Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I felt outmatched to be honest. Lowell probably did identify me on here and decided to send one of their more experienced. The guy they sent to last hearing didn't sound half as competent. The solicitor and judge were pretty much talking amongst themselves. That's how it felt. The Judge understood and accepted what the solicitor said at every point. She accepted fresh start as a brand name only. She accepted all the evidence were copies. She accepted I entered into a valid agreement. She accepted the error on the default notice was a typo. Felt like I lost before the hearing. If not, I wasn't able to express my points well enough. Not like the claimant who I'm sure was giving a law lesson. Completely out of my depth. I didn't ask to appeal. I'm upset understandably but grateful for all the help and support I received here. I've learnt a hell of lot but hope to never need it again.
    • FAW counts Red Flag limousines, used by China's communist party leaders, among its products. View the full article
    • Thanks for your reply...much appreciated. Last payment date was December 2018. She had been paying £50/month from July, and they wanted £150/month, despite my partner losing her PIP (which was eventually reinstated after appeal). She stopped paying anything after they failed to supply a true copy of the original CCA (which she took out in 1981). Her name and address were different in 1981 due to marriage (and subsequent divorce!). Again, no mention of that in the “reconstituted” agreement which they supplied. Once again, many thanks and we both appreciate you putting time in to helping with this, especially due to the increased financial pressures of Covid on many people who also need your help.
    • never get a cca for a debt of that age when was the last payment date?   dx  
    • i have shrunk the uploads earlier as they exceeded in total your upload limit try now in pdf.   BTW: the file a few posts up renamed burlington comms is very damning for them they knew they had done wrong having just read it.   now this subject needs addressing and sorting. where has all your available income been going for the last 12mts...why has this debt not been paid and why did you resort to even taking out an LBL in 1st place..usually its as a result of shear desperation and financial mismanagement as you could not get money elsewhere ...why ?   this debt is a priority ...2nd to everything other that what keeps a roof over your head like mortgage , rent. CTAX. gas/electric.   mobile phone/sky/broadband/credit cards/OD's/catalogue debts or accounts and anything else you payout for needs to be either cancelled or dropped to <£5PCM..they can't do anything to your roof or your car.   spill the beans..why were you in such a whole in 2018 that you ever had to goto these sharks and expose yourself to this grief..          
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Lowell Portfolio I - Is this right?


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2881 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I have just received my statutory credit reports back from both Experian and Equifax

 

On my credit file I have numerous searches, 22 in fact from Lowell Portfolio I LTD, as documented below.

 

There is 22 searches within a 6 month period, a few times 3 times a day and 2 times a day

 

Searched

 

01) 09 MAY 2012 2 times this day

02) 09 MAY 2012 2 times this day

03) 15 MAY 2012

04) 21 JUN 2012 2 times this day

05) 21 JUN 2012 2 times this day

06) 28 JUN 2012

07) 06 JUL 2012

08) 28 JUL 2012 2 times this day

09) 28 JUL 2012 2 times this day

10) 23 AUG 2012 2 times this day

11) 23 AUG 2012 2 times this day

12) 28 NOV 2012 3 times this day

13) 28 NOV 2012 3 times this day

14) 28 NOV 2012 3 times this day

15) 03 DEC 2012 2 times this day

16) 03 DEC 2012 2 times this day

17) 06 DEC 2012 3 times this day

18) 06 DEC 2012 3 times this day

19) 06 DEC 2012 3 times this day

20) 15 DEC 2012 3 times this day

21) 15 DEC 2012 3 times this day

22) 15 DEC 2012 3 times this day

 

This doesn't seem right to me, 3 times somedays, what do they think I am doing Moving in the morning, afternoon and at night, am I classed as a flight risk, do they really think I will be living somewhere different 3 times a day, and 22 times in 6 months.

 

 

I also have a few defaults from Lowell one of which is a duplicate of another one from Barclays Bank for £102.00, so I have 2 defaults for the same default. Lowell are refusing to send me proof they own the debt (Is this called an Assignment?? because this is what I asked them for) and they are refusing to remove it, I have not yet called Barclays Bank.

 

Thanks in advance for reading,

 

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is very excessive, the CRA's need to answer why they think this is satisfactory behaviour.

 

As for lowlifes, what is the debt? How much? How old? Who is it originally with?

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If your credit score is getting worse, then it could be thes searches, it depends on the type of search that has been made.

 

Ask Lowell why they have made these searches.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes these searches are too many and too frequent, a complaint to Lowells Data Controller for that.

The 2 entries for 1 account is in fact an up date one is the creditors entry which should be marked satisfied and the Lowell one is the update for when they aquired the debt BUT the default MUST be the same.

 

You can dispute the searches with the CRAs data controller but only Lowell(whatif these are unrecorded searches ( previously known as Table 2 Searches) they are seen only by you.

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 debt is a £102 overdrawn bank account with Barclays, (The 2 identical defaults, one from Barclays and one from Lowells)

 

They are all Un-Recorded searches, even though they are only visible to me is besides the point, How can someone or some entity ride rough-shot over you personal data, I think it is far to excessive....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the original entry for the bank account marked as satisfied?

 

Unrecorded searche are usually made od ID when the debt purchaser aquires a new debt and to check for financial changes if they already have an account.

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...