Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • 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
      • 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

Lowell to Lucas, threatening legal action within 10 days


jackt
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2127 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

I’ve received a letter from Lowell stating they have passed my account to Lucas Credit Services.

 

In the same envelope is a letter from Lucas stating that they will refer the matter to Cohen Cramer Ltd (solicitors) if outstanding balance is not paid within 10 days.

 

It says the debt relates to a store card but this does not show on my credit report(s) and I’m not entirely sure what it is. It’s for the amount of around £200.

 

The wording in the Lucas letter is:

 

“If we do not hear from you to discuss this matter or receive payment within the next 10 days we are instructed by our client to refer this matter to their solicitors Cohen Cramer Ltd to commence legal action”

 

Does the above mean that a CCJ claim will definitely be started or is it just scaremongering?

 

Any advice appreciated.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thread moved to appropriate forum ...Debt Collection Agencies.

 

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 OTHER

 

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

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucas are Lowell are Cohen

When did you last pay this debt

And have you moved since taking it out

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

All Lowell group

 

You've moved

These are phishing letters

You must respond else you risk backdoor CCJ 's on any debt you've not updated the owner in writing of a change of address

 

Never run away from debt!!

 

Cca request time!!

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

yes

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

That is Lowell's usual MO write to you at the new address, send the claimform to the old one, next thing you knoew they send threatening letters to your current address which they already knew demanding payment of their shiny dodgy backdoor CCJ

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

The bailiff: A 12th Century solution re-branded as Enforcement Agents for the 21st Century to seize and sell debtors goods as before Oh so Dickensian!

Link to post
Share on other sites

no first you know about it is bailiffs!

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

as this is a store card [who was the OC please?]

I've moved you to the store card forum

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

It was home retail group apparently,

 

Also, I believe since recently there is new legislation that means they have to send you documents to allow you to tick an option that is relevant before they can issue a CCJ claim form. Is this correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I believe since recently there is new legislation that means they have to send you documents to allow you to tick an option that is relevant before they can issue a CCJ claim form. Is this correct?

 

Not heard that??

 

You're jumping too far ahead of yourself, a CCJ is a long way off yet, if at all!

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not heard that??

 

You're jumping too far ahead of yourself, a CCJ is a long way off yet, if at all!

 

Yeah just worried as they said about legal action and didn’t think they were allowed to threaten legal if they weren’t gonna go through with it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes, I see, PAP, you only need worry about Pre Action Protocols when they mention it in a letter.

 

The usual untruths about legal action is nothing to worry about, why threaten 'legal action' when they can simply cut out the BS and dive right in.

 

Probably because they're hoping their empty threats will worry you into handing over your hard earned before they have to do any work.

Who ever heard of someone getting a job at the Jobcentre? The unemployed are sent there as penance for their sins, not to help them find work!

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah yes, I see, PAP, you only need worry about Pre Action Protocols when they mention it in a letter.

 

The usual untruths about legal action is nothing to worry about, why threaten 'legal action' when they can simply cut out the BS and dive right in.

 

Probably because they're hoping their empty threats will worry you into handing over your hard earned before they have to do any work.

 

True, didn’t really think about it like that. Anyway, I’ll let you all know what happens in a few days, if they do go through with anything.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So an old argos card

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

I got a letter from Cohen solicitors today and they have included the PAP.

 

It says I need to respond within 30 days and that there client is fully entitled to take me to court.

 

What is the best box to tick on the form?

I was thinking that as I’m not sure exactly what it relates to and want to see proof,

 

there is a box that says you can tick it to get more information and I think they have to provide it

- for example; orginal Credit agreement etc.

 

Is it best to do this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Youve already posted what you need to do yourself in that post 13 link

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...