Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I re-read the extract from your  solicitor's letter this morning and think I might understand what they have in mind. I believe (and it’s only a guess) their strategy is this: 1.    You will make your SD 2.    You will enter fresh pleas to the four charges (not guilty) but will offer to plead guilty to speeding on the understanding that the FtP charges are dropped. 3.    If this is accepted they will attempt to argue that the two offences were committed “on the same occasion” 4.    You will be sentenced for those two offences (the sentence depending on whether the “same occasion” argument succeeds). They also have a plan in the event that your offer at (2) is unsuccessful and you are convicted again of the 2xFtP charges (and so face disqualification under “totting up”): 5.    They will make an “exceptional hardship” argument to avoid a ban. 6.    If that is unsuccessful they have already lodged an appeal in the Crown Court against that decision. (This is the only “appeal” I can think of). 7.    They plan to ask the court to suspend your ban pending that appeal. If I’m correct, I’m surprised the Crown Court has agreed to accept a speculative appeal (against something that hasn’t happened). The solicitor says this is to lodge it within the normal timescales. But you will have 21 days from the date of your conviction (which will be next Wednesday) to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court, so there is no need for a speculative appeal. I have to say that an application to have your ban suspended pending an appeal is unlikely to succeed. The Magistrates Court is unlikely to agree to it for one very good reason: if they make such an order (suspending your ban until your appeal is heard), all you need to do is not to pursue the appeal and the Magistrates order suspending your ban will remain in place. Hey Presto! No ban and no need for you to trouble with an appeal. Perhaps he will ask for your ban to be suspended for (say) three months or until your appeal is heard (whichever occurs first). This potentially creates a problem because if your appeal is not heard in that time either your ban will kick in or you will have o go back to court to get the suspension extended. But the solicitor obviously knows more about these things than I do. I would want to be very clear about this solicitor’s fees and what he proposes to charge you for. As I said, there is absolutely no need to lodge an appeal with the Crown Court. That can be done if and when it becomes required. But I am still firmly of the opinion that it is overwhelmingly likely that you will not need to progress beyond point 2 above. Point 3 is optional and I don’t know whether he solicitor has made It clear to you that the only thing you will avoid in the event of success is three penalty points. You will still be fined for the second offence and your driving record will still be endorsed with the details, but no penalty points will be imposed. Do let us know how it goes.  
    • I'm really trying, but worst case I can't find what are my options?
    • John Lewis' Privacy Notice states that their CCTV Systems does not use facial recognition or collect biometric data - so I assume it should be fine?    Thank you a lot for your reply. I've scheduled my first therapy session ne t week. Really the time to turn my life around..
    • absolute rubbish, whomever told you that lied to make them sound important. no stores are using face recognition, they are not allowed too it's not been generally licenced by the gov't. it's only in a very few stores in central london. and they most certainly would never waste staff time searching old CCTV they dont even have. it should be wiped by GDPR laws etc after 30days. if you get any silly letters BIN THEM. go see your GP ASAP 
    • Thank you both so much for the reply. I am worried because they told me they have face detection systems in place, that they go back through the CCTV from their other stores and find out I've shoplifted from them before. How likely is this? Also they did not mention anything about DWF solicitors or retail loss prevention. Should I still expect a letter from them? 
  • 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

Harrassed by Lowell - Debt not mine


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3957 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

What rubbish, your only commitment was to allow payment to be made via your account without personal liability another but stronger letter 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

  • Replies 242
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Is there any reason why they are not pursuing your daughter ?

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

I believe they have tried that and Lowell are now abusing the agreement made that the account would be used to ''service'' with the account without any liability on the OP.

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 believe they have tried that and Lowell are now abusing the agreement made that the account would be used to ''service'' with the account without any liability on the OP.

 

Think I would make a formal complaint to Lowell regarding breaches of the Data Protection Act. If Lowells have files that show that Foggy is the debtor then this is incorrect and a breach of the DPA. If Lowells don't correct their records, then a complaint can be made to the ICO.

 

I wonder whether there is a basis to make a small claims court case against Lowell ?

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

There is at the present little to make a case with certainty, furthermore I think a further attempt at resolution on the basis of why the account was originally opened is the best way. forward.

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,

Just a quick question, Is having the Petition for Bankruptcy Dismissed the same as having it Annulled. If you remember I was made Bankrupt whilst at Jury Service and I applied to have it set aside because I had sought the Courts permission to attend Jury Service before hand.

 

I think there is a difference, but no expert. Dismissal meant no grounds for the petition, as you were not the debtor. Annullment meant that there may have been grounds for it, but for reasons accepted, the petition has been made void. Just my amateur reading and hopefully someone more legally aware will answer.

 

Why did Lowells agree to pay the costs, if everything they did was in order ? I may be wrong, but their strategy appears to be one of damage limitation, following a mistake. If you think about it, if any DCA tried to make a third party bankrupt, they are not likely to admit to making such a mistake. It would be very embarrasing. You could imagine the media coverage with headlines such as " Debt collector makes Dad bankrupt for the debts of his Daughter ". So they would try to find a way of dealing with it, by suggesting that the Dad had opened the account using the Daughters details. As long as they kept to the line of believing this was the case, in some peoples eyes it might seem to justify the actions taken.

 

Why did the payments stop ? Did Lowells stop taking the DD from your account ? Perhaps they stopped, given that the court appeared to accept that the debt was not yours. They would not want to continue processing a debt in your name, with your payments, when a court has accepted it is not your debt.

 

I wonder whether it is now a case of your Daughter offering to continue the payments in writing and if they don't take it up, then they are no longer interested in the debt.

 

Have you and your daughter checking credit records to see if this debt is showing ?

