Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Yes. I'd be very interested to know how the defendant fared in putting forward the defence that the calaimant had been contributorily negligent by not keeping their cat under control. I'm aware that some people might find that fatuous, distracting or confusing, but the reality is that I'm not aware of any law that imposes a duty upon cat owners to keep their pets under control.  Whereas I believe the law does hold dog owners responsible for their dogs in public places. I'm not certain it was at all beneficial to the OP to suggest that blaming the claimant was a credible defence...
    • Okay, perfect. they did say BS is invoked as soon as i fill in their application form, ill get a pin. i had to press them more on this as they didnt want to discuss BS much. so i should fill in the form and get the pin, then i can initiate BS. What will follow and what should i do after? Thanks again for all the help and patience.
    • Good evening, so not a good weekend reviewing paperwork -- I have lost some proofs of postage.. also, although not provided at CCA, they have now supplied a DN in their WS, please see scan of claimants WS (without statements) Document with tick boxes as signatures doesn't look like an agreement and is split across pages. Documents have been stapled and copied multiple times looking at the top left of them. Aside from that, having read other threads, I suspect they have everything? appreciate your input please Sorry for heavy redactions, I noticed the paperwork was see-through LinkHalifaxCC1.compressed.pdf
    • Received a final demand today Final demand.pdf
    • Here is my final draft: I, XXXXXX, being the Defendant in this case will state as follows; I make this Witness Statement in support of my defence in the claim and further to my set aside application dated 1 November 2022. The claimants witness statement confirms that it mostly relies on hearsay evidence as confirmed by the drafts in person in the opening paragraph. It is my understanding they must serve notice to any hearsay evidence pursuant to CPR 33.2(1)(B) (notice of intention to rely on hearsay evidence) and Section 2 (1) (A) of the Civil Evidence Act.   1.        The claimant failed to comply with the additional directions ordered by District Judge Davis on the 2 February 2024 'The Claim shall be automatically struck out at 4pm on 3 April 2024 unless the Claimant delivers to the Court and to the Defendant the following documents.' None of these documents were received by the court nor the defendant by that date.   2.        I understand that the claimant is an Assignee, a buyer of defunct or bad debts, which are bought on mass portfolios at a much reduced cost to the amount claimed and which the original creditors have already wrote off as a capital loss and claimed against taxable income as confirmed in the claimants witness statement exhibit by way of the Deed of Assignment.   As an assignee or creditor as defined in section 189 of the CCA this applies to this new requirement on assignment of rights.  This means that when an assignee purchases debts (or otherwise acquires rights under a credit agreement) it also acquires certain obligations to the borrower including the duty to comply with CCA requirements (such as the rules on statements and notices and other post-contractual information).  The assignee becomes the creditor under the agreement. This ensures that essential consumer protections under the CCA cannot be circumvented by assigning the debt to a third party.   3.        The alleged letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 was served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018, no effort was made to ascertain my correct address.  I have attached a copy of my tenancy agreement which is marked ‘Appendix 1’ and shows I was residing at a difference address as of 11 December 2018 and was therefore not at the service address at the time the proceedings were served.  I have also attached an email from my solicitors to the Claimants solicitors dated 14 July 2022 which was sent to them requesting that they disclose the trace of evidence they utilised prior to issuing the proceedings against me.  This is marked ‘Appendix 2’.  The claimants solicitors did not provide me with these documents.   4.        Under The Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims 2017 a Debt Buyer must undertake all reasonable enquiries to ensure the correct address of a debtor, this can be as simple as a credit file search. The Claimant failed to carry out such basic checks. Subsequently all letters prior to and including ,The Pre action Protocol letter of claim dated 7 January 2020 and the claim form dated 14th February 2020 were all served to a previous address which I moved out of in 2018.   5.        I became aware of original Judgement following a routine credit check on or around 14th September 2020.   6.        Upon the discovery of the Judgement debt, I made immediate contact with the Court and the Claimant Solicitors, putting them on notice that I was making investigations in relation to the Judgement debt as it was not familiar to me.  I asked them to provide me with a copy of the original loan agreement but this was not provided to me.   The correspondence to the Claimant Solicotors is attached and marked ‘Appendix 3’   7.        I then sent a Data Subject Access Request to Barclays but no agreement was provided. Details the timeline of communication between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 4’and the copies of correspondence between myself and Barclays are attached and marked ‘Appendix 5’.   8.        The claimant relies upon and exhibits a reconstituted version of the alleged agreement.   It is again denied that I have ever entered into an agreement with Barclaycard on or around 2000.  It is admitted that I did hold other credit agreements with other creditors and as such should this be a debt that was assigned to Barclaycard from another brand therefore the reconstituted agreement disclosed is invalid being pre April 2007 and not legally enforceable pursuant to HH Judge Waksman in Carey v HSBC 2009 EWHC3417.  Details of this are attached and marked ‘Appendix 6’.   The original credit agreement must be provided along with any reconstituted version on a modified credit agreement and must contain the names and address of debtor and creditor, agreement number and cancelation clause.   9.        Therefore the claimant is put to strict proof to disclose a true executed legible agreement on which its claim relies upon and not try to mislead the court.   10.   As per CPR 1.4(2)(a) the court encourages parties to cooperate with each other in the conduct of proceedings in order to try and save time and costs for the parties and to also save the time and resources of the court however, despite vast attempts at mediation the claimants have been most unreasonable and have remained unwilling to mediate. Until such time the claimant can comply and disclose a true executed copy of the original assigned agreement they refer to within the particulars of this claim they are not entitled while the default continues, to enforce the agreement pursuant to section 78.6 (a) of the Credit Consumer Act 1974. I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.  I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. Signed                 ………………………………………………….. Name                  XXXX Date                     30 April 2024
  • 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 Financial


