Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • no that is not a defence. because you don't have a photo
    • I purchased the vehicle using finance through motonovo under a HP 60 months agreement. I have now amended the document ensuring all is in black. Unfortunately, this email has now been sent. However, I have not sent a letter to big motoring world. Also, I have taken the section of the firealarm issue. I am struggling to convert to PDF. I am not tech savy at all. My mistake was that the the salesman was very fussy on a sale. We went down a quiet road for a little test drive and not for a lengthy road test. The water issue was not present at this moment of time. However, it only became prevalent after driving away, after all docs signed. I did stated to Audi I wanted a diagnostic report. However, they carried out an Audicam which is footage of the issue. Audi have diagnosed the issue as a common issue where coupes/cabriolets accumulate water in the seals. However, I did state beforehand for no issue to be rectified due to me wanting to reject the vehicle. I am awaiting a report from Audi through email from the branch manager in relation to the issue. The issue so far is the water still being present in the sills. Audi tried to fix the issue however the problem is still prevalent. Regards 
    • First begging letter received from Overdales   ;Blah blah blah, our client's are going to win this blah blah blah we supplied all your documents under CPR   PS you can stop all this by paying £1200 less in a lump sum
    • Right,  so the court hasn't send out the Directions Questionnaires/N180s yet. PE's one is a false one, meant to intimidate you into thinking your defence was rubbish and they are confident with their claim. This is par for the course.  The PPCs do this regularly. However, PE have gone further and written that "a copy has also been filed with the court" which is a lie as the court haven't even sent out the papers yet. Keep a screenshot of MCOL, later on in your WS you can draw attention to their lying and abuse of court procedure. If you've got time on your hands, then complain to the BPA about one of their members lying.    
  • 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

Lowell changed Default Notice date?


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3966 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 All,

I have just checked my credit report with Equifax and a default notice date has changed,

 

on previous report it was dated Jan '08 and on the new one it is changed to March '08

 

- no other data has changed and no contact has been made with anyone

 

.How is this possible and will it adversely affect when the debt becomes statute barred?

 

many thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

The default date is not relevant to a debt becoming statute barred, SB= 6 clear years with no payment or written acknowledgment of the debt.

 

There can only be one default date on a debt, which should no be changed.

 

What company name is shown as the owner of this account.

 

You can place a notice of dispute on the entry on the credit file Equifax will contact the company that placed the entry, but you can do this as well, by writing to the Data Controller of the company.

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

thanks for the reply;initially on old credit report it showed as Equidebt, it now has been updated as Lowell Portfolio as the new custodian - amount exactly same, default date changed to 19/3/8 from 30/1/8.....Should be SB'd anyway as last payment was June of '07 and no contact since

Link to post
Share on other sites

In the hands of Lowell now, we have seen a number of old accounts cropping up that are stat barred, what date does it show that Lowell acquired the debt?

It could be that there has been some attempt to extend the 'life' of this debt, and someone a Lowell has messed up!!

 

I think we can 'test the water' here with a letter that does not restart the SB clock.

 

Send this a written to:

 

Ms Sarah de Tute

Director of Legal & Compliance

The Lowell Group

Enterprise House

1 Apex View

Leeds

LS11 9BH

 

Date:.....................:

 

Ref: use the one on the CRA entry..

 

 

Complaint Change of Default Date on Equifax Credit File:

 

Dear Ms de Tute,

 

I refer you to the entry placed on my on my credit file held by Equifax (screen print attaché for clarification), being aware that the date this account was shown to have been originally defaulted I was most concerned that Lowell have changed the default date from xx.xx.xxxx. to xx.xx.xxxx and I require an immediate explanation as to why Lowell have manipulated this date.

 

Furthermore I am fully aware that the last payment / acknowledgment in regard to the alleged debt was in June 2007, therefore I do not acknowledge any debt to any company of the Lowell Group as the alleged debt is Statute Barred and I will not now or in the future make any payment or offer of payment in regard to this matter.

 

Lowell should be aware that should it dispute the status of the alleged debt that the onus of providing unequivocal proof that it is not statute barred falls entirely upon Lowell.

 

Please also note any allegations that any ''mystery'' payments have been made to this account affecting the limitation period the are/will be totally refuted.

 

I require Lowell to confirm in writing that this matter is now closed and that it has removed all data relating to me from its files.

 

 

Send by recorded/signed for post and check delivery.

Edited by BRIGADIER2JCS

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

updated date is Feb 2013 - I've had 4 letters since May seeking payment on this from various DCA's, all forwarded from previous address via Royal Mail forwarding service - standard contents - contact us to discuss, next step field collection team will knock on door etc - I've ignored all.So as it stands they do not have my current address

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes 5 years limitation in Scotland, how long have you been resident.?

 

The letter is ok for this scenario as well.

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

since March in Scotland, is it worth sending the letter when the default will fall off credit file in less than 6 months anyway?thanks again

 

Your choice, Lowell can be a pain in the arse, if you want to be rid send the letter now!

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...