Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Sorry, had a meltdown.   Returned the form to the court. Said that I believed the loans wee still deferred but that I was happy enough to make some form of repayment. The court referred back to Shoosmiths who contacted me. Reiterated my belief that the loans should still be deferred but said was "happy enough" to make repayments at the level I would if I was earning above the threshold. Not good enough so offered a slight increase, which I was prepared to do as i had been considering starting repayments anyway. This still wasn't good enough for them.   Long story short, they've done bugger all since until last week, when they sent a letter recorded delivery saying Erudio had instructed them to recommence legal proceedings. They included a form to return to the court to give reasons why the legal action should not resume.   Financially, because of covid, I am worse off now than I was previously (my partner is self employed and her industry has been shut down).   Any thoughts on how to respond? I note that they have not reported to the CRAs.  
    • I'm on pip and in my current property I'm allowed 2 bedrooms 1 for me and 1 for carers 
    • This is taken from the Sure Start Maternity Grant application form.  I have made bold/underlined, what they have applied.   They have not applied any exception which you think should be applied in your case.   You may be able to get a Sure Start Maternity Grant if you live in England or Wales and   : • your new baby is the only child under 16 years of age in your family, or • you already have a child or children under 16 years of age in your family and you are having a multiple birth, for example twins or triplets, or • you already have a child under 16 years of age living with you who is not your own, such as a younger brother or sister, that you are looking after because he or she is not able to be looked after by his or her own parents and they were over 12 months old when this arrangement started.   Stepchildren or partner’s children under 16 years of age are counted as children living with you so if you have stepchildren or partner’s children under 16 years of age living with you, you may not be able to get a Sure Start Maternity Grant, and you or your partner are getting one of the following benefits: • Universal Credit • Child Tax Credit • Working Tax Credit which includes a disability or severe disability element • Income Support • Income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance • Income-based Employment and Support Allowance • Pension Credit 
    • and here's the text from my first challenge letter to PCM  - red bits I'm not sure whether apply - PCM are an IAS member not POPLA    ============================ Name Address here Date: 16.01.2021 Without prejudice, except as to costs Parking Charge Notice - Notice to Keeper PC16620810   This letter is a formal challenge to the issue of your Parking Charge Notice - Notice to Keeper as set out in the current BPA Ltd AOS Code of Practice B.22   On 12.01.20 I was the registered keeper of a Hyundai Tucson, registration number XXX XXX.   Before I decide how to deal with your Parking Charge Notice - Notice to Keeper, I should be grateful if you would first answer all the questions and deal with all the issues I have set out below. Once you have done so, I will be able to make an informed decision on how I deal with the matter.   I should be grateful for specific answers to all questions raised. In this respect I remind you of the obligations set out in the current Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct. I dispute your claim for the reasons set out below. Please note that although I dispute the whole basis of the parking charge, my main concern is its disproportionate and punitive level. 1. Your parking charge amount claim.   Please explain on which of the following grounds your claim is based:   (i)   Damages for trespass (ii) Damages for breach of contract (iii)  A contractual sum 2. Your loss.   If it is your case that that a trespass was committed or that a contract was breached such that your claim is one for damages; please give me a full breakdown of the actual losses which evidences that this parking charge is a true reflection of the damages caused solely by the alleged parking contravention.       3. Your status – the creditor.   Your Parking Charge Notice - Notice to Keeper simply mentions Parking Control Management (UK) Ltd. seeking monies.  Please tell me the actual creditor who is making this £100 parking charge demand. I need to know exactly who is making the claim and in what capacity. I also must first draw your attention to the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012, Keeper liability for parking charges incurred on private land. “The Creditor or its agent must have made application to the DVLA for your name and address either ·        NOT EARLIER than 28 days after the vehicle was parked (where a Notice to Driver  was issued); or ·        NOT LATER than 14 days after the vehicle was parked (where a Notice to Driver was not issued)”.   Your letter dated 13/01/202021 alleges that an NTD (in your terms a PCN) was affixed to the windscreen of the vehicle at 12:14 in Southbrook Rise SO15.   This is wholly incorrect, no NTD (PCN) invoice was affixed to the windscreen of the vehicle. Fortunately for yourselves this was the case as any attempt to touch the vehicle in question could have resulted in damage and a claim made against yourselves for touching the property of the registered keeper.   You may well have issued a PCN but as no such NTD was put on the vehicle as the driver has confirmed the employee of your company walked off from the driver of the vehicle on that day. So your request for details was made beyond the 14 day time limit as the registered keeper had no PCN affixed to their vehicle to examine.   I also draw your attention to the prior case of Jopson v Homeguard (2016) as the homeowner was being assisted in loading her chattels into a van and the alleged vehicle as being moved house and that has been established as clear legitimate reasons for using a residents car park in law your claim of a parking charge is illegitimate and void.   On the incident in question an employee of PCM approached the driver & leaseholder loading the van and car heavy furniture and after explaining it was being loaded for moving home she advised the vehicles could stay and load up and walked off. Seeing as under Jopson v Homeguard (2016) residents and their agents are entitled to be able to load vehicles for said cases and as the employee agreed to this the driver and homeowner continued to load up as quickly as possible.   Your own photographic evidence actually clearly shows the box van and the alleged vehicle with its tail gate open as it was being loaded.   The employee returned later on while the driver was continuing to load in the back of the van and alleged vehicle, she took a picture of the car and when asked what she was doing went back on her original statement saying now it had no permit and was not between the lines either. Again which was it that was at issue? Both vehicles were stopped loading up in the same way.   Your letter itself states PCN was “For parked outside of a marked bay/ Outside of marked lines/On restricted roadway/landscaped/paved areas or causing an obstruction to others” Which is it? Can you make your mind up? That it didn’t have a permit or that it was across the lines or one of the other alleged issues? In any case, as vehicles and residents are entitled to load furniture under current law any of your alleged breaches are once again null and void.   The attached photo also shows the van for loading at the same time and across the lines, however, it has been issued no such NTD or NTK. Either your rules apply equally or they don’t.   The hire van also had no permit seeing as the tenant does have one of your permits but this is only for the car registered to themselves and not a van loading furniture and chattels. This was further explained to your employee at the time.   The driver confirms that the alleged vehicle was moved immediately as the employee returned and tried to sneak up to the vehicle just as the driver was loading the vehicles. The employee then changed their earlier statement “allowing” loading so they moved it into the roadway upon hearing this but the employee then came onto the street in the roadway which is not within the land being discussed and tried to push an NTD into their hand demanding they take it.   Under current distancing regulations and guidance she was far too close to the driver, had no PPE equipment on and did not maintain a 1 or 2 metre distance, actually touching the driver could have been construed as an assault in any case and could have contaminated them even from her equipment and breath.   4. Ownership of premises.   Please tell me who owns the car park as I wish to send them a copy of this letter. The driver of the vehicle is a leaseholder of this apartment block with a dedicated parking space. The lease governs the behaviours, relationships, rights and obligations of the parties to it. The claim is for a parking charge but the amounts due by the driver on an ongoing basis under the lease do not include parking charges. The lease gives access to the leaseholder to common parts of the development such as access roads and laydown areas which have conferred a right for the driver to park in that location, in order to facilitate the unloading of an awkward and heavy load from the vehicle into the apartment (large bed delivery or house removal) – just like Jopson in Jopson v Homeguard.   5. Contractual Authority (as required by BPA Ltd AOS CoP