Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • 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
      • 160 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

Creation Consumer Finance / Lowell


Gaspanic9
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 3229 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

Hmm. Usually Lowlifes say that they will close the account but should the agreement appear in the future, they reserve the right to recommence collection activity.

 

At the moment this is a win. Keep the letter safe just in case another DCA picks it up (as has happened in the past)

If you are asked to deal with any matter via private message, PLEASE report it.

Everything I say is opinion only. If you are unsure on any comment made, you should see a qualified solicitor

Please help CAG. Order this ebook. Now available on Amazon. Please click HERE

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

So it seems like they still haven't updated my credit report so I contacted them in regards to it.

 

The request I had from them was

"With regards to the Creation Consumer Finance account I can see documentation has being requested which can take a couple of days to reach.",

 

 

I advised that I had requested the CCA and they had been unable to provide it and that they've advised they're going to close the account

(I also said I didn't acknowledge the debt).

 

 

They've replied with this.

 

"Thank you for your resposne.

 

As you have advised you received a letter saying the account would be closed, can you please send in the letter as a proof?

 

Looking in to the notes, I cannot see who advised the account would be closed, can you let me know who told you? Was it over the phone?

 

Further more, I can see the account is being looked in to, and you will receive the documentation shortly.

 

I look forward to your resposne, so I can assist you further."

 

Now, i'll not be sending the letter back but I will email them a copy of what they have sent,

 

 

is there anything else I should be doing in the meantime?

 

 

What would I do if they go back on their word of closing it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
So i'm still waiting for them to get this taken off my credit report, I contacted them and they've asked for me to send them a screenshot of my credit report. Is it safe to do so?

Yes it is often requested in this situation, you only send a shot of the one account nothing more.

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

  • 8 months later...

Sorry to bump an old thread but it seems apt seeing as it's about the same account.

 

I've been looking at my credit file and it still seems to have this account on it set as settled,

will this be on my report 6 years from that date?

(They closed the account as they couldn't find my original credit agreement,

will this affect my file for years to come?)

 

Creation Consumer Finance Ltd

Account number: xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Name: xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Account address: xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Date of birth: xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Account type: Credit Sale

Account status: Settled

Date last updated: 01/09/2014

Account opened: 21/04/2007

Account opening balance: £1148

Regular Payment Amount: £29

Repayment frequency: Monthly

Settlement date: 24/09/2014

Link to post
Share on other sites

so the defaulted date is 2011 from the earlier post?

 

 

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

so the defaulted date is 2011 from the earlier post?

 

 

dx

 

 

On the report it says 2011 yes but i'm sure it is earlier than that!

 

Currently i'm unsure as to what to do, i'm eager to start rebuilding my credit so I can buy a house when the time comes but i'm not sure how much this one is affecting my report. Does settled have any baring on it? I'm hesitant to poke the dog so to speak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So it will vanish on the defaults 6fh birthday

Regardless. To you doing anything

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

So it will vanish on the defaults 6fh birthday

 

Regardless. To you doing anything

 

 

 

 

Yes but it should be earlier, this would be another 15 months on what it should be which is a bit of a hassle seeing as I'm also needing a new car soon.

 

I'm adamant it is wrong so is there anything I should do?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Polite letter to the original creditor f asking?

 

There. No longer any ICO guidelines that suggest its now unfair

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

sorry I was on a small screen

if there is evidence from the OC

that says a DN was issued in 2009

 

 

then I'd copy that and send it to the OC

asking them to put the CRA files correct.

 

 

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

So I need to drop an email to Creation and ask them to provide the details of the account or just the default date?

 

On my credit file it is still under Creation but last time it was Lowell chasing it, so would I send this onto Lowell or ask Creation to sort it?

 

Would there be any commupence for me contacting them would you think?

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

you already state in post 11 that the sar says default notice issue date of feb 2009

I would politely ask CCL to move the defaulted date to more inline

with when they issued the DN.

 

 

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

you already state in post 11 that the sar says default notice issue date of feb 2009

I would politely ask CCL to move the defaulted date to more inline

with when they issued the DN.

 

 

dx

 

 

 

So I did (it has been a while, totally forgot about that SAR).

 

I've fired them off an email, i'll let you know how it goes.

 

Thanks for your help, it's much appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Contacted Lowell who was originally chasing and they have said they have already removed the default. They asked for a screenshot of my credit report which I sent. (Below is what I sent them which it currently shows in my report)

 

Creation Consumer Finance Ltd

Account number: ****5761

Name: XXXXXXXXXXXX

Account address: XXXXXXXXXXXX

Date of birth: XXXXXXXXXXXX

Account type: Credit Sale

Account status: Settled

Date last updated: 01/09/2014

Account opened: 21/04/2007

Account opening balance: £1148

Regular Payment Amount: £29

Repayment frequency: Monthly

Settlement date: 24/09/2014

 

This is the email I received.

"Thank you for your email.

 

I have confirmed with the relevant department and they have confirmed that the default relating to your former Richer Sounds PLC account (ref: xxxx1865) has been removed from your credit file.

 

In addition, the screen shot that you attached to your file shows an account number ending in ‘5761 and a balance of £1148 which does not correspond to the former Richer Sounds account.

 

I hope you find this information useful towards your enquiry.

 

If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to get in touch.

 

Kind Regards,"

 

Now the reference number that is in my credit report (ending 5761) i'd guess is the Creation ref and the one ending in 1865 is the Lowell ref which is where I think they have got mixed up. The values are also both different so I delved a bit further.

 

I re-checked my credit file from when I first started sorting this out as it keeps all of the old searches ( http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?406740-3-different-debts. )

 

and it shows this

Creation Consumer Finance Ltd

Account number: ****5761

Name: XXXXXXXXXXXX

Account address: XXXXXXXXXXXX

Date of birth: XXXXXXXXXXXX

Account type: Credit Sale

Account status: Default

Date last updated: 01/09/2013

Account opened: 21/04/2007

Account opening balance: £788

Regular Payment Amount: £29

Repayment frequency: Monthly

Default date: 28/02/2011

Original default balance: £788

 

So even though the amounts are different, everything else seems to tally up, including the references numbers, account opened and regular payments.

 

How should I go about getting this rectified (sorry if I havent explained it well, i'll answer questions if needs be to make it clearer)

Link to post
Share on other sites

as post 41

 

 

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...