Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • is the home in joint names but this is solely your debt? need far more history to be able to comment if it's paid off and was not just written of by one partly on their books and sold to anther, thus the cra file says £0. dx
    • So, Sunak has managed to get someone to 'volunteer to go to Rwanda hasn't he? .. for just £3000 payment to the person plus 5 years free board and lodging isnt it? - cost to UK taxpayer over £300M+ (300 million quid+) isnt it? - Bargain says Rwanda, especially with all the profit we made privately selling those luxury chalets Bravermann advertised for us   I wonder how many brits would jump at that offer? Thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Lets see, up to 5 years free board and lodging and £3k in my pocket .. I'd go - and like that person - just come back if/when I get bored. First job - off to Botswana for a week to see the elephants.   Of course the paid volunteers going to Botswana are meaningless - Rwanda have REPEATEDLY said they wont take any forcibly trafficked people in breach of international law eh? Have the poops actually got any civil servants to agree to go yet - probably end up as more massive payments to VIPal contractors to go and sit there doing nowt shortly eh?    
    • Hi Wondered if I could get a little advise please. I entered into a commercial lease (3 years) and within a few months I had to leave as the business I was trading with collapsed. I returned the keys to the landlord and explained the situation and no money, also likely to go on benefits but the landlord stuck to their guns. They have now instructed solicitors to send letter before action claiming just over £4000. The lease was mine and so the debt. I know this. I have emailed the solicitors twice to explain I am out of work and that with help from family I could offer a full and final settlement figure of £1500 or £10pw. This was countered by them with an offer to reduce the debt by £400, or pay off the amount over 12 months. I went back with an improved full and final offer of £2500 or £20pw. This has been rejected with the comment 'papers ready to go to court'. I have no hope of paying the £4000 and so it will have to go to court. Pity as I have no debts otherwise but not working is a killer. I wondered if they take me to court, could I ask for mediation? I also think that taking me to court will result in a pretty much nothing per week payment from my benefits. Are companies just pushing ahead with action even if a better offer is on the table? Thanks for your help.
    • Hi all, Many thanks for the advice! Unfortunately, the reply to the email was as expected…   Starbucks UK Customer Care <[email protected]> Hi xxxxxx, We are sorry to read you received a parking charge after using our Stansted Airport - A120 DT store. Unfortunately, the car park here is managed by MET parking. Both Starbucks and EuroGarages who own and operate this site are not able to help and have no authority to overturn any parking charges received. If you have followed the below terms then you would need to send all correspondence to [email protected], who will be able to assist you further. Several signs around the car park clarify the below terms and conditions: • Maximum stay 60 minutes, whilst the store is open. If the store is closed, pay to park applies. • The car park is for Starbucks customers only who make a purchase in our store, a charge will be issued if you left the site. • If you had made a purchase and required additional time, you must have inputted your registration number into the in store iPad which would have extended your stay up to 3 hours • To park in a disabled bay, you must have displayed a valid disabled badge. • If Starbucks was closed, you must have paid for parking as charges still apply, following signage located on site. • If you didn’t use the store, you must have paid for parking, following signage located on site Please ensure all further correspondence is directed to MET parking at the above email address, and accept our apologies that we cannot help you further on this matter.  Kind Regards,  Lora K  Customer Care Team Leader Starbucks Coffee Company, Building 4 Chiswick Park, London, W4 5YE
    • Thanks HB edited and re-uploaded. Thanks for the heads up 👍
  • 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

barclaycard debt sold to Lowell - chasing BC debt


Hacked_Off
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3618 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

Claims would go to the Original Creditor. They will then almost certainly pay any amounts due directly to Lowell, and send you the balance if there is anything left over.

Any advice given is done so on the assumption that recipients will also take professional advice where appropriate.

 

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING

EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

DONATE HERE

 

If I have been helpful in any way - please feel free to click on the STAR to the left!

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 367
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

If the account has been assigned/sold then the original creditor is not permitted to repay any refunds to the new owner - 3rd party agency.

