Lowells newest SB tactic

[spamheed]

I have noticed on the latest batch of begging letters from the Leeds Losers, that they state that "we have addressed your query"

 

At first I thought nothing of this, however this old mobile debt becomes Statute Barred in the next Month or four and I wonder if this is some kind of p!$$ poor pre-emptive tactic to try to circumvent the whole SB argument, without the obvious pitfalls of the usual phantom payment scenario.

 

ie. they have resolved a query on YOUR account therefore you must have acknowledged the account in some way.

 

Obviously they would still be required to provide evidence of such a written query, but this would be much easier to fabricate (allegedly) than a historical payment

[citizenB]

Yes, they would be required to prove that they had indeed "addressed your query"

[sequenci]

And further to that they would need to prove unequivocal admission of liability, in writing.

[BRIGADIER2JCS]

Taking a leaf out of Transcms book, stating not under LA1980 before SB is mentioned.

[lookinforinfo]

I expect they will next come out with "we have addressed your query even if not read by you".

[babybear39]

Hiya

 

This might be a bit of a help:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?375220-BB-v-Mackenzie-Hall-Arrow-Global-and-CAML...(15-Viewing)-nbsp

[babybear39]

I expect they will next come out with "we have addressed your query even if not read by you".

That old classic... LMFAO!!!

[42man]

Can you scan and post up the letter (minus personal details) ?

[babybear39]

The OP can if they wish but I will not until given assurance re my message to you...xxx

[spamheed]

I have no issues in dealing with this, they, in their many carnations have sent dozens of letters over the years and have never had so much as a button out of me and never shall they.

 

This came from one of the infamous Three mobile accounts, trying to take payments after the contract had ended and been terminated, I told them when I received the very first letter that they had bought a dud, but they wouldn't listen, I still have the original bills showing the final payments and letters from Three demanding less than Lowells. They would be on a costly hiding to nowt if they took this further and they know it. so they keep on sending the threatograms, but now with a slight change from the usual alleged phantom payment miraculously preventing the alleged debt becoming Statute Barred.

 

it does become SB in a short while, hence their hiking up the number of letters, emails and texts, but as I've never hidden, they have had every chance to take me to court and declined each opportunity.