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5032 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

If you want people to have any sort of trust(if that is possible) with Lowells CRT, then they are going to need to anwer all questions that CAGGERS ask & be open to scrutiny because of your companies (Lowells) bad reputation on here.

 

If Lowells want any meaningful dialogue then, come on James, start answering peoples questions, so we can see if you are indeed independant.....if I'm honest I have my doubts!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 222
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

i can gaurantee its a load of rubish , if been writing to them and emailing them for the last 2 months , they totally ignore all my correspondance and just send threat after threat , the latest being a stat demand if i don't pay up , they realy have changed haven't they ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe the Site Team could invite Lowell to start answering questions in a dedicated thread? Then if they really are interested in open dialogue and "resolving an issue quickly and efficiently" then they can put our* money where their mouth is.

 

* Sorry, their.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am really surprised Site Admin are continuing to allow this. The robot posts - then nothing. Lou lou has more sense than to give this skullduggery a second thought.

 

"Total Posts

Total Posts: 5

Posts Per Day: 0.21

Find all posts by Lowell CRT

Find all threads started by Lowell CRT

General Information

Last Activity: Today 09:43; 15 July 2010

 

Cagger since : 21st June 2010

Referrals: 0 "

 

Astonished...!

Link to post
Share on other sites

by BBC Watchdog:

 

Lowell Chasing Debts

 

When it comes to debt, we've never had it so bad. Personal debt in the UK is at £1.5 trillion. That's the equivalent of everyone in the country owing over £25,000 each. No wonder debt recovery has become such big business.

 

Debts are now being bought and sold by companies who seem to have no idea why you owed the money in the first place. The result is that many of you are being hounded for money by people you've never heard of for sums that you might not even owe.

 

One company doing just that is Lowell Portfolio I, part of the Lowell Group, based in Leeds [End Quote]

 

Do not telephone them;

Do not email them!

 

If you have a valid query/ dispute, send a letter marked;

'ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE' via the 'Royal Mail' recorded delivery service (keep a copy of the letter plus a copy of the 'Royal Mail' receipt)

 

James of Lowell CRT, should NOT be contacting members on this forum!

 

The above is my personal opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

AC

 

Any DCA that comes on here offering genuine help & advice will need to stand up to scrutiny & looking at Lowells CRTs stats & from what I've seen on the forums, I am not impressed.

 

Agree, Delta-Charlie.

 

The Lowell Group's bad business reputation...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't make me laugh, you are just tricking the poor woman inmto clling you.

 

You know th rules, everything in writing.

 

Isuggest you don't make entries on this site again. Go and bully and harass somewhere else.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can our Lowells spokesperson explain why they find the need to use three different types of notepaper. Firstly they issue 'threats' from Lowell Financial, when they see you dont bite they use the Red Debt notepaper in an effort to intimidate. If that fails then they stick in the Hampton Legal notepaper.

