Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks FTMDave, I like the cut of your jib - I'll go with that and obtain proof of postage. Encouraging that NPE have never followed through and seem to blowing hot air, let's see where they go after this   Regards
    • Please see my comments in orange within your post.
    • no i meant the email from parcel2go which email address did they send it from and who signed it off (whos name is at the bottom)
    • I understand confusion with this thread.  I tried to keep threads separate because there have been so many angles.    But a team member merged them all.  This is why it's hard to keep track. This forum exists to help little people fight injustice - however big or small.  Im here to try get a decent resolution. Not to give in to the ' big boys'. My "matter' became complicated 'matters' simply because a lender refused to sell a property. What can I say?  I'll try in a nutshell to give an overview: There's a long lease property. I originally bought it short lease with a s.146 on it from original freeholder.  I had no concerns. So lender should have been able to sell a well-maintained lovely long lease property.  The property was great. The issue is not the property.  Economy, sdlt increases, elections, brexit, covid, interest hikes etc didn't help.  The issue is simple - the lender wanted to keep it.   House or Flat? Before repo I offered to clear my loan.  I was a bit short and lender refused.  They said (recorded) they thought the property was worth much more and they were happy to keep accruing interest (in their benefit) until it reached a point where they felt they could repo and still easily quickly sell to get their £s back.  This was a mistake.  The market was (and is) tough.   2y later the lender ceo bid the same sum to buy the property for himself. He'd rejected higher offers in the intervening period whilst accruing interest. Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same. I had the property under offer to a fantastic niche buyer but lender rushed to repo and buyer got spooked and walked.  It had taken a long time to find such a lucrative buyer.  A sale which would have resulted in £s and another asset for me. Post repo lender had 1 offer immediately.  But dragged out the process for >1y - allegedly trying to get other offers. But disclosure shows there was only one valid buyer. Again, points as above. Lender appointed receiver (after 4 months) - simply to try acquire the freehold.  He used his powers as receiver to use me, as leaseholder, to serve notice on freeholders.  Legally that failed. Meanwhile lender failed to secure property - and squatters got in (3 times).  And they failed to maintain it.  So freeholders served a dilapidations notice (external) - on me as leaseholder (cc-ed to lender).   (That's how it works legally) Why serve a delapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease. I don't own the freehold.  But I am a trustee and have to do right by the freeholders.  This is where matters got/ get complicated.  And probably lose most caggers.   Lawyers got involved for the freeholders to firstly void the receiver enfranchisement notice. Secondly, to serve the dilapidations notice.  The lack of maintenance was in breach of lease and had to be served to protect fh asset. Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to buy the freehold of the property. It's normal, whether it is a "normal" leaseholder or a repossession with a leasehold house, to claim this right of enfranchisement and sell the property with said rights attached and the purchase price of the freehold included in the final completion price. That's likely what the mortgage provider wished to do. The lender did no repairs. They said a buyer would undertake them. Which was probably correct. If they had sold. After 1y lender finally agreed to sell to the 1st offeror and contracts went with lawyers.  Within 1 month lender reneged.  Lender tried to suggest buyer walked. Evidence shows he/ his lawyers continued trying to exchange (cash) for 4 months.  Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been to renege and for ceo to take control.   I still think that's their plan. Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at? Lender then stupidly chose to pretty much bulldoze the property.  Other stuff was going on in the background. After repo I was in touch by phone and email and lender knew post got to me.   Despite this, after about 10 months (before and then during covid), they deliberately sent SDs and eventually a B petition to an incorrect address and an obscure small court.  They never served me properly.  (In hindsight I understand they hoped to get a backdoor B - so they could keep the property that way.)  Eventually the random court told them to email me by way of service.  At this point their ruse to make me B failed.  I got a lawyer (friend paid). The B petition was struck out. They’d failed to include the property as an asset. They were in breach of insolvency rules. So this is dealt with then. Simultaneously the receiver again appointed lawyers to act on my behalf as leaseholder. This time to serve notice on the freeholders for a lease extension.  He had hoped to try and vary the strict lease. Evidence shows the already long length of lease wasn't an issue.  The lender obviously hoped to get round their lack of permission to do works (which they were already doing) by hoping to remove the strict clauses that prevent leaseholder doing alterations.  You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension. You'd need a Deed of Variation for that. This may be done at the same time but the lease has already been extended once and that's all they have a right to. The extension created a new legal angle for me to deal with.  I had to act as trustee for freeholders against me as leaseholder/ the receiver.  Inconsistencies and incompetence by receiver lawyers dragged this out 3y.  It still isn't properly resolved. The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there. Meanwhile - going back to the the works the lender undertook. The works were consciously in breach of lease.  The lender hadn't remedied the breaches listed in the dilapidations notice.  They destroyed the property.  The trustees compiled all evidence.  The freeholders lawyers then served a forfeiture notice. This notice started a different legal battle. I was acting for the freeholders against what the lender had done on my behalf as leaseholder.  This legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease. The simple exit would have been for lender to sell. A simple agreement to remedy the breaches and recompense the freeholders in compensation - and there's have been clean title to sell.  That option was proposed to them.   This happened by way of mediation for all parties 2y ago.  A resolution option was put forward and in principle agreed.  But immediately after the lender lawyers failed to engage.  A hard lesson to learn - mediation cannot be referred to in court. It's considered w/o prejudice. The steps they took have made no difference to their ability to sell the property.  Almost 3y since they finished works they still haven't sold. ** ** I followed up some leads myself.  A qualified cash buyer offered me a substantial sum.  The lender and receiver both refused it.   I found another offer in disclosure.  6 months later someone had apparently offered a substantial sum via an agent.  The receiver again rejected it.  The problem of course was that the agent had inflated the market price to get the business. But no-one was or is ever going to offer their list price.  Yet the receiver wanted/wants to hold out for the list price.  Which means 1y later not only has it not sold - disclosure shows few viewings and zero interest.  It's transparently over-priced.  And tarnished. For those asking why I don't give up - I couldn't/ can't.  Firstly I have fiduciary duties as a trustee. Secondly, legal advice indicates I (as leaseholder) could succeed with a large compensation claim v the lender.  Also - I started a claim v my old lawyer and the firm immediately reimbursed some £s. That was encouraging.  And a sign to continue.  So I'm going for compensation.  I had finance in place (via friend) to do a deal and take the property back off the lender - and that lawyer messed up bad.   He should have done a deal.  Instead further years have been wasted.   Maybe I only get back my lost savings - but that will be a result.   If I can add some kind of complaint/ claim v the receiver's conscious impropriety I will do so.   I have been left with nothing - so fighting for something is worth it. The lender wants to talk re a form of settlement.  Similar to my proposal 2y ago.  I have a pretty clear idea of what that means to me.  This is exactly why I do not give up.  And why I continue to ask for snippets of advice/ pointers on cag.  
    • It was all my own work based on my previous emails to P2G which Bank has seen.
  • 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