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

So we're do refunds go!? :s

 

As stated above. If the account is sold warts & all to another party then whatever you claim from the OC goes to you (although if you've got other accounts in debit with the same bank I think they can use the refund to go towards thoses other accounts) The OC may try it on and use any refund to set-off the amount owed to the new owners of the debt, but if that happens you have to educate the bank regarding the right of set-off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is something on the FOS website that explains the right of set off and that it cant be done if they have sold/assigned the account to a 3rd party :)

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

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is something on the FOS website that explains the right of set off and that it cant be done if they have sold/assigned the account to a 3rd party :)

 

So if a refund is obtained what happens to the full amount owing to the 3rd party?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if a refund is obtained what happens to the full amount owing to the 3rd party?

 

That's a good question. The amount "outstanding" would be including the unfair charges and PPI so could be deemed to now be inaccurate (as the figure is made up OF these unfair charges). However, if you were successful in having these charges and PPI payments refunded, then you've already effectively had the "discount" off this amount.

 

DCA claim you owe £2000. £1000 is unfair charges. You get £1000 back from OC. DCA still chase you for £2000, but you've had £1000 of that back.

 

Complex!

This space intentionally left blank

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a good question. The amount "outstanding" would be including the unfair charges and PPI so could be deemed to now be inaccurate (as the figure is made up OF these unfair charges). However, if you were successful in having these charges and PPI payments refunded, then you've already effectively had the "discount" off this amount.

 

DCA claim you owe £2000. £1000 is unfair charges. You get £1000 back from OC. DCA still chase you for £2000, but you've had £1000 of that back.

 

Complex!

 

 

 

Very complex!! I have similar with LTSB! I have an outstanding loan of just over £5,000. I made a claim for mis-sold PPI/charges on that account. My refund was £5,000+ but DCA are still chasing me for original £5,000.

 

As 100% of the original balance was made up of mis-sold PPI and charges, surely I didn't really owe it in the first place! Stay with me!! And I'm still being chased for the full amount.

 

I gave up months ago trying to understand the full implications, so have just offered to pay the DCA £1/month - sounds realistic and sustainable to me given that it's just a credit debt.

 

BTW, I originally refused LTSB's offer as "derisory" - verbally and in writing - but they still insisted on sending it to me. I accepted it as "part-payment" and now I'm looking for another £2-3K from them.

 

Such is life!

 

 

Impecunious! :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very complex!! I have similar with LTSB! I have an outstanding loan of just over £5,000. I made a claim for mis-sold PPI/charges on that account. My refund was £5,000+ but DCA are still chasing me for original £5,000.

 

As 100% of the original balance was made up of mis-sold PPI and charges, surely I didn't really owe it in the first place! Stay with me!! And I'm still being chased for the full amount.

 

I gave up months ago trying to understand the full implications, so have just offered to pay the DCA £1/month - sounds realistic and sustainable to me given that it's just a credit debt.

 

BTW, I originally refused LTSB's offer as "derisory" - verbally and in writing - but they still insisted on sending it to me. I accepted it as "part-payment" and now I'm looking for another £2-3K from them.

 

Such is life!

 

 

Impecunious! :-)

 

Mmmmm my balance is 390 of that I reckon about 200 is charged and ppi could be more though. Surely you could argue with the dca once a refund has been obtained x amount had been refunded leaving x amount to pay and make an offer of payment. Given that the dcas are always desperate to get you to pay are they likely to say no?

 

I'll get that sar off tomorrow :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets say you have a loan of £400, 200 in your hand and 200 to pay off charges. You dont pay on this so it is sold on to a dca. you then find that the charges were unlawful and claim them back the bank pay you £200.00 - you have now had the full £400 in your hand so the balance owing is the full £400.

 

You cant have the refund and have it deducted from the loan it is one or the other.

