Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • more detest the insurrectional ex variety dx
    • Laura, I was surprised that the Director said that you hadn't appealed twice. I thought that the letter you posted on 24th June was the second appeal and that was to the IAS. And they did say that there was no further appeal possible. Could you please explain how many times you appealed. I am going to read your WS now. PS  Yes I meant to say that the keeper did not have a licence therefore it was wrong of them to assume he was the driver and the keeper. Thanks for picking that up.
    • In answer to your questions yes even though it wasn't called that, it was the NTK. Had it been a windscreen ticket you would not have received the NTK until 28 days had elapsed. In earlier times if the warden was present then a windscreen ticket would have been issued. It nows seems that the DVLA and the Courts don't see a problem  with not issuing a ticket when a warden is on site. A period of parking must mean that ther e has to be a start time and a finish time in order for it to be considered a period. A single time does not constitute a period. I am not sure what you mean by saying it could be taken either way.  All they have mentioned is  the incident time which is insufficient. There are times on the photos about one minute apart which do not qualify as the parking period because they are not on the PCN itself. The reason I asked if the were any more photos is that you should be allowed 5 minutes Consideration period for you to read the signs and decide whether you want to accept them and you do that by staying longer than 5 minutes. if  more  do not have photos of your staying there for more than 5 minutes they are stuffed. You cannot say that you left within the 5 minute period if you didn't , but you can ask them, should it get to Court , to provide strict proof that you stayed longer than the statutory time. If they can't do that, case over.
    • I recently bought some trainers from Sports Direct and was unhappy with them and their extortionate delivery and return postage charges. I tweeted about being unhappy, and received a reply from someone claiming to be from Sports Direct asking me to send my order number and email address by pm, so a claim could be raised. Which I (stupidly) did. The account used Sports Direct's name and branding, and a blue tick.  The following day I received a call from "Sports Direct Customer Service", and with a Kenyan number. They asked for details of the issue, and then sent me an email with a request to install an app called Remitly. They provided me with a password to access the app then I saw that it had been setup for me to transfer £100, and I was asked to enter my credit card number so they could "refund" me. I told them I was uncomfortable with this (to say the least), and was just told to ring them back when I did feel comfortable doing it. Ain't never gonna happen.  I just checked my X account, and the account that sent the message asking for my details is gone. I feel like a complete idiot falling for what was a clear scam. But at least I realised before any real damage was done. if you make a complaint about a company on social media, and you get a reply from someone claiming to be from that company and asking for personal details, tread very carefully.   
    • The good news is that their PCN does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012  Schedule 4.. First under Section 9 (2)The notice must— (a)specify the vehicle, the relevant land on which it was parked and the period of parking to which the notice relates; (b)inform the keeper that the driver is required to pay parking charges in respect of the specified period of parking and that the parking charges have not been paid in full; The PCN does not specify the parking period. AS you rightly say the ANPR times do not include driving to the parking space and then from there back to the exit. And once you include getting children in and out of cars especially if seat belts are involved the time spent parked can be a fair bit less than the ANPR times but still probably nowhere near the time you spent. But that doesn't matter -it's the fact that they failed to comply. Also they failed to ask the keeper to pay the charge.  Their failure means that they cannot now transfer the charge from the diver to the keeper . Only the driver is now liable. As long as UKPA do not know who was driving it will be difficult for them to win in Court as the Courts do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person. Particularly as anyone can drive any car if they have the correct insurance. It might be able to get more reasons to contest the PCN if you could get some photos of the signs. both at the entrance and inside the car park. the photos need to be legible and if there are signs that say different things from others that would also be a help.
  • 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

Lowell claim form regarding Vodafone debt


daniel197
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2771 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

Evening everybody,

hoping for some advice regarding a claim form i've received from Lowell solicitors regarding a Vodafone mobile phone debt.

 

 

Around 2008/2009 i took out a mobile contract with Vodafone, fairly sure it was for a year.

After the year was had passed, i continued using the phone and paying the monthly line rental, without upgrading my contract or taking out a new phone.

 

After some time (mid 2010?) I informed Vodafone via telephone that i did not want to continue doing this and intended to put a pay as you go sim into the same phone.

As far as I can remember nothing more was said.

 

I continued to keep getting monthly line rental charges for a number of months

when I called vodafone again was informed that I could only end a contract via written letter.

 

 

Monthly charges stopped but debt collection letters started arriving for the £152 outstanding.

Foolishly I didn't do anything about this at the time, thinking it wouldn't come to anything as they were trying to charge me for something that had been cancelled and clearly wasn't being used.