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

Hello,

I feel Lowell are accusing me of fraud in a thinly veiled way. Their Barrister did the same thing before we went into one of the hearings and when I told the Judge she backtracked and denied having said it.

I see Stephen Hunter has left so they are stabbing in the dark. Strange but I always got the feeling he would not collect the payments.He knew Lowell had come close to a compensation pay out hence the offer from Lowell of paying all the costs incurred.

I still have his e mails and I always stressed on my replies that the debt was not mine.They are saying that because I acknowledge the debt with the first payment of £50 through my account that makes me responsible. I have in writing from Stephen Hunter the arrangement and that I would be using my account on behalf of my Daughter.

How strong can I make my reply to them I will contact OFT and have this latest debacle added to my original case with them.

Thank you

Foggy123

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel you are right because they are quoting annulment in their correspondence and it clearly says dismissed on my Court summing up. I will clarify it with the Court.

Thank you

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ha you are right. When I tried to contact the OFT by telephone there is a recording saying if your complaint is re Debt Collecting that they are inundated and there will be a delay in their response. What a surprise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Foggy

 

They are just covering their *sses, as they have gone down a road of believing one thing and there is no evidence to support this. Their last email to you was libelous, if you can show that it is untrue, but they know that you would never take action. Plus you have added the email to a public internet forum, so would have a weak case anyway.

 

If Lowells are still chasing this debt, the debt is still owed by your daughter and Lowells already have this admission, then I would think it may be wise for your daughter to make an offer of payment in writing. Then it puts it back in Lowells hands to decide whether they want to collect payments or not. If they were still silly enough to go back to court, then you would have a letter of evidence which offers payment, by the person who had the contract with the original creditor. If your daughter decides to do this, then send by recorded delivery.

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

I think they are not pursuing my daughter because if they accepted that the account is hers they would be pursuing a statute barred debt.The account is now eight years old, and had it been mine, well yes they were in there rights to pursue, because they started proceedings before the Debt became statute barred. If they now started to Pursue my daughter they would be pursuing a statute barred debt.We have always been willing to settle this debt amicably but have been blocked by Lowell to make payments in my daughters name.Although I was criticised in Court for my attempt at defending myself the Judge thought me honest and that I was speaking the truth. Which I was. An e mail from Lowells saying we have made a mistake and we have not been collecting your daughters payments I would have responded by sending the Bank information again but no they have started accusing and threatening me again and as a result any good will has been crushed. If I give my permission now for a third party to pay this debt I would be making myself responsible for a debt that is not mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case, if they have no evidence this debt is yours and the debt is statute barred for your daughter, then each time they wrote, I would get your daughter to respond with a statute barred response. Perhaps your daughter should write to Lowells stating what her charges are for responding to letters and that she will issue a small court claim against them to recover such charges if they continue, as well as a formal complaint to the OFT. If you remember there was a recent case, where a chap who kept receiving unsolicitor calls invoiced a company involved and won in court.

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

I think they are not pursuing my daughter because if they accepted that the account is hers they would be pursuing a statute barred debt.The account is now eight years old, and had it been mine, well yes they were in there rights to pursue, because they started proceedings before the Debt became statute barred. If they now started to Pursue my daughter they would be pursuing a statute barred debt.We have always been willing to settle this debt amicably but have been blocked by Lowell to make payments in my daughters name.Although I was criticised in Court for my attempt at defending myself the Judge thought me honest and that I was speaking the truth. Which I was. An e mail from Lowells saying we have made a mistake and we have not been collecting your daughters payments I would have responded by sending the Bank information again but no they have started accusing and threatening me again and as a result any good will has been crushed. If I give my permission now for a third party to pay this debt I would be making myself responsible for a debt that is not mine.

 

Hi Foggy,

 

I been mulling over this thread and perhaps come up with another challenge to Lowell, want to reads it all again then I'll post something here.

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

If you get your bankruptcy annulled then under the slip rule you go back to the original hearing of the petition. Getting the petition dismissed there is no return to another stage as the demand falls away also.

 

42man, if you get a chance, can you have a read of this thread and possible offer some wisdom on any steps that could be taken. Personally I think that Lowells want to drop this, as they have made a mistake. There is no basis for Foggy to make payments, as he is not the debtor and there is no proof otherwise. According to Foggy, they can't go after his daughter the real debtor, as she has not made any repayments or acknowledgement for more than 6 years. If this is the case, then this debt is dead and nothing that Lowell can do about it.

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

Hello,

Thank you all so much, I have replied to Lowells with a very strong letter, which your comments have helped me to do. I am in the process of reopening my case with the OFT. Its nothing short of scandalous Lowells handling of this case and I intend to take it as far as possible now.

I will keep you informed and thank you again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Hello,

Just a quick update.

 

I received an e-mail from Lowell on Friday thanking me for my patience and that it was taking them longer to complete the investigation

and as it had exceeded the eight weeks deadline that I was entitled to go to The Financial Ombudsman but they trust that wouldn't be necessary

 

.I forwarded my complaint to the Ombudsman on Saturday and then informed Lowell of my decision.

 

I am awaiting a response from the Ombudsman I believe they can act if you have been treated unfairly.

 

I think I qualify for that so we will see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lowells in deep doo!

 

Up to their grubby necks imo:madgrin:

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

If the FOS have not accepted the complaint, I think they might reject dealing with it, because elements of the matter have been in a court. Once a court has been involved, the FOS don't like dealing with complaints. I hope that they don't do this, but recently I have been hearing that the FOS have been rejecting complaints at an early stage. I suppose they are trying to avoid sitting on a complaint for months and then saying they can't deal with them.

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

I'm finding the FCA far more pro-active than all the other regulatory bodies.

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

Just read this thread from start to finish, sad to see Lowells have not changed in the 5 1/2 years since I joined the CAG.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...