 

Would you have had a £400 loan in the first place since you only needed £200???? that is a whole different issue

 

just my opinion

HTH (Hope This Helps) RDM2006

 

THE FORCE (OF CAG) IS WITH YOU

;)

 

We've Helped You To Claim - Now Help Us Remain

A live Site - Make a Donation

 

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

However, if you have found any advice you have been given helpful.

Why not show your gratitude And

Click the * on the post you found helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The new owners of the debt will have purchased it from the OC for probably pennies in the £. Obviously they will want you to pay the full whack of the original balance but hold out and they will be offering huge discounts and still make a profit. It’s an interesting one as if the debt was made up entirely of charges which you have claimed back from the OC, it seems wrong for a 3rd party dca to make a profit on the back of the debt as if it wasn’t for the charges there wouldn’t have been any debt to sell on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My opinion was based purely on an accounting point of view.

 

would you have had that much debt if it wasnt for charges? - NO

 

Should you pay the **** bags the full amount? --- only you can decide....

HTH (Hope This Helps) RDM2006

 

THE FORCE (OF CAG) IS WITH YOU

;)

 

We've Helped You To Claim - Now Help Us Remain

A live Site - Make a Donation

 

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

However, if you have found any advice you have been given helpful.

Why not show your gratitude And

Click the * on the post you found helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely the OC is at fault selling on a debt knowing full well it's riddled with charges and mis sold ppi!! That would be an issue between OC and third party surely they've sold a debt on under false pretences. Mmmmm interesting.

 

Sar sent to OC anyway I'll be interested to see what both come back with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely the OC is at fault selling on a debt knowing full well it's riddled with charges and mis sold ppi!! That would be an issue between OC and third party surely they've sold a debt on under false pretences. Mmmmm interesting.

 

Sar sent to OC anyway I'll be interested to see what both come back with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But surely the OC is at fault selling on a debt knowing full well it's riddled with charges and mis sold ppi!! That would be an issue between OC and third party surely they've sold a debt on under false pretences. Mmmmm interesting.

 

Sar sent to OC anyway I'll be interested to see what both come back with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A debt can be sold at any time defaulted or not charges and PPI

included.

The ICO guidance says if a debt consists of charges without which

the debt would not have been defaulted no defaulted be recorded,

challenging in this way may get a default removed.

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

No.

 

They should not be collecting whilst the account is in dispute.

 

They can not send a collector without your prior agreement (OFT REGS)

 

Doorstep Collectors Letter

HTH (Hope This Helps) RDM2006

 

THE FORCE (OF CAG) IS WITH YOU

;)

 

We've Helped You To Claim - Now Help Us Remain

A live Site - Make a Donation

 

All advice and opinions given by people on this site are personal, and are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, please seek qualified professional legal Help.

 

However, if you have found any advice you have been given helpful.

Why not show your gratitude And

Click the * on the post you found helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing to stop them attempting to collect when

the debtor is waiting for a SAR even when waiting for a CCA

request they can attempt to collect but cannot enforce in court.

The subtle difference is between collction activity. attempting

to collect is NOT enforcement.

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

The inability of a DCA to receive payment of PPI/charges from a bank for debts/alleged debts they bought, makes for an interesting situation, especially in Scotland.

 

Once a debt/alleged debt becomes time barred five years after the last payment. Then the debtor/alleged debtor could then seek return of charges/PPI, and no one would own an enforceable debt to attempt to chase for the repayment.

 

It obviously applies elsewhere too - but to claim there are only six years of records in a five year jurisdiction, makes one year very difficult to deny/set off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 years only in Scotland when the debt is not only SB but completely

extinguished 6 year in England an Wales and the debt still exists.

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

Yes - I could have made the "Scotland" bit in the first paragraph clearer.

 

But can you see what I mean - effectively when the banks are claiming they only have six years of records, but can only pursue for 5 years.

 

So it looks like this could mean repayment for Scottish PPI/charges five years after the last date of payment (etc) could result in a repayment that could not be set off against a debt as it was extinguished.

 

Does anyone agree/disagree?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...