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

Lowell claimform - 3 sep CAT debts ***Claim Discontinued***


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 869 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

  • 1 month later...

Hi all

been away for awhile getting my head together and awaiting developments

now back so on with the show

received paperwork while away but only from Studio Cards (see attached) - credit agreement and sar

N180 not received from Low

MCOL still shows the same as on date my defence was received so no change there

so I presume now a waiting game to see if more paperwork appears re j.d williams?

 

 

Studio SAR Return.pdf

studio Credit Agreement from studio sar.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

so looks like the claim is well stayed now..

twill cost Lowell another £255 to lift the stay too.

 

IF they do.

 

 

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

can I just check that your name nor sig nor address is nowhere to be seen on any of that upload from lowells?

ignore the sar that's your secret paperwork

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

but you didn't send studio your CCA request did you?

 

and mu Q above please too

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 dx

to save looking back copy pasted Post 37:

"Hi

Although I have not posted I have not been idle.

I have sent  Lowell Sol CPR 31.14 re each of the companies on  claim form. 22-24/07/2019

I have sent Lowell Port CCA s78 re each of the companies on claim form.   22-24/07/2019

I have sent companies ( original creditors ) listed on claim form a SAR.        29/07/2019"

Regarding the above post I have received nothing at all from lowell sols and/or lowell portfolio

 

the only documentation I have received is from Studio Cards in response to SAR

 

re question on upload what is shown in the 2 documents at Post 78 is as it was received all paperwork just merged into 1 in both cases

Link to post
Share on other sites

so what you have uploaded, the agreement, has not come from lowells and is not stated as being in response to your CCA request but what you have extracted from studios SAR? and it doesn't have your address / sig anywhere...

 

ANYTHING you get from studio in the SAR you KEEP TO YOURSELF!!

 

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

no harm in the SAR.

 

 

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...

Hi all

thought they might have forgotten about me, but no.

22-11-2019 received large envelope of docs I asked for what seems like ages ago

 

thanks again dx for pointing me patiently in the right direction

 

 

Letters_from_Lowell_22-11-2019_merged.pdf Studio card express gifts CCA return Lowells.pdf Crazy Clearance CCA return Lowells.pdf Fashion world CCA return Lowells.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

the claim is well stayed is it not?

 

 

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 dx I have pulled the following together to save you trawling docs and or my posts and yes it is well and truly stayed,I think,BUT this is Lowells after all

 

1.checked MCOL claim history last item shown Your defence was received on 13/08/2019 at 12:05:48”

 

2.Paperwork received from Lowell dated ??-11-2019 received 22-11-2019

Merged doc-Page 1 of 39 - 2nd para - line 3 - “You were given the opportunity to request documentation in support of our Client’s Claim, however there is no record of you making any such request for documents.”

NOTE:

On or about 21st July 2019 I posted by recorded delivery 4 letters/requests to the following.

Letter 1 to Lowell Sols which was a CPR 31.14 Request

On 03/08/2019 received from Lowell sols letter of acknowledgement in answer to my request for documents

Letters 2-3-4 to Lowell Portfolio quoting separate account/reference on each letter.

The first line of each letter stated “This letter is a formal request pursuant to s.78 of the consumer credit Act 1974”

Yes I have kept receipts for the postings.

 

Page2 of 39. 5th para “Current position”

We note that your filed a Defence in response to our Client’s Claim. However due to an error in relation to our reporting systems the Claim has subsequently been stayed as we did not notify the Court of our Client’s intentions in response to your defence.

In order to resolve the matter amicably, our Client is keen to attempt settlement of the outstanding balances with you. Please contact our offices etc”

 

I have and always will keep/make copies of documentation.

I am pretty sure that from the date I submitted my defence 12/08/2019 Lowell had 28 days (09/09/2019) to submit their defence, otherwise claim is automatically “stayed”.

As stated at 1. nothing is shown on MCOL regarding Lowell defence

Please correct me if I am wrong in the above statement.

Advice on what happens next is much appreciated.

T

Link to post
Share on other sites

from what I remember they just squeezed this claim in before they all went SB'd.

 

they have now gone SB'd but ofcourse the issuance of the original claimform stopped the clock.

 

if lowells were stupid enough to issue an N244 to lift the stay and the court writes...

 

i'm pretty sure you'd have a very good case to respond with something referencing the original claim was issued to solely stop the statute barred clock. which is somewhat an abuse of the court system.

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 you are correct just before SB'd by about a week if I recall

 

so the way forward is to sit and wait to see if N244 is issued

BUT more importantly to await a court letter saying that the stay is lifted

Am I correct in my assumption?

 

otherwise just ignore any further communications re this matter?

Link to post
Share on other sites

no the claim is not automictically lifted should the fleecers issue an N244.

 

there has to be a court hearing, which is where the notification from the court becomes important as it will detail important things the claimant and defendant must do by certain dates.

 

however...……...

it is worthy to note that many DCA's issue N244's to the defendant on stayed court claims without actually filing them to the court, hoping the defendant doesn't know otherwise and wets themselves and coughs up in panic.

 

 

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

mcol wont change even if they did.

 

I pers would still read dca letters:lol:

 

 

 

 

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

  • 6 months later...

Open

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

Thank you dx for opening thread, something I mistakenly thought was over.

After all this time paperwork from Lowell re lifting the "stay"

Please note paperwork was emailed to an account where it sat in the spam box, the only paperwork delivered by post is the last 2 items "accounts"

Lowell_merged_25062020.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

As post 93

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

On 26/11/2019 at 15:59, dx100uk said:

no the claim is not automatically lifted should the fleecers issue an N244.

 

there has to be a court hearing, which is where the notification from the court becomes important as it will detail important things the claimant and defendant must do by certain dates.

 

however...……...

it is worthy to note that many DCA's issue N244's to the defendant on stayed court claims without actually filing them to the court, hoping the defendant doesn't know otherwise and wets themselves and coughs up in panic.

 

 

^^^

 

Nothing to so with mcol..not sure why you are looking there...

 

Begging letter!!

 

Re read from your defence filing post

 

 

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...