 

What is the purpose of these split personalities if not to intimidate

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can our Lowells spokesperson explain why they find the need to use three different types of notepaper. Firstly they issue 'threats' from Lowell Financial, when they see you dont bite they use the Red Debt notepaper in an effort to intimidate. If that fails then they stick in the Hampton Legal notepaper.

 

What is the purpose of these split personalities if not to intimidate

 

Did you omit Lowell Portfolio 1 on purpose, ODC?

Link to post
Share on other sites

my son was in debt and had dealings with lowells. i must admit that as my son is ill i took over with the debt and phoned lowells. they put a password on the account so i was able to deal with them as my son was so ill. they arranged a direct debit to come from my account an amount that was very low and i thought reasonable.. they stuck to the deal and for 6 months took no more no less. the debt finished this week and a got a call from them thanking me for the regular payments.i believe they was very fair and honest and always went through me instead of worrying my son who is ill.. im just being honest about my experience

Link to post
Share on other sites

my son was in debt and had dealings with lowells. i must admit that as my son is ill i took over with the debt and phoned lowells. they put a password on the account so i was able to deal with them as my son was so ill. they arranged a direct debit to come from my account an amount that was very low and i thought reasonable.. they stuck to the deal and for 6 months took no more no less. the debt finished this week and a got a call from them thanking me for the regular payments.i believe they was very fair and honest and always went through me instead of worrying my son who is ill.. im just being honest about my experience

 

I( would love to believe you but my dealings with this shower tell me differerent. They invented imaginary payments on a Statute Barred debt that could not possibly have been made by me. Hardly strikes me as an ethical firm operating within the rules does it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my son was in debt and had dealings with lowells. i must admit that as my son is ill i took over with the debt and phoned lowells. they put a password on the account so i was able to deal with them as my son was so ill. they arranged a direct debit to come from my account an amount that was very low and i thought reasonable.. they stuck to the deal and for 6 months took no more no less. the debt finished this week and a got a call from them thanking me for the regular payments.i believe they was very fair and honest and always went through me instead of worrying my son who is ill.. im just being honest about my experience

 

That's good but there does not seem to be the experience of other posters here. It could well be that they are trying to get their act together but I think the best that we can say is there management processes areen't yet up to it and certainly not to the point where they should be allowed to be members of the forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my son was in debt and had dealings with lowells. i must admit that as my son is ill i took over with the debt and phoned lowells. they put a password on the account so i was able to deal with them as my son was so ill. they arranged a direct debit to come from my account an amount that was very low and i thought reasonable.. they stuck to the deal and for 6 months took no more no less. the debt finished this week and a got a call from them thanking me for the regular payments.i believe they was very fair and honest and always went through me instead of worrying my son who is ill.. im just being honest about my experience

 

The OFT have advised DCA's etc., to treat 'Sensitive' cases fairly and in line with the MALG guidleines:

http://www.moneyadvicetrust.org/images/MALG_MHGuidelines_2007.pdf

 

These guidelines do not just apply to people suffering from mental health problems but also health problems and bereavement...health problems often cause psychological problems e.g. depression.

 

The OFT have already imposed 'Requirements' on another firm: 1st Credit for not following same, etc...

 

This is not a position of Lowell being fair and honest, it is what they should do if they wish to retain their Consumer Credit Licence!

 

No doubt, Lowell are aware of this!

 

Reorete, Lowell have not treated other members fairly, as is plain to see on this forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OFT have advised DCA's etc., to treat 'Sensitive' cases fairly and in line with the MALG guidleines:

http://www.moneyadvicetrust.org/images/MALG_MHGuidelines_2007.pdf

 

.

 

This would be the same Lowell who persistently phoned me whilst I was waiting for a hospital to phone me concerning my wife who was undergoing treatment for cancer and would not clear the line when this was explained to them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This would be the same Lowell who persistently phoned me whilst I was waiting for a hospital to phone me concerning my wife who was undergoing treatment for cancer and would not clear the line when this was explained to them.

 

I know ODC:(

 

Disgraceful behaviour!!!

 

Many like you and yours, have been treated despicably by Lowell...

