Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • So, the two child benefit cap is going to (rightly or wrongly) be a big issue, with the care of kids undoubtedly taking second place to political point scoring  ... Some think that parents should be responsible for kids, and the state pay as little as possible else the parents will just use having kids (which they then neglect) as a means of income for them to spend on fags and booze. Some think that benefits should be effectively there for anyone whatever the circumstances.   So what do people think might be some sort of solution?   I think that both those stances are extremes,  and you can be sure of just a few things 1. Neither or any approach fits all affected. There are some who will abuse the system, just as there are some left in genuine desperate need. 2. None of its the kids fault, and how they are treated will have a large impact on our nations future.   So, despite the claims of 'it means only rich people can have kids' which is rubbish, I think the cap should stay. ... BUT that free school meals should be introduced for all state school kids:   Which would * ensure our nations children kids get fed at least one meal a day with the funds intended for that * be a significant incentive to go to school for the poorer kids at least - keeping many off the streets and away from bad company * almost certainly reduce problems and increase productivity in the classroom from irritable hungry kids (per stats)   Not a perfect solution by any means - but seems a positive move to me.    
    • and more positive change From next year, mobile phone, paid television and broadband companies must inform customers of any price rises at the point of sale. The changes, ordered by Ofcom, will come into force on 17 January and mean that any mid-contract price rises must be given “in pounds and pence” and in a “clear and comprehensible” way.   Taken a change of government to do it after years of bluster about it eh?   Mobile phone companies banned from hiking prices mid-contract based on inflation WWW.INDEPENDENT.CO.UK The new year plan ensures providers are transparent on prices at the point of sale  
    • Could he/ his partner set up a new internet bank account?  In his name ? It depends which country, I imagine. Most UK banks want proof of address and ID, probably more. If your friend/partner can use the house address and provide bills that could help. You would need to look at various online banks and see what their requirements are. Or there are expat accounts but I haven't looked closely at how they work. Could I then get his pension diverted to that new account?  That would at least cover some costs  ( ie epc/ storage) I'd have thought the DWP would pay to a new account, as long as the person they're authorised to deal with asks them and provides details. The international pensions people in Newcastle are pretty helpful.
    • HB - he has certainly given me a challenge ! I set a plan in motion. A refinance plan that would have enabled me to take time to sell one asset and sort out another for him.   The bank account blockage has hindered the plan.  His partner seems to think I can do everything w/o paying anyone for anything.  I don't mind helping - but it's not normal to clear out 2 properties, organize storage or sale of possessions, get properties ready for sale/ rent - w/o being paid.  He has the money to pay for things and services - and for my help - but the blockage prevents that. If the refinance plan could still be actioned then at least I would have some time to sell one asset.  Could he/ his partner set up a new internet bank account?  In his name ? Could I then get his pension diverted to that new account?  That would at least cover some costs  ( ie epc/ storage)
    • Unrest has claimed the lives of 32 people, after a policy on government jobs sparked mass protests.View the full article
  • 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
      • 162 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

Lowell and Hamptons


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5029 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

I have previously posted about problems with lowell, see this thread. So I have sent them letters before asking for details of the debt, the debt is well over Statue Barred yet around this time every year I get a letter from some part of their group.

 

Todays letter is posted below,

 

scan0011-1.jpg

 

So this DCA has never ever answered any of my letters sent recorded delivery asking for proof of account and they simply ignore me for about 12 months to start again.

 

Any help and advice is appreiciated

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 74
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

If it's Statute Barred send them this http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/599-letter-sent-when-debt-is-statute-barred and if they continue to pursue complain to Trading Standards as they will be in breach of OFT guidelines, see page 9 http://www.oft.gov.uk/shared_oft/business_leaflets/consumer_credit/oft664.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Well this letter is now full of threats about charges against my property as a homeowner. they also sent me a statement of account today. This account is well over statue barred all letters sent to them by myself (recorded delivery) have been ignored and then a further 12 months down the line they start the ball rolling again.

 

scan0012.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

Both companies are known to chase statute barred debts, when will somebody wake up and realise the Debt Buyers and Sellers Group are villians and need closing down, all the directors should be barred from opening up other companies in the line and as for their pet 'solicitors for rent' there should be a special helpline set up where these abuses can be logged.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello! To continue the Lowells theme - can anyone explain to me why they would have searched my credit history at least TEN times in the past five months? The latest was 23 July (I had need to look at my credit report with Experian). Lowells have never sent me anything in writing, so clearly they haven't found what they think they're looking for. It's like they are lying in wait, ready to pounce! Is this quite a normal practice for this bunch of sleazeballs?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Report them to the Information Commissioners office and ask to have all the searches removed from your file, they will be doing this to make sure you have a low score and they are 'alerted' to any type of credit you are applying for, anything from a new mobile phone to a new fridge....

Link to post
Share on other sites

They did the same with my credit file & I don't have any debts let alone any association with those wassocks, unfortunately they are unrecorded searches otherwise I would have Andy's gonads on a plate but nevertheless I have made a complaint to the ICO.

 

Makes you think. There must be 40 millions plus credit records live on the CRA's database at the moment. Why make a search on a site team member of CAG ?

 

Is this a coincidence or do Lowells have access to your personal information?

 

I hope the ICO gets to the bottom of why the searches were made, as this does appear to be a clear breach of the DPA.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this a coincidence or do Lowells have access to your personal information?
I know more about them than they'll ever know about me. ;)

 

It's all to do with a financial association a bank registered on my credit file, an association which does not and has never existed and is now also subject to an ICO investigation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wheres James, He'll know what to do.......after all he does work for them.

 

50P bet that he will not respond to this thread,quite selective on which thread to post his wisdom on is james. and if he did would claim that he works for lowell and NOT hamptons.:lol::lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ten searches is way beyond any lowlife explanation, not even they could fabricate a valid response to that (even if not read by you) Complain to the ICO is a definite must..

 

50P bet that he will not respond to this thread,quite selective on which thread to post his wisdom on is james. and if he did would claim that he works for lowell and NOT hamptons.:lol::lol::lol:

 

And I thought he was a she? Although he/she still hasn't come back clarify this VERY IMPORTANT matter, of utmost URGENCY, you MUST respond this won't go away you know James/Samantha!!

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

Since my last note, I've re-read my report, and it's actually FOURTEEN searches they've made since February!! They're going to have to really impress me with a reason for that little lot! Thanks for the link, Bazooka, I'll have a good look.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've tried to have a look for the reference to carrying out so many searches on one account, as usual can't blooming find it, BUT, the people to make the complaint to is the ICO and the CRA for allowing, yet again, their bosom buddies to carry out so many unjustifiable searches, bloody scandalous.

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

Hear, hear, Bazooka! I've filled out the online form with ICO, ready to send off. I noted that on the Experian report it says that these numerous searches are not released to potential lenders, but I'm not convinced, I'm afraid. It doesn't excuse Lowell's behaviour, either. Clearly, the staff at Lowell have nothing better to do with their time! I wonder, too, if they do it just to be downright nosy - a former colleague used to go into the allegedly confidential personnel records and look up things about people when she was bored!! No one liked her, funnily enough......

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just sent off a letter of complaint to Lowell, asking why they have searched my record 14 times in the last 7 months, and asking them to stop doing it, or I will report them to the ICO (I've done that anyway!). I've asked them if they've confused themselves with a credit reference agency, and to reply within 7 days. My partner's not convinced that they'll cause us hassle, but I'm afraid I know better, so I'm prepared for some flak!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be very surprised if these undesirables will reply, they have to find someone who can read first!

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...