Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
        • Like
      • 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
        • Like
      • 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

Yet another Lowel l/ BW LEGAL (Stat Demand/Bankruptcy order). Help please!

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4146 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

I appear to have a debt of around £3500 to Littlewoods in 2007 which Lowell's have tried to collect. Yesterday I had a visit from a collector who handed me a Stat Demand for the amount in whole


This debt was in dispute in 2008 as I was not receiving my 'cash back' for items that were purchased. After repeated demands for these due amounts I warned them unless they paid back what they owe they would receive no more communication from me. Well they eventually reworked out the amount and applied that but it was still not the correct amount (they claimed they made a mistake initially, even though it was still wrong).


Well they continued to harass and not include the whole cash back amounts and eventually passed the debt around until Lowells finally issued the Stat Demand via a company called BG LEGAL yesterday. The debt had been passed with ALL the cash back now removed from my account, toally disregarding my legitimate requests.


I have written to BG LEGAL today with a £1 postal order (CCA request), I also contacted Lowell Portfolio and did a similar CCA request (overkill but I wanted to make sure they could not delay further). I also contacted Littlewoods (the original creditor) and sent off a SAR request and duly included the £10 fee. I sent all recorded with BG LEGAL contacted by special delivery (I have all tracking numbers).


I now need help with getting this set aside, I believe firmly they will not be able to provide the CCA, is this alone enough reason to get this set aside? Or do I go alongside the angle that this debt is in dispute as the cash back amounts were not correctly applied to my account? Also there are plenty of £12 charges against my account when I stopped paying due to the cash back saga. (I notified Littlewoods in 2008 via telephone that the debt was in serious dispute and they were in breach of contract).


Can someone also post a link to 6.4 and 6.5 as I want the latest version that I can hand into my local court that handle bankruptcy orders (the one named on the letter, does indeed)


Finally, the letter handed to me by the 'process server' did not contain the officer's name or details who handed me the Stat Demand, all the information on the first piece of paper was left blank so I cannot even tell if he is qualified to make this call and hand me the letter. Is this relevant?


Many thanks to anyone who can help, you lot are brilliant (long time lurker).


My main worry



I am a home owner but it is a joint mortgage with my fiancee. We have different surnames and this debt is only in my name, could they do something to our house or mortgage under these circumstances if, heaven forbid, they manage to win?


How long do they have to respond to the (sent today) CCA request? Will that time limit expire before my 18 days to get this set aside? Am i right in thinking they have 40 days for the SAR? Was this a waste of time?

Edited by Floydian
details added
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Hello Floydian and wecome to the CAG forums, I do like it when I see a situation like this where it has clearly been in dispute for some time without the slightest bit of remedy by the other side. The issuing of a demand where there is a clear and substantial dispute is a large shot across the bows in the way that debt collection agencies communicate with an original creditor, If Lowells have any common sense they will drop this like a stone.


You will be setting this aside due to a significant and unresolved dispute (do you still have any evidence of the dispute) (not a major issue as such but it helps) non production of the agreement, default charges, (PPI possibly ?)


You can find forms 6.4 and 6.5 here - http://www.bis.gov.uk/insolvency/About-us/forms/england-and-wales


Can you type up the particulars of the debt ? but please don't be too specific with exact amounts, exact dates etc.


As for the CCA requests / SAR you have covered all your bases (well done).


If you need help with the witness statement then please do ask. I would also beg you to forward this to the OFT too, and your local MP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As you know you have 18 days from the date the demand came into your hands to apply to set it aside. Once complete you can send it in (but you must do it recorded delivery) or you can take it in to your local court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you type up the particulars of the debt ? but please don't be too specific with exact amounts, exact dates etc.


Certainly, what information do you require (i'll not be specific as you mentioned). Im probably being a little dense here but I wanted to check I passed on helpful info to you.


I would indeed appreciate help filling in the forms. :-)


Thank you for getting back to me so quickly, I am scared they may go for our house, in all my communication with Littlewoods they just brushed me aside, never resolving my enquiries about the cash back on the purchases made previously.


