MAY INCLUDE THIS DATA."

 

If you have any further queries or wish to discuss this further, may I suggest you contact the company concerned direct at the following address:

 

Lowell Portfolio I Ltd,

Lowell Financial Ltd,

PO Box 172,

Leeds,

LS11 9WS

 

Tel: 0845 3009416

 

In view of the above, I have drafted the following Notice of Correction for you. Please let me know if you would like us to add this or a similar statement to your report. We cannot add a statement that is longer than 200 words or one we think is defamatory, frivolous, scandalous or unsuitable for publication for some other reason. We recommend you do not name the company or anyone else in your statement.

 

"I MR xxxxxxxxxxxxx DENY ANY LIABILITY FOR THE ACCOUNTS DEFAULTED 18/11/04 AND 25/11/04. I HAVE CONTACTED THE COMPANY CONCERNED AND THEY HAVE RAISED MY CONCERNS WITH THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR AND ARE AWAITING THEIR RESPONSE. I HAVE NOT BEEN PROVIDED WITH A CREDIT CARD AGREEMENT AND THE COMPANY HAVE FAILED TO PROVE THAT THE DEBT IS MINE. I HAVE ATTENDED COURT AND HAVE DOCUMENTATION PROVING THAT THESE ACCOUNTS SHOULD NOT BE RECORDED ON MY REPORT. I WOULD LIKE ALL LENDERS SEARCHING MY REPORT TO TAKE THIS INTO ACCOUNT."

 

Kind regards

 

This smacks of Lowlife punishing me by way of my credit file and the 2 defaults for kicking their sorry butt in court.

 

Response in progress...................

[HighFly]

Just fired this email back to Experian.

 

Where would we be without other CAGers experiences to learn from...?

 

Regarding my friends at Lowell. How remarkable that they can reply to you so quickly, yet they cannot reply to my CCA request (not even an acknowledgment), my SAR request, the County Court Order, the Order to pay my costs, or even reply to Bailiff's letters.

 

One can only hope they are more diligent when the County Court Bailiffs knock on their door and when the OFT comes to reviewing and renewing their licence.

 

For clarification, is there a prescribed time limit for which Lowell must comply in replying to you?

 

I am bemused by their comment "We cannot amend or remove the default entry unless the account is confirmed as fraud" as the only fraud being committed is Lowell's attempt to collect on an account which is either not mine or, as the Judge agreed, is clearly Statute Barred. That is vexatious action, as conceded by the Office of Fair Trading.

 

Having researched extensively and learnt of the Information Commissioners Office position regarding such matters, I am disappointed that you claim to be unable to remove the data. I understand that you, Experian, are not merely data processors, but JOINT DATA CONTROLLERS with Lowell, and that you have the ability to remove data without third party consent.

 

As you are therefore clearly data controllers, you are beholden to the Data Protection Act which states in section 4 (4) that it shall be the duty of the Data Controller to comply with the data protection principles.

 

Furthermore, the ICO has previously advised that when an individual supplies a Credit Reference Agency with clear evidence of inaccurate information, then they (the ICO) would NOT expect them to wait for the other party to respond before acting upon the request, and that it is clear the credit reference agency should inform the original data provider (the other controller) of the action.

 

The facts and proof in this case are therefore clear, and the data must be removed forthwith:

 

• Lowell have not acknowledged a CCA request sent August 1st 2009, nor have they supplied the CCA in the time legally granted
  
• Lowell have stopped writing to me regarding these 2 accounts since I advised them they were either completely denied or statute barred
  
• In xxxxxxxxx County Court, a Statutory Demand issued by Lowell was SET ASIDE by Deputy District Judge xxxxxx on August 6th 2009 on the grounds Lowell had failed to supply a CCA, failed to supply proof of a Default Notice or Notice of Assignment, failed to prove this debt as mine, and on the grounds that I declared them statute barred if, indeed they were mine. Costs were awarded to me.
  
• Lowell claim to you that they are waiting for the original creditor to provide proof. THEY HAVE BEEN ON NOTICE FROM MYSELF TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION SINCE AUGUST 1ST. How much more time can they waste with this frivolous excuse?
  

It is clear to me that Lowell have ignored my correspondence and are intent on "punishing" me by way of my credit file.

 

I reiterate my request to you that, as joint data controller, you remove this data from my file with immediate effect, as failure to comply will result in Experian becoming named in any future civil action prepared against Lowell.

 

In the interim, please add the following ammended Notice of Correction to both files:

 

"I MR xxxxxxxxxxxx DENY ANY LIABILITY FOR THE ACCOUNTS ALLEGEDLY DEFAULTED 18/11/04 AND 25/11/04. I HAVE CONTACTED THE COMPANY CONCERNED AND THEY HAVE ALLEGEDLY RAISED MY CONCERNS WITH THE ORIGINAL CREDITOR AND ARE AWAITING THEIR RESPONSE. THE OTHER JOINT DATA CONTROLLER HAS REFUSED TO REMOVE THE DATA UNTIL THIS INFORMATION HAS BEEN RECEIVED. I HAVE NOT BEEN PROVIDED WITH A CREDIT CARD AGREEMENT AND THE COMPANY HAVE FAILED TO PROVE THAT THE DEBT IS MINE. I HAVE ATTENDED COURT AND HAVE DOCUMENTATION PROVING THAT THESE ACCOUNTS SHOULD NOT BE RECORDED ON MY REPORT. I WOULD LIKE ALL LENDERS SEARCHING MY REPORT TO TAKE THIS INTO ACCOUNT."

