Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I'm afraid that I think that as you've assembled the chair and you are unable to return it into its saleable condition, then you probably have a problem. I don't think you could take advantage of the distance selling rules in those circumstances and that means that the seller would be entitled to apply conditions to the return of the item. If that's the case then you only fall back is that the item was defective if you find that there is something wrong with it which is preventing its disassembly. On the other hand, this itself raises an interesting issue. Does a chair become of unsatisfactory quality because you can't take it apart and put it in a box? From the sounds of it, the sellers terms and conditions that there is a restocking fee for the return of an online sale even if it is within the 14 day period, seems to me to be quite unenforceable but on the basis of what you say, that issue doesn't arise here because you are unable to put the chair back into its saleable condition and it's not clear that the chair is defective - 
    • Hi everyone, I'm in need of some urgent advice please. Apologies for the long post - I felt it was better to provide all the information clearly at the outset.   I purchased an office stool (that cost £104.39) online, which was delivered on 18th May. After assembling the stool, I found it wasn't suitable for me, so contacted the seller on 27th May to initiate a return.    The seller told me that there would be a "£24.95 handling charge" for returning the item. He quoted the terms and conditions from their website to back this up (please see below), although this is confusing because 35% of £104.39 does not equal £24.95: "Please note that furniture items are subject to a 35% restocking fee. Furniture returns will only be accepted if the item is unused and still in the original packaging. All furniture returns must be made within 14 days of delivery."   I told the seller that, under the Consumer Contract Regulations, the trader cannot charge any fees in the event of cancellation. The response was: "If you not happy to pay for the collection charge for us to arrange this with a courier to uplift then you can send this back to our office directly arranging your own courier, please note we would not cover the cost if this is the case."    I agreed to this, because from my reading of the CCR I thought that the customer was responsible for return delivery:  (5) The consumer must bear the direct cost of returning goods under paragraph (2), unless— (a)the trader has agreed to bear those costs, or (b)the trader failed to provide the consumer with the information about the consumer bearing those costs, required by paragraph (m) of Schedule 2, in accordance with Part 2. Also, from getting quotations online I thought I could arrange delivery, for what was at the time a smallish box, for a much cheaper price (£7-8).   However, when I tried to disassemble the stool for return, it would not come apart. I contacted the manufacturer for further guidance, but the only how-to video they had available was not applicable to the model, and the manufacturer representative was unable to provide further instructions.   I have now been sent a 'built box' to return the stool without the need to disassembly. The issue is that the size of the box means that shipping charges are now £30 minimum i.e. more than the 'handling charge' the seller quoted.    Am I obliged to pay this return fee, or should this actually be something the seller should pay for? 🤔 I feel like I may have two potential arguments against it: Return delivery would not be nearly so expensive if the stool had come apart as the manufacturer said it should.  The Consumer Contract Regs state that a consumer is not responsible for return shipping if the trader has not provided information about the right to cancel and about return shipping on a durable medium.    What even counts as a durable medium? The dispatch note that came with the stool had no such information, while the order confirmation email simply had a link to their terms and conditions (which includes the statement about the restocking fee quoted above).   Does this clause mean the seller is still obliged to pay return shipping? Any advice would be greatly appreciated! I'm starting to stress a little about this because the 28-day cancellation-and-return period will be in two working days (although I realise that may be extended if it can be considered that the seller did not provide the required cancellation information).    Thank you in advance!  
    • so what you mean is that "each" parcel contained a single dinner plate. Thank you that clarifies things. As you been advised by my site team colleague, please make sure that you read around a substantial number of the Hermes stories on the sub- forum. You will get to understand the principles and also the similarities and approach from Hermes. Of course Hermes is being abusive of the system because they exploit a taxpayer funded under resourced justice system simply to put their customers into a kind of triage where only the most persistent finally get through to the end which is almost always – mediation – and then will manage to get their money or most of their money. Hermes are abusive of this system and of course they are actually going to spend more money than the value of your damaged items trying to smash you down. Because their attempts to crush you are effectively subsidised by the taxpayer, they don't really care. Make sure you understand what they will say about the prohibited items list because your plates are made of china or porcelain and will be prohibited items, according to Hermes. On the other hand, they were correctly declared and they were accepted for delivery. The values were correctly declared – and once again after you have completed your reading, you will understand the significance of this. Hermes will also try to say that you didn't have a contract with them and you should sue packlink – who conveniently – are based in Spain outside the jurisdiction. They were say that you are attacking the wrong people. Once again, when you have completed your reading you will understand the standard reply to this. Once again you will discover that this is Hermes being abusive of the system and misleading their customers as to what their rights are. Make a formal complaint to Hermes. Tell them that they are responsible. Don't give them a deadline, but wait a reasonable time – 10 to 14 days – after which you will send them a letter of claim if they haven't put their hands up by then or if you have had no response. By that time, you will have done enough reading to understand the way it goes but we will advise you and support you all the way.   Come back here when you have been knocked back by Hermes and we will take you through the next step  
    • @BankFodder is this ok to send to all contacts at aviva regarding the final notification debt letter theyve sent   I received your correspondence regarding the notice of debt dated 8th June received 12th June giving me 7 days to make payment. I don’t owe this money and the policy was taken out by my brother by a fraud in which you were complicit. The police are aware I have a crime reference number 1XXXXX this fraud is being investigated by PC XX, she will be emailing yourselves I give full authorisation for her to discuss any aspects of this case with yourselves.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