Was the serving of papers done legitimately with no details of the serving officer in the notes (left blank).


Will the CCA be useful if they come back to me that they do not have it (which I am convinced they do not). How long do they have to respond to a CCA, is it 14 days?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There should be a box on the demand which states 'Particulars Of Debt / Claim'


If you get made bankrupt then you may lose your house.


Do you still have any of the correspondence from the original dispute ? if not then you would have to write in your witness statement 'on or about (date)'


As for the serving of the papers by a process server then you will find it will probably be a minor issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I can photocopy and redact personal information, thats not a problem, but on my 7 pages there are no boxes and no Particular of Debt / Claim.


There is :


1) A letter from BWLegal outlining the case warning me about the stat demand and telling me I can still ring them up and come to an arrangement. (They are willing to accept a 'realistic' settlement without BR.

2) The demand under Section 268 (1) (a) of the insolvency act 1986. Debt or Liquidated sum payable immediately. This includes a 'demand'.

3) There is then pages 1,2 and parts A, B and C

4) There are aso a few pages of rubbish which I should not have got, (including warnings to the staff who approach people's houses)


Which (any/all) do you require. Thank you so very much. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting so there are no particulars of debt !!! If you can scan / photo all the pages and post them up here (minus the personal information) then that would be great...


Here you go, anything you need to know that has been redacted let me know. Its interesting that the default date has moved forward to 2011 when it should be no later than 2009.


I think what you were looking at is on page two.


Edit - Not sure why the size of file has dropped :(

Link to post
Share on other sites






hopefully...... :)


(unable to post links - post count less that ten. If you can edit the post for me or grant me access it would be grand. :)

Edited by Floydian
Link to post
Share on other sites

There should be at least 4 pages - If it is this form - Statutory Demand under section 268(1)(a) of the Insolvency Act 1986. Debt for Liquidated Sum Payable Immediately


Then you can see here they have not served all of the demand on you (that is if you only have 3 pages. !! - (Form 6.1) http://www.bis.gov.uk/insolvency/About-us/forms/england-and-wales

Link to post
Share on other sites

Okies, here we go. Sorry I am unable to hyperlink these but it's a forum restriction of ten posts and I am not one to just post junk to circumvent rules. Just do a copy and paste job into your browser of choice.






LETTER TO STAFF (Some may find interesting, but has no real purpose to this)





















I have nothing else, in order, that was the whole thing (redacted obviously) that I was given.


Tasks done so far


Sent off a CCA to Lowells and BG LEGAL (DCA)

Sent off a SAR to Littlewoods (Shop Direct)


Smashing job, thank you for all help!

Edited by Floydian
Link to post
Share on other sites

For form 6.5


The defendant is disputing the alleged account


The account has been in dispute since XXXXX. (outline the dispute and make references to any telephone conversations if you don't know the exact dates then say 'on or around the (date)' Also make reference to any copies of letters that were exchanged at the time.


The defendant believes that the claimants use of a statutory demand is trite law and merely a tactic to frighten the defendant into paying and thereby frivolous, malicious and a gross abuse of the process. I believe the claimant will not turn up to court to defend this demand and it is the defendants contention that use of the insolvency laws as a debt collectionlink3.gif tool is an abuse of the Insolvency Rules.


The claimant has failed to provide a copy of the agreement despite a legal request made under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 (attachment 1 (will be your CCA request))




(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of £1, shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—


(a) the state of the account, and


(b) the amount, if any, currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and


© the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.



The Consumer Credit Act in section 78(6) States that


(6) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—


(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;



For the avoidance of doubt the 2006 Consumer Credit Act does not change the above legislation……


The Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Commencement No. 2 and Transitional Provisions and Savings) Order 2007 (No. 123 (C. 6))


1. This Order may be cited as the Consumer Credit Act 2006 (Commencement No.2 and Transitional Provisions) Order 2007.


2. In this Order “the 2006 Act” means the Consumer Credit Act 2006.


3. — (1) The provisions of the 2006 Act specified in Schedule 1 shall come into force on 31st January 2007.

