Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sunak actually nailed it in his boring speech yesterday  Starmers only offering is vote to be depressed  Just about sums up lefties  Humourless and Depresive🤣
    • Ah ok I will see if we receive it in the post tomorrow before I go to work. We want to see theirs so we know what documents they will list ? If their N265 is not received then best to send ours so that we do not miss the claimants deadline as per their draft directions.  What would happen if we did miss the deadline even by 1 day ? The claimant would use it against us in court ?  I scanned and posted in #159 the claimants continuation sheet attached to the N244 where they give a background of the case and reference e-mails etc. After this I will continue to work on the WS which is also causing me anxiety. This will also be used to object to their SJ application. I will advise tomorrow if anything else is received.  
    • Last September our 2019 plate Motorhome went to Brownhills of Newark for its annual habitation check/service. Whilst on their site for the day one of their drivers managed to drive it into a lamp post and put a 2m long scratch down the side of the body. They didn't own up to the damage, but luckily we noticed it before leaving the site, at which point the admitted fault and said they would fix it in house rather than go through the insurance. As they are an authorised Motor home repairer etc we agreed to this and a time frame of 3 weeks was given for the repair, which was booked in for late November. It could not be booked in sooner for the repair as we had a weekends away etc booked with the vehicle until mid November.  3 weeks, and a simple re-spray has now evolved to 18 weeks of them having the vehicle, due to the spray job having to be done 3 times, a window seal not been re-fitted correctly, leading to rain water pouring into the van and the replacement decals been applied wrong twice & having to be re-ordered from Elddis who originally built the camper. We finally got the vehicle back in late April, still minus 1 of the decals. Back in March we had an email from Brownhills asking what compensation we would accept due to the delays in returning the vehicle to us (They have had it for 18 weeks instead of the initial 3 weeks which was agreed). Once we finally got the vehicle back we told them what we expected (the value that the camper has depreciated by in the extra 15 weeks they have had it and which time we were unable to use it). They are now refusing to honour any compensation and are only offering us a free service for when this is due in September. Legally where do we stand?  Obviously we are not taking it back to them for a service, given that last time they managed to crash it and its taken so long for them to make such a simple repair. We are considering legal action, but are not really sure under what grounds/legislation we could claim. Any advice would be much appreciated.
    • Usual alarmist tripe from the Guardian exposed🤣     Many of the ‘Climate Experts’ Surveyed by the Guardian in Recent Propaganda Blitz Turn Out to be Emotionally-Unstable Hysterics – The Daily Sceptic DAILYSCEPTIC.ORG Last week, the Guardian published a survey of 383 'climate experts' and – shock – many of them turned out to be... The Guardian last week published its survey of ‘climate experts’. The results are a predictable mush of fire-and-brimstone predictions and emotional incontinence. This stunt may have convinced those already aligned to the newspaper’s ideological agenda to redouble their characteristically shrill rhetoric, but encouraging scientists to speculate and emote about the future of the planet looks like an act of political desperation, not scientific communication.
  • 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
      • 161 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 Portfolio 1 Ltd - dodgy letter??


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5274 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

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Well According To This No

 

Do You See Process Servers Listed

 

Trade Of Premisis No

 

I Would Think A Nice Letter To The Leeds Loosers Is In Order And A Complaint To The Ico And Oft Also On These So Called Process Servers

 

Its All Rollocks

 

Wait For A Few Days For More Comments Though

 

Lowell Must Be Getting Desperate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does look like it might be a fishing exercise by Lowell. Your safest bet is to get it set aside and claim back your costs in doing so. You don't have to have legal representation to do it, many from this site have done it themsleves. You will have to assume you will need to attend court and face them across a table (fairly informal process). You can claim Litigant in Person costs (£9.25 per hour unless the figure has changed) this includes time for researching and putting together your defence. You could come out of this with a nice little tax free bonus :)

 

Ignore the dates on the documents, your time for setting aside starts from the date of service, i.e. when you actually receive it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Office of Fair Trading: Contact us

 

Complaints - Privacy & electronic communication - ICO

 

Lowell Group - Customer

 

I see their 'Customer' site is still under construction!

Losers in every sense of the word, I wonder how long it will be before they go out of business?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you - I will mention the dates - and there were 2 witnesses here at the time he came - thank goodness. Fuuny really - 1st thing this morning I felt quite positive about it all, but the self doubt and panic is setting in again now - but that's what these parasites rely on I suppose.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just read the set aside link - surely (or am I misunderstanding again!!??) the set aside can only be applied for by me if a court case against me has been started? I think I may have to trot along to a solicitor because I'm really confused! Not surprising really with all this c**p going round and round in my head!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

this is just typical of lowells

predated

you have 18 days fron the date of service for set aside

your technically out of time. dont worry about it youve got 2 witnesses as to the standard of service.

ill have a look at the "green book" regarding proper service.

your 2 witnesses now need to make a statement of truth regarding the service, and the fact that it was pre dated.

firther a stat demand has to be on a specific type of form if being served under insolvency rules a letter from a company is not suffice.

will keep you updated

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what an official SD looks like

 

SDP1.jpg picture by fiftypence_photo - Photobucket

SDP2.jpg picture by fiftypence_photo - Photobucket

SDP3.jpg picture by fiftypence_photo - Photobucket

SDP4.jpg picture by fiftypence_photo - Photobucket

 

compare it to your own to see if its similar.

 

The SD is a precursor to making you bankrupt, if you don't respond by having it set aside they can then apply to make you bankrupt.

 

Don't panic though, most of these can be set aside quite easily and a lot of time these are not followed up to the bankruptcy stage anyway, they are used as a scare tactic. However, it is important to treat it as though they will follow up with the bankruptcy action so that you can be prepared for the worse, but setting aside the SD will stop any bankruptcy action in it tracks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have today had a reply from Barclaycard - which surprised me as I expected it to be from Monument. I sent the £10.00 letter off to the address that I found on an old Monument statement though??

Anyway, the letter says:

Dear Sir/Madam

 

Reference SECTION 78 of the Consumer Credfit Act 1974

 

Barclaycard Account Number: Unknown

 

Thank you for your request under section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Based on the informatiojn you have given we are unable to locate your Barclaycard account number. Please provide further information to allow us to proceed with your request.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

*********

 

Barclaycard Customer Services.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Phil, No I haven't started the set aside process yet - having read the info on here, it appears to me that I can only do this if a judgement has been entered against me? How do I know if one has?

 

postggi - thank you - so, please excuse me being a bit thick (again!!) but as the original card was Monument Visa, wouldn't Barclaycard have been the original owner so to speak? And do I now need to write back to them with more details other than my full name and address which they already were given in my subject access letter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

You really must get this set aside.....they do not have to have a judgment against you necessarily to attempt to enforce a bankruptcy petition...and it is easier to set aside a stat demand (as this is where debts should be disputed) not at the hearing of the bankruptcy petition. Moreover, if you don't set aside the demand within 18 days of the date on the demand, you have to pay in the region of £30 to set aside outside of the timeframe....

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...