Bryan carter solictors re lowell finanical servieces


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 4130 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 any help would be welcome,

 

i have a few debts and a few are with lowell but get others to collect

 

i left all my debts at my prevous address, as could not afford them,

wrong i know,

but a few have followed me as i got a few quotes for insurances in past but dont know how they have obtained my new address,

as first i have not fill in voting forms so they cant trace me through that,

 

most debts will expire this year and letters if i have received i have put sender not here, another lie i know,

 

but got one with no return address, a grey letter i iusually check online usually po boxes are debt or have orange lines across enevelope but double check,

 

it was from bryan solictors, and gave deadline 7 days just before christmas, otherwise they take me to court,

i read so where that it is last date when made payment or is date of default this was 04/2007 so should be off this time.

 

i cant see if they do take me to court why they have left it to last minute,

or do they have no chance,

 

any help like i said will help do i jsut say never recieved any letters,

 

and would court then see rest on my credit file as they are all of this year last one in june.

 

lastly i have a judgement from northampton court 10/2007 could this come to light if bryan carter take me to court

as read it is same court they use if thats true,

but you see a lot on web and dont know what to take in also when does a judgement go off heard it 7 years not 6 like a default.

 

 

anyway hope anybody can help me and what to do if worse happens thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you know if you have made any payments / acknowledgment to the BC Debt since 04/2007 the Defaults are usualy added around 6 months after the first missed payment / cause of action. The SB date is 6 years from the first missed payment, if you are certain that no payments have been made since December 06, this should be SB'd.

 

Do you know if the debt that BC are chasing is for the same debt as the CCJ?

 

The CCJ will fall off your credit file after 6 years not 7, (I have just had one fall off my file), CCJ's are enforcable after the 6 years but the claimant will have to go back to court in order to re-enforce the order.

 

It may be worth CCA'ing BC for the debt that they are currently chasing, just to find out what they have on you and to check if it is enforcible, it may be that they don't have agreements etc, due to the age of the debt.

 

Hope this helps

 

QB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi many thanks for quick reply

all on my file it says defaulted april 2007

no payments made at all just returned letters,

and now got this one but thrown it but how have they obtained my new address

as they cant search a credit file without my permission can they,

 

just really hope it does not go through as then it goes back to 6 years again back to start.