(2) The provisions of the 2006 Act specified in Schedule 2 shall come into force on 6th April 2007.

Transitional Provisions

4. Subject to article 5, section 1 of the 2006 Act shall have no effect for the purposes of the 1974 Act, in relation to agreements made before 6th April 2007.


5. Section 1 of the 2006 Act shall have effect for the purposes of the definitions of “debtor” and “hirer” in section 189(1) of the 1974 Act wherever those expressions are used in—


sections 77A, 78(4A), 86A, 86B, 86C, 86D, 86E, 86F, 129(1)(ba) 129A, 130A and 187A of the 1974 Act;


section 143(b) of the 1974 Act in respect of an application under section 129(1)(ba) of that Act; and


section 185(2) to (2C) of the 1974 Act insofar as it relates to a dispensing notice from a debtor authorising a creditor not to comply in the debtor's case with section 77A of that Act,

in relation to agreements made before 6 April 2007.




  1. As the creditor has not provided the credit agreement Wilson v First County Trust Ltd [2003] UKHL 40 states that:
    ‘….the effect of the failure to comply with the requirements of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 was that the entire agreement ………….. was unenforceable. The statutory bar on its enforcement extended to First County Trusts's right to recover the total sum payable on redemption, which included the principal as well as interest[.’








The claimant has failed to provide any copies of any valid default notices as required under the Consumer Credit Act.


The claimant has failed to provide any deeds or notices of assignment.


The claimant has failed to provide any statements for the duration of the agreement (as in Phoenix vs Kotecha)




The Need for a Default notice


  • Notwithstanding the above, it is also drawn to the courts attention that no default notice required by s87 (1) Consumer Credit act 1974 has been provided


  • It is denied that any Default Notice in the prescribed format was ever received and the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that said document in the prescribed format was delivered to the defendant


  • Notwithstanding the above points, I put the claimant to strict proof that any default notice sent to me was valid. I note that to be valid, a default notice needs to be accurate in terms of both the scope and nature of breach and include an accurate figure required to remedy any such breach. The prescribed format for such document is laid down in Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1561) and amendment regulations the Consumer Credit (Enforcement, Default and Termination Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2004 (SI 2004/3237)


  • Service of a default notice is a statutory requirement as laid out in sections 87,88 and 89 Consumer Credit Act 1974. Section 87 makes it clear that a default notice must be served before a creditor can seek to terminate the agreement or demand repayment of sums due to a breach of the agreement. therefore without a valid default notice, I suggest the claimants case falls flat and cannot proceed and to do so is clearly contrary to the Consumer Credit Act 1974


  • Failure of a default notice to be accurate not only invalidates the default notice (Woodchester Lease Management Services Ltd v Swain and Co - [2001] GCCR 2255) but is a unlawful rescission of contract which would not only prevent the court enforcing any alleged debt, but give me a counter claim for damages Kpohraror v Woolwich Building Society [1996] 4 All ER 119


The claimant has failed to provide any details of any potentially missoldlink3.gif insurance that may have been added to the agreement.


The defendant avers that some debts are made up entirely of charges and / or potentially missold personal protection insurance.


It is averred that the Claimant has failed to serve a Notice of Assignment in accordance with section 136(1), of the Law of Property Act 1925, in respect of the alleged debt. The amount detailed in the Claimant’s claim, which is likely to include penalty charges, which are unlawful at Common Law, Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Company Ltd v New Garage and Motor Company Ltd [1915], under The Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 and The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999. Accordingly, the inclusion of penalty charges in the purported Notice of Assignment renders it entirely legally unenforceable. The Claimant has failed to comply with section 136(1) of the Law of Property Act 1925, by furnishing a Notice of Assignment in respect of that which is denied, that is inaccurate, W.F.Harrison and Co Ltd v Burke [1956].