Egg / Lowell - *** Lowell Bite The Dust Again - Debt Is Statute Barred - SUCCESS ***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2535 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

Hi can anyone give me some advice please, I have been in dispute with Egg PLC since 2007, The dispute is over an alleged loan and credit cards, to cut a long story short Egg PLC have assigned/ sold my alleged debt to Lowell Portfolio 1, my question is, is this legal whilst the account was in dispute?

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I think the commitment not to sell a debt in dispute exists only in the Banking Code, and is not a point of law. The closest I know of is the Consumer Credit Act of 1974, where it becomes a legal matter to continue demanding payment if you cannot provide details of the debt.

 

Basically the CCA (1974) stipulates that a lender cannot sell a debt whilst the account is in dispute, its all linked through s.10 of the CCA which is a cease & desist instruction that means the lender cannot do much whilst the debt is queried, i.e. in dispute.

 

....................................................................................................................

 

 

This account is now formally placed into dispute and you should 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 from my records with the three (3) 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 then I expect that this means you agree to remove all such data.

 

Furthermore you should be aware that a creditor is not permitted to take ANY action against an account whilst it remains in dispute. The farcical way in which I’ve been treated gives a clear basis for 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;

* Any payment previously made should be refunded immediately;

* 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.

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi maroondevo52, I use the template which cerberusalert sent, or should I just use the information you outlined in the post,

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have already informed Egg that you dispute the a/c just send the letter in post #2 to Lowells.

Anthrax alert at debt collectors caused by box of doughnuts

 

Make sure you do not post anything which identifies you. Although we can remove certain things from the site unless it's done in a timely manner everything you post will appear in Google cache & we do not have any control over that.

 

Vir prudens non contra ventum mingit

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

17 Port & Maritime Regiment RCT

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 months later...

I have been dealing with the above issue with lowell, but the keep ignoring my requests, they keep refering to the letter of assignment they sent, which they say is sufficient to make the sale of the alledged debt effective under the law of property act 1925, but as i mentioned above, my account with egg plc was in dispute when it was sold to egg,

please can anyone advise me.

 

Regards

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lowell's are complete idiots and chancers.

 

They are well aware of the proper procedures and ignore them as their standard practice.

 

They will not take any notice of any of your letters, I know because I been in the same situation.