 

i did open last lot of letters and 3 out are 4 we have been instructred by lowells t

he grey letter one unmarked so no postal address to return so if i do get court action

do i say i have not recieved warning letter,

as anybody seen a warning letter and what's it say. thanks

 

other question is i think something i sold on ebay if i can remember but they never returned the item did not hear of them

i moved due to other debts, but would have paid back this person if they had return the item anyway

 

thanks for all your help but would like to know if bryan carter as ever takien anybody to court as this is a five year plus debt or they trying last tackles thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can and do search credit files, they started sending me threats after I updated my mobile phone provider with a new address. There are laods of unrecorded searches on my files from DCA scumbags!

 

You are right a CCJ will restart the 6 years, but by the sound of it, it is probably already Stat Barred as the SB Date is from the last missed payment usually 6 months prior to the Default entry. If it is already SB'd they wont be able to obtain a CCJ.

 

I'm not very legally minded, but in my opinion, if they have had enough on you they would have already seeked to obtain a CCJ at your last know address in previous years, I feel that this may be they're last throw at the dice in getting you to pay up on a SB'd debt.

 

Bryan Carter are well known for taking people to court.

 

I'm not to clued up when it comes to Ebay.

 

Hopefully someone more knowledgable will be along soon to help you further.

 

QB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to add, if you CCA BC, I have read that he is likely to throw his toy's out of the pram and start running for the hills!

Then move onto his next victim.

He'll come back stating that he's requested the docs from original creditor or DCA, then he'll come back saying that docs are not avaliable.

Then he'll write to tell you he's passed the debt back.

I don't think that he can issue proceedings whilst you are waiting for a CCA from him.

If they had enough to get a CCJ they could have done this 5 1/2 years ago.

QB

Link to post
Share on other sites

many thanks most are off jan, apri and june this year just the judgement end of year if i do recieve court papers could i return them undelived or would that be worst for me, like you said and thanks for all your help and advice they might not do anything they have left it to long thanks again

Link to post
Share on other sites

What you have to remember is the Defaults are added after the first missed payment, usually 6 months but sometimes more, once the debts are SB'd (Usually 6 months prior to Default) they will not be able to issue a CCJ against you.

Do you mean that the Defaults are off in Jan/April and June? If this is the case, the only one that may not be SB'd just yet will be the June one, but it will be very close to being SB'd (probably only weeks away).

Did the BC letter say say May / Might take you to court? Did he offer any discounts?

 

If you do receive Court Papers it would be advisable to post back here for further help, even if you were to send them back they could issue a judgement against you in your absence.

 

QB

Link to post
Share on other sites

ITS the april one june is a different company and that is still under old address, but one not showing this month and don;t know what as happen to that one that was down as 7th month this year, so that one is a mystery maybe next month it will show, and have you tried noodle its free every month no more paying out, for your credit file, but it does say people have to ask me to view my file and none of the debt companies have done searches on me last 2 years also not on electric roll since i have moved here, wrong again i know.

 

with reference to letter not had one of these before, i do remember it saying on numerous times we have tried to contact you and know you live there and if not heard of you court action cant remember 100% what it said as thrown away like rest wish i kept it now.

 

will keep you posted and keep checking my file from noodle cheers again

Link to post
Share on other sites

pers i'd continue to ignore

 

we dont have debtors prisons here

 

and we certainly dont take other debts or CCJ 's into count on non related debts.

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Default is April, ot will most probably already SB from November, on Noddle check to see when the last payment was made. There is a drop down that shows previos years, it's the last payment date that is important.

 

I know that they need your permission to make a credit search on your file, but they can make unrecorded enquiries on your file, My Noddle report doesn't list unrecorded searches but my Equifax one does. I've read on here that the DCA's pay the CRA companies to view our info.

 

I've only just registered on the Electorol Role this month (Naughty Me)!!

 

Most of the letters are just threats which say Might/May etc. Next one you get check the wording.

 

Keep us posted

 

QB

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I have similar for one of mine where it's listed twice once in open accounts and also in closed.

Is this listed as the original creditor or the debt purchasing / collection company? Does this account also show in closed accounts under the original creditor?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi no they are all listed once but for payment history jan 2007 to may 2007 then says df on june 2007 so have no idea like you said all accounts i have dates are different to df but it says de-faulted in april 2007, anyway fingers crossed, thanks again all

Link to post
Share on other sites

Default dates and statute barred dates are two entirely seperate matters.

Defaults are usually placed within 6 months of the cause of action, which can be assumed to be the date when a payment was due and not made, after which no further payment was ever made.

 

Statute barred = no payment or written acknowledgment of a debt in 6 clear years.

 

All defaults are removed after 6 years paid or not, a statute barred debt will remain on credit files until the default expires.

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...