 

Yours sincerely

[babybear39]

Have lowlife's been issued a warrant of execution yet?

 

With regard to the press, I've had no luck. Better for you to go local and hope mainstream media pics it up

[HighFly]

Yes, the warrant was issued on September 2nd and passed on to Leeds County Court Bailiffs for execution.

[babybear39]

Well thta means the leeds losers will have been served with it by, or should been All those extra charges added on as well I'm lovin' it

[HighFly]

Experian's reply

 

Dear

 

Thank you for your email, which we received on 09 September 2009.

 

I would like to take this opportunity to explain to you in full the processes we have in place when an individual queries the accuracy of an entry recorded on their credit report.

 

Under Section 159 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, you have the right to query information on your credit report that you believe to be inaccurate, once you have received a copy of your report.

 

You may wish to refer to the relevant legislation below that outlines the process we adhere to when dealing with disputed information.

 

CONSUMER CREDIT ACT 1974

 

159 Correction of wrong information

 

(1) Any individual (the "objector") given-

 

(a) information under section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 by a credit reference agency, or

 

(b) information under section 158,

 

who considers that an entry in his file is incorrect, and that if it is not corrected he is likely to be prejudiced, may give notice to the agency requiring it either to remove the entry from the file or amend it.

 

(2) Within 28 days after receiving a notice under subsection (1), the agency shall by notice inform the objector that it has-

 

(a) removed the entry from the file, or

 

(b) amended the entry, or

 

© taken no action,

 

and if the notice states that the agency has amended the entry it shall include a copy of the file so far as it comprises the amended entry.

 

I also draw your attention to the fourth Data Protection Principle, which states that:

 

Personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date.

 

Within Schedule 1, Part II (Interpretation of the Data Protection Principles) of the Data Protection Act 1998 it is explained that, as a credit reference agency, we are not considered to have breached the Act by querying the disputed information and adding a Notice of Dispute statement.

 

7. The fourth principle is not to be regarded as being contravened by reason of any inaccuracy in personal data which accurately record information obtained by the data controller from the data subject or a third party in a case where-

 

(a) having regard to the purpose or purposes for which the data were obtained and further processed, the data controller has taken reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy of the data, and

 

(b) if the data subject has notified the data controller of the data subject's view that the data are inaccurate, the data indicate that fact.

 

Our regulator considers our action to query disputed information with the data provider as taking additional steps to verify the accuracy of the entry and by adding a statement to this effect to your report we are recording your viewpoint that the entry is inaccurate.

 

Therefore, we were choosing to take no action with regards to your initial request to remove this information from your report. Should you wish to verify this you can contact our regulator at the following address:

 

The Information Commissioner's Office: Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, SK9 5AF

 

In view of this, I am of the opinion that we have acted correctly throughout this matter and in accordance with the relevant legislation. I remind you that under the terms of the Data Protection Act 1998, each lender that supplies us with information is obligated to ensure that the data is accurate and kept up to date.

 

I hope this explains why we cannot act unilaterally to remove data from your report, especially when the company concerned has confirmed it to be accurate or has not authorised us to make any amendments, as in your case.

 

Furthermore, as we also have a responsibility to enable lenders to make informed lending decisions, I am sure that you can appreciate why we cannot amend information simply because the individual concerned claims that the data is incorrect.

 

If we operated in this way, any individual could claim that all the adverse information on their report was inaccurate purely as a means of improving their credit report. This would put our clients at risk by enabling people to potentially obtain finance that otherwise would not be offered to them.

 

Because of this, if a consumer disputes information on their report we query this with the data provider. The only instances where we would remove information without direct authorisation from the data provider is if a Court Order is provided that specifically states that an entry should be deleted or a ruling is made from a recognised regulatory body.

 

If you are unhappy with the outcome of the queries that we raised on your behalf, then I suggest that you take up this matter with the Information Commissioner's Office.

 

 

Kind regards

 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Senior Consumer Service Officer

[ODC]

Basically what they say is they dont believe you but believe the Leeds Losers who have failed to prove any debt exists before trashing your Credit File

[babybear39]

Send the CRAs and lowlifes an LBA stating you WILL commence legal proceedings against the bloody lot of them and they shall all be named as co defendants in one case!

[HighFly]

Basically what they say is they dont believe you but believe the Leeds Losers who have failed to prove any debt exists before trashing your Credit File

 

Quite. What gets my goat is that in one of her replies, she drafted me a Notice of Correction which states "I HAVE ATTENDED COURT AND HAVE DOCUMENTATION PROVING THAT THESE ACCOUNTS SHOULD NOT BE RECORDED ON MY REPORT."

 

What more proof does she need? How far up each other's a$$ are Experian and Lowlifes?

 

 

Send the CRAs and lowlifes an LBA stating you WILL commence legal proceedings against the bloody lot of them and they shall all be named as co defendants in one case!

 

Paid for the pack this morning baby ! Great minds think alike.

 

Note how she completely, absolutely, totally failed to respond to my comments that Experian were Data Controllers and not merely Data Processors. No surprise there. Perhaps she didn't have a template to cut and paste about it.

 

I'll be asking for LOTS of help and guidance on this one, me thinks.

 

HF