 

If they bought a debt that is in dispute then the joke is on them as it's a lemon, if they have been assigned to collect, then just let them waste their time and paper.

 

Send them the letter above and go and have a coffee with a big smile on your face.

 

Lowell's are a running joke and should be treated with utter contempt!

 

(waves to Lowell's, and blows kisses)

 

RI

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank RI, they really are a bunch of twits, This account has been in dispute since 2007, if they had all the information they said they had, then I don't think that they would just be sending me letters, surely they would have taken it to court by now?

Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said, Lowell's are complete chancers!

 

They can't take anyone to court as 99% of debts they get their grubby hands on are unenforcable or Staute Barred.

 

I would say yours is unenforcable and close to being Statute Barred!

 

As long as you have got proof that you have placed the account in dispute with Egg in 2007 then tell Lowell's to 'Feck Off' and ignore their drivel.

 

Also, make sure you report them to the OFT etc.

 

Don't even waste your time opening their letters!

 

They really are the Loosers From Leeds!

 

(big hugs to guests!)

 

RI

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

Hello again, it's been over 2 years since I last posted, on Friday I had a letter from Lowell requesting payment for the alleged debt, can anyone tell me when an account becomes statue barred and what does it mean,

Regards

Yoker

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi yorker,

 

A debt will be "Statute Barred" if there has been no acknowledgement of the debt by you making a payment or in writing within the relevant limitation period.

The debt would then be legally unenforceable.

 

If you are in England/Wales then the limitation period is 6 years and in Scotland 5.

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

How are you doing, long time no see, I take it this 'debt' does not show on your credit file.

 
 

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes fresh credit checks are needed.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

What am I looking for in the credit history, no payments have been made for over 6 years, Lowell purchased the alleged debt in 2009 and I have never acknowledged the alleged debt with them, then I took your advice 2 years ago and all went quiet till now, is the default date that last time any payment was made ? or will Lowell of tried something underhand ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly the latter which is why you need to check your file. Trust them at your peril.

Default date is roughly when you started to miss payments, if it's not on your file then it's probably SB and I'd tell them to prove it isn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all and thank you again for your help, I have checked my credit file and the alleged dept accounts are closed, and have been closed since 2008, the odd thing is that each alleged account has two entries, one with a £0 balance and satisfied and one with the alleged outstanding amount, but all are showing closed, my credit record doesn't show any open credit accounts ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good morning, Maroondevo asked me to look in again.

 

My thinking is that LOWELL were not the ' first new owner' of the debt, more than possible because debt is sold in bulk lots and debt purchasers will sell on some of a portfolio.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello again, I have a letter from Egg stating that they have sold the alleged dept to Lowell and a letter from Lowell stating that they had purchased the debt, but the the dates do not match what is on my credit report, (18 months wrong)

Egg never informed me that the dept had been sold to anyone else and only to Lowell, my credit report shows the following information. Card 1 - opening balance £0 - closing balance £0 - ( S )The account has been satisfactorily closed Jan 2008 - then the details are duplicated and an opening balance of £0 and a default balance of £x is shown but account is closed - closed date jan 2008 ( D ) A notice of default has been served. This usually arises from non-payment.

Default was applied ofter 2 missed payments, both accounts show CLOSED on my credit report.

Hope this helps

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lowell have yet to update files it seems, it matters not now when Lowell acquired the accounts (s). Just as long as the default dates remain those shown on the original CRA files, so check any new CRA entries ON ALL 3 main agencies.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have used checkmyfile.com is this ok or should I check the individual companies, does it make any difference that the accounts are shown as closed and not active/ open

Link to post
Share on other sites

CMF is using 2nd hand data so may not be up to date.

Experian and or Equifax will give better results.

All you are looking for now is entries by Lowell.

Any Letters I Draft are N0T approved by CAG and no personal liability is accepted.

Please Consider making a donation to keep this site running!

Nemo Mortalium Omnibus Horis Sapit: Animo et Fide:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...