Link to post
Share on other sites

This would be the same Lowell who persistently phoned me whilst I was waiting for a hospital to phone me concerning my wife who was undergoing treatment for cancer and would not clear the line when this was explained to them.

 

 

and the same lowell threat calling chimp who after I myself explained that I was stressed by their constant harrassment of a statute barred debt and that I was heavily pregnant and previously suffered a stillbirth was told that

 

"It would be my fault when I buried this one through not facing up to my debt"

Link to post
Share on other sites

by sam614:

I was heavily pregnant and previously suffered a stillbirth was told that

 

"It would be my fault when I buried this one through not facing up to my debt"[End Quote]

 

And these are the very same people, who are being allowed to post up on CAG!?

 

Unbelievable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In reality, nothing surprises me anymore.

Firms such as Lowell will use every dirty trick in the book, to obtain payment or, regular payments.

They pursue alleged debts that are in dispute;

they pursue statute barred debts;

they pursue alleged debts that are not known to the individual concerned etc...

 

Lowell circumnavigate the OFT guidelines on debt collection practices, often breaching them.

 

Lowell breach the CCA;

Lowell breach the DPA.

 

The Lowell Group needs to take a long hard look at itself.

 

The general Consumer will not tolerate, bad business practice!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately CAGBOT also does not allow phrases like "law breaking", untruthful, falsehood either to be discussed. Despite the fact that to continue to harass is breaking the law, not having the correct documentation is breaking the statute laws of this overtly corrupt land, by passing properly appointed representatives is in breach of all of the codes of practice and guidleines laid down by the regulators and obediance to these is a condition of any outfit to hold a valid credit licences reference the regulators!!!. But we on CAG must never question the validity and openly discuss such LAW BREAKING. I personally do not know an honest person working in banking, the finance industries as a whole or the DCA business. Now challenge that for libel!!!!

 

WHAT THE HELL IS HAPPENING TO CAG????? Has been totally infiltrated by the detritus of the DCA and banking business? I do know there is much misleading being posted on here and the poster is allowed to get away with it yet law breaking!!! must never say it or allude to it it might offend the little darlings of the pre school potty training divisions now infesting this site.

 

oilyrag.:mad:

Link to post
Share on other sites

And just for amusement I came across the following little story in a magazine. An engineer died and went down to hell. Things were not good down there but it was not long before they all had flush toilets and air conditioning with more mod cons on the way. God phoned Satan. "I hear that you have all mod cons down there and an engineer fixing the place up for you" "Yes" replied Satan, we do have an engineer down here". god said " Send him back up here immediately, it was all a dreadful mistake. Do so now or I will sue you!!"

 

Satan said, " No way, I don't know what he is going to do for us next and in any case just where do you think you are going to get a lawyer???"

 

oilyrag:p

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sick of all of this!

 

Vulnerable CAG members do not wish DCA's to post up on their threads, in this particular case: Lowell.

 

The OP on this thread, received a meaningless template letter asking her to contact them.

 

But, she had already sent them a letter by recorded delivery:

 

:

...so I wrote to them stating that he does not live here, that we are not in contact and even giving them the last address I had for him I also told them as I had now informed them in writing that he doesn't live here, I did not want any more letters sent here regarding this..[End Quote]

 

:

I sent my letter recorded delivery and on checking track and trace found it had been signed for on 22nd June (2010) so I thought that would be the end of it..

 

Lowell, were told but they continued to pursue, even though they knew that their next letter could breach the OFT guidelines on debt collection.

 

:

On 2nd July (2010) another letter addressed to my son arrived with the same return address on the envelope, marked private and confidential yet unsealed again, [Emphasis Added] I didn't bother to read it at first, I just thought I told them the situation[Emphasis Added]

...Can I just say at this point I have a younger son who still lives at home, both my sons obviously have the same surname and even unfortunately have the same initial of their first names, so tonight about 8.00pm my phone rang I answered and a male voice said "is Mr ***** there"(he didn't actually say an initial) so I handed the phone to younger son, he said hello and male voice says "is that Mr *****", younger son says yes and with that the phone went dead, did 1471[End Quote]

Edited by angry cat
addition
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lowell, pursuing a Capital One account holder, who clearly no longer resides at home; the family home.

 

Shame on you Lowell...

 

In short, these matters can be sorted out with the assistance of CAG members, solely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5032 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...