Jump to content


Lowells taking me to court for unpaid charges to Shop Direct


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2502 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 sent the Section 78 request on 14th Oct, it was received and signed for on 16th, I have had no response so far, should I have had it by now? How long do I wait for it? Sorry to be a little dim but I am a bit confused by the time period they have to respond. Is it 12 working days or just 12 days?. From when I sent it or when they received it? Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 working days + 2 for service.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

I have had no response from the section 78 request, which was received by Lowells on 16th Oct. I have to submit my defense by the end of this week, could you please help me with how to word it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your defence is due this Fri/Sat Anlli...

 

Here is a defence that I have drafted this morning for another poster...it will give you an idea of form and content...have a go at editing it to suit your situation.

 

The particulars of claim read as follows:

 

1.The claimant claims the sum of 5232.23 for debt and interesticon. On 26/08/02 the defendant entered into an agreement with MBNAicon for a credit card under reference xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.

 

2.On 31/08/12 the defendant defaulted on the agreement with an outstanding balance of 4,873.34.

 

3.On 24/10/12 the debt of 4,873.34 was assigned to Aktiv Kapital portfolio As Oslo Zug Branch.

 

4.Notice of assignment was sent to the defendant in accordance with s136 Law of Property act 1925.

 

And the claimant claims

 

1. The sum of 4,873.34

2. Statutory interest pursuant to Section 69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8.00% per annum

from 24/10/12 to 25/9/13 358.89, & thereafter at a daily rate of 1.07 until judgement or sooner payment.

 

######Defence######

 

 

Paragraph 1 is admitted with regards to entering into an agreement with MBNA for credit facilities the agreement also included PPIicon which was unsuitable as I was self employed..

 

Paragraph 2 is admitted because MBNA were and still are in default of my section 78 request dated xxx xxxxx xxxx.MBNA did not serve a Default Notice.

 

Paragraph 3&4 are denied as yet the claimant has failed to serve a Notice of Assignment accordance with s136 Law of Property act 1925 and therefore yet to prove they are entitled to bring this claim.

 

On receipt of this claim I requested a further section 78 request from the claimant dated xxx xxxxxx xxxx sent recorded and delivery and signed for on the xxx xxxxx xxxxx.The claimant has yet to comply.

Furthermore on the xxx xxxx xxxxx I requested copies of the documents referred to in the claimants particulars of claim by way of a Civil Procedureicon Request 31. PD 14.The claimant has yet to respond.

 

On the xxx xxxx xxxx I requested extra time to submit my defence by way of a CPR 15.5 to enable the claimant to comply with the above requests.The claimant responded they are unable to serve the information at this time but agreed to an 14 days to submit my defence......to start after they have complied with my disclosure requests and not stating an agreed time for submission.

 

It is my contention that the claimant has acted this way to frustrate and confuse my submission date to enable themselves to attain a judgment by default.

 

Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the Claimant; and

(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

© show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim;

 

As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

On the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and Section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

Until such time the Claimant can comply with my request for a copy of the agreement/Default Notice it relies upon they are prevented from enforcing or requesting any relief as pursuant to the CCA 1974

 

By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief

 

 

 

Okay complete the dates marked xxxxxxxx and check for accuracy ...edit to suit if you are not happy with any of the above.

 

Copy and paste into MCOL and print a receipt of submission time dated.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you.

 

Particulars of claim states:

 

"This claim is for 144.00 the amount due under agreement between the original creditor and the defendant to provide finance and/or services and/or goods.

 

This debt was assigned to/purchased by Lowell Portfolio I Ltd on 09.03.2012 and notice served pursuant to the Law of Property Act 1925.

 

Particulars Re Shop Direct Ac No ********

 

And the claimant claims 144.00

 

The claimant also claims interest pursuant to S69 County Court Act 1984 from 09/03/2012 to date at 8% per annum amounting to 17.92"

 

The form is dated 9th October

 

 

Thanks Andy. I have used your example and come up with the following, could you please tell me what you think? Not sure whether I should mentioning original agreement with Great Universal or not.

 

 

Paragragh 1 is denied as there was no such agreement with the original creditor. The claimant has failed to respond to a section 78 request for the orginal agreement, dated 14th October 2013 and signed for on 16th October 2013.

 

Paragraph 2 is denied because there was no debt to be assigned/purchased.

 

Paragraph 3 is denied because there was no agreement with Shop Direct.

 

 

The original agreement was with Great Universal Stored Ltd and did not include charges for late payments. This claim is made up entirely of unlawful charges, the account balance having been paid off in full on 19th July 2011.

 

Therefore the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with the original creditor.

(b) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed.

 

As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

Until such time the Claimant can comply with my request for a copy of the agreement it relies upon they are prevented from enforcing or requesting any relief as pursuant to the CCA 1974

 

By reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief

 

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very good Anlli

 

I would agree remove the " The original agreement was with Great Universal Stored Ltd and did not include charges for late payments."

 

The third party is unaware of the original creditor...only refute or agree with what is stated in their particulars...never add information...that can be retained for later down the line.

 

Well done.

 

Regards

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Andy, I've submitted that, with that bit omitted, fingers crossed and I'll keep you posted of any developments.

 

Many thanks for your help.

 

Annlli

Link to post
Share on other sites

Following

CAG has helped me so much since I joined. Based on what I have learnt from others on here and my own experiences, I try to chip in and help others from time to time. I am not an expert and give my opinion only. Always check with the more experienced CAG members before making important decisions.

:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Update:

 

A couple of weeks ago I had a letter from Lowell's to say my account was on hold.

 

I have just received another letter telling me that because I have failed to pay my account it will be sent to ScotCall

who will be instructed to pursue me for the full balance, which is now £176.92.

 

Does this mean they have given up on the court claim?

 

I have not had any communication from the court.

 

And any advice about how to deal with this new lot when they start chasing me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

snotcrawl are a doorstepper DCA that RARELY ever turn up

 

just remember they are a DCA

NOT A BAILIFF

so have NO SUCH LEGAL POWERS.

 

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 scotcall are involved then its 99% certain its a lemon debt

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

But if a claim form has been issued, make sure to file by the timelines. Lowell will do anything to get judgement by default.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did the S 78 request which they ignored, and put in my defence as above, but what is so frustrating is that they now appear to have given up on the court claim but are still chasing me for the debt. I don't owe them anything, this so called debt is made up entirely of charges added AFTER I paid off the balance and tried to close the account. They won't take me to court but still want the money!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do you state they " but what is so frustrating is that they now appear to have given up on the court claim " they have 28 days to respond.The claim is still live dont so take your eye off the ball and ignore the above nonsense re Scotcall.

 

Andy

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

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

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...