 

Dated 20 sep 2016 i've now received a claim form from Northampton court for £240.

I've already sent off the acknowledgement of service.

What should be my next step?

I desperately don't want a CCJ, but don't really think this £240 charge is at all fair.

 

I've got a Lowell statement of account from 2012 that shows vodafone transactions on the reverse between 21 July 2010 and 14 Oct 2010. £35 charges every month despite the only usage showing is £0.01 middle of August?

 

Hope you can help, thanks in advance.

Daniel

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I've moved this thread to our Legal Issues Forum, you should get some help shortly.

 

Regards,

 

Scott.

Any advice I give is honest and in good faith.:)

If in doubt, you should seek the opinion of a Qualified Professional.

If you can, please donate to this site.

Help keep it up and active, helping people like you.

If you no longer require help, please do what you can to help others

RIP: Rooster-UK - MARTIN3030 - cerberusalert

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eugh Voda... The Bane of my life.

 

Right so Please fill out the concerned link and post back here

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?419198-You-have-received-a-Claim-What-you-need-to-do.-**UPDATED-2016**

Link to post
Share on other sites

As for general advise with Vodafone, Thats kind of a lie it just being in writing, they always have permitted termination via the phone.

 

i could probably get you T&Cs from that time if need be

Link to post
Share on other sites

looks like it statute barred to me

you didn't need to send off the claim form

you could have acknowledged the debt defend all on line at the MCOL website.

 

 

have you still got the claimform number and the password?

cause you could go file the SB defence now and end it today if you do.

 

 

get that link done mind first

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

Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio 1 limited

 

Date of issue – 20 Sep 2016

 

Date to submit defence = 21 Oct 2016 [as 33 falls w/end -dx]

 

What is the claim for –

 

1) The defendant entire into an agreement with Vodafone under account reference xxxxxxxx ('the agreement').

2) The Defendant failed to maintain the required payments and a default notice was served and not complied with.

3)The Agreement was later assigned to the Claimant on 27/03/2012 and notice given to the Defendant.

4) Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of £160 remains due and outstanding.

And the Claimant claims

a)The said sum of £160

b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.0XX but limited to one year, being £1X.XX

c) Costs

 

What is the value of the claim? £240

 

Is the claim for a current account (Overdraft) or credit/loan account or mobile phone account? Mobile Phone

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after 2007? Not sure. Possibly 2008/2009

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor

or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Lowell

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? Yes

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Yes

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Default sums” – at least once a year ? No, although I do have a 'Statement of Account' from Lowell

Why did you cease payments? 12/24 month contract was well finished, informed vodafone by call and stopped using the services I have been charged for.

What was the date of your last payment? July 2010??

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? Yes

 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

If there was no payment from July 2010 then it will be Statute Barred by now. Lowell will also have great difficulty getting the contract from Vodafone. It is also likely that Vodafone will have very little in the way of system notes however, it would be worth sending them a SAR to get what they have.

 

By acknowledging the claim then by defending, Lowell will have to supply any proofs that they mention in the claim.

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

i'd go file the sb defence

have you still got a copy of the claimform front page with the log-in details for the MCOL website?

 

 

if so pop back up and we'll give you the SB defence to file

 

 

that will kill the claim dead

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

Great I'll pop the SB defence up later

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

The following defence is all you need if it is SB

 

 

1 The Claimant's claim was issued on (insert date).

2 The Defendant contends that the Claimant's claim so issued is a claim in contract and is statute barred pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the limitation act 1980.

 

If, which is denied, the claimant contends that the Defendant is in breach of the alleged contract, in excess of 6 years have elapsed since the date on which any cause of action for breach accrued for the benefit of the Claimant.

 

3 The Claimant's claim to be entitled to payment of £[insert figure from their POC] or any other sum, or relief of any kind is denied.

 

..ends..

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

  • 1 month later...
Is there a time scale after submitting my defence before the claim gets struck out/set aside?

 

The claimant would have been advised of the defence. Just does not proceed any further (stayed), until the claimant wants to go through the process and you will be advised by the court, asking you to complete an allocation form, so it can go to your nearest court of necessary.

 

Suspect they will just check whether it is SB and you may or may not get letter from Lowell saying they have discontinued.

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

did you get an acknowledgement that the court got your defence?

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 typically get an ack that says if the claimant does not progress the claim

after 28 days it gets stayed.

 

 

but don't forget also to read other threads too in case yours progresses too so you know whats to come

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...