Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Well we can't predict what the judge will believe. PE will say that they responded in the deadline and you will say they don't. Nobody can tell what a random DJ will decide. However if you go for an OOC settlement you should still be able to get some money
    • What do you guys think the chances are for her?   She followed the law, they didnt, then they engage in deception, would the judge take kindly to being lied to by these clowns? If we have a case then we should proceed and not allow these blatant dishonest cheaters to succeed 
    • I have looked at the car park and it is quite clearly marked that it is  pay to park  and advising that there are cameras installed so kind of difficult to dispute that. On the other hand it doesn't appear to state at the entrance what the charge is for breaching their rules. However they do have a load of writing in the two notices under the entrance sign which it would help if you could photograph legible copies of them. Also legible photos of the signs inside the car park as well as legible photos of the payment signs. I say legible because the wording of their signs is very important as to whether they have formed a contract with motorists. For example the entrance sign itself doe not offer a contract because it states the T&Cs are inside the car park. But the the two signs below may change that situation which is why we would like to see them. I have looked at their Notice to Keeper which is pretty close to what it should say apart from one item. Under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4 Section 9 [2]a] the PCN should specify the period of parking. It doesn't. It does show the ANPR times but that includes driving from the entrance to the parking spot and then from the parking place to the exit. I know that this is a small car park but the Act is quite clear that the parking period must be specified. That failure means that the keeper is no longer responsible for the charge, only the driver is now liable to pay. Should this ever go to Court , Judges do not accept that the driver and the keeper are the same person so ECP will have their work cut out deciding who was driving. As long as they do not know, it will be difficult for them to win in Court which is one reason why we advise not to appeal since the appeal can lead to them finding out at times that the driver  and the keeper were the same person. You will get loads of threats from ECP and their sixth rate debt collectors and solicitors. They will also keep quoting ever higher amounts owed. Do not worry, the maximum. they can charge is the amount on the sign. Anything over that is unlawful. You can safely ignore the drivel from the Drips but come back to us should you receive a Letter of Claim. That will be the Snotty letter time.
    • please stop using @username - sends unnecessary alerts to people. everyone that's posted on your thread inc you gets an automatic email alert when someone else posts.  
  • 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

Advice needed - Lowell Chasing BT Debt


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2341 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

 

Hoping for some advice here.

 

Held a BT account for a few years at a previous address.

I left the address back in 09/2013 and notified BT to cancel the account via phone.

I was a couple of months in arrears at the time and was told that a final bill would be sent.

I never received anything after that, and to be fair (much to my stupidity), I didn't chase them.

 

here we are a few years later

I now have now Lowell chasing me for a total sum of £700+ at my current address.

I have ignored them so far and they have offered discounts of up to 30%

but now are moving onto the typical threatening tactics to pass onto solicitors for court action.

 

Aware that I am unable to CCA request them since it's a telecoms contract I did an SAR to BT for info on the account.

I have received the SAR back from BT but it is very scarce to say the least.

 

I have an account statement and screen notes from their customer service system and thats it!

There are no copies of any correspondence for any bills, final bills, demands, default notices or information regarding passing onto a DCA.

Also there is no information regarding my contact to cancel

 

the reason why the bill has gone so high is because they continued to bill me for nearly a year after it should of been cancelled!

I estimate the final bill should of been around £250

 

Last payment on account 06/2013

Moved out 09/2013

BT terminated account 07/2014

DCA has registered default on credit file for 02/2015

 

Im considering 2 options here,

just wanted to get peoples thoughts or perhaps an alternative approach?

 

1) Offer to settle with DCA at a discount on the basis that default date is changed to reflect when the account "should?" of put into default

(i.e. change from 02/2015 to end of 2013)

 

2) Open dispute with BT stating that I don't have all the info in the SAR and state the account should of been closed back in 2013,

offering them to pay the full balance at the time I moved.

 

Would they consider purchasing back from the DCA in this case if I agree to settle with them?

Would also send a letter to Lowell stating the account is in dispute with the original creditor so they cease any activity for a couple of months.

 

Ultimately I would like to settle but have the default either removed or date changed to 2013.

 

What do you all think?

Sorry I know its a lot of blurb, appreciate any suggestions and happy to answer any questions

 

Cheers

Link to post
Share on other sites

BT registered the default upon sale, DCA's cant register defaults they are not a creditor but a debt buyer.

 

complain to BT that [at the time] ICO guidelines dictated that a default should have been registered within 3- 6ths of the last payment

if they fail to correct the error you will open a complaint to the ICO seeking financial compensation too.

 

you also need to understand the following:

 

should the alleged amount claimed include an early termination charge(s) amounting to the total balance of the remaining contract,

OFCOM guidance clearly states that any Early Termination Charge,

that is made up of the entire balance of the remaining contract,

is unlikely to be fair,

as it fails to take into account the fact that the provider no longer has to provide and pay for their service.

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

Hi

 

Thanks for your quick reply.

 

I will look into formulating a response to BT.

 

For info,

Already with BT I agreed to a new 18m deal in 12/2011 for phone line and fibre, billed quarterly

After leaving address in 09/2013 they continued to bill quarterly on 11/2013, 02/2014 & 05/2014.

Termination is listed as £11 credit in 07/2014

Link to post
Share on other sites

I left the address back in 09/2013 and notified BT to cancel the account via phone.

 

there should be no default showing at all.

 

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

ignore the DCA.

 

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...