The defendant also wishes to make known the statutes in the Consumer Protection From Unfair Tradinglink3.gif Regualtions 2008, and believes that the alleged creditor is in multiple breach of statute


Offences relating to unfair commercial practices. A trader is guilty of an offence if he engages in a commercial practice which is a misleading action under regulation 5 otherwise than by reason of the commercial practice satisfying the condition in regulation 5(3)(b).


Which clearly state...


Misleading actions


5.—(1) A commercial practice is a misleading action if it satisfies the conditions in either paragraph (2) or paragraph (3).

(3) A commercial practice satisfies the conditions of this paragraph if—

(b)it concerns any failure by a trader to comply with a commitment contained in a code of conduct which the trader has undertaken to comply with, if—

(i)the trader indicates in a commercial practice that he is bound by that code of conduct,


Interpretation2.—(1) In these Regulations—“average consumer” shall be construed in accordance with paragraphs (2) to (6);“business” includes a trade, craft or profession;“code of conduct” means an agreement or set of rules (which is not imposed by legal or administrative requirements), which defines the behaviour of traders who undertake to be bound by it in relation to one or more commercial practices or business sectors;“code owner” means a trader or a body responsible for—(a)the formulation and revision of a code of conduct; or(b)monitoring compliance with the code by those who have undertaken to be bound by it;


“trader” means any person who in relation to a commercial practice is acting for purposes relating to his business, and anyone acting in the name of or on behalf of a trade


The defendant refers to the Code Of Conduct stated by the Credit Service Association of which Lowells are a member -

The code of conduct clearly states


q) Where a debt or the sum owed is disputed, as

soon as is practicable, supply information to the

debtor in support of the claim. Where no

information has been supplied by the creditor,

obtain the required support, or failing that cease

collection action.


b) Adhere to all relevant requirements under the

Consumer Credit Act 2006 and any other

relevant legislation.




e. When seeking to recover a debt, failing to take appropriate steps with a view to ensuring that available data/information to inform the pursuit and recovery of a debt is accurate and adequate, such that the debtor and the (amount of the) debt can be correctly identified from that data/information


• a person being pursued for an incorrect amount.


f. failing to ensure that an accurate and adequate history of the debt is passed between parties, as appropriate and necessary


n. making undue, excessive or otherwise inappropriate use of statutory demands when pursuing arrears or debts




a) Conduct its business lawfully, comply with

all relevant UK legislation, regulation

and judicial decisions and trade fairly and



Comply with this Code of Practice and

follow any guidance notes issued by the

Board of the Association


Comply with

debt collectionlink3.gif Guidance as

Published by the Office of Fair Trading

In light of the above evidence, the defendant gracefully requests the Judge dismisses the demand and orders the claimant to pay my full costs + compensation (either in the standard or in the indemnity) in light of the distress and upset this has caused myself and my family.


In support of this I quote –


Hammonds (a firm) v Pro-Fit USA Ltd [2007] EWHC 1998 (Ch)

So far as disputed debts are concerned, the practice of the court is not to allow the insolvency regime to be used as a method of debt collectionwhere there is a bona fide and substantial dispute as to the debt. Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner). Save in exceptional cases, the court will dismiss a petition based on such a debt (usually with an indemnity costs order against the petitioner).

I believe the facts herewith in this form are true.

Edited by 42man
Link to post
Share on other sites



I have enough time to wait for the CCA request to fail before I fill this out, should I?


I also note that on my credit report the littlewoods debt is marked as settled with lowells defaulting me in the end of 2011 (maybe when they purchased the debt) with just one month marked as DEFAULT. The original account was defaulted in 2007.


Obviously they are hoping to roll forward the default so it does not become statute barred next year.

Edited by Floydian
Link to post
Share on other sites

for 6.4 asks for a date (but not a time !!) It is the date you filled out the form... - http://www.bis.gov.uk/insolvency/About-us/forms/england-and-wales


Sorry, never filled out a court document in 38 years!


I'll let you know how I get on, still no reply to cca request.


Is it an automatic win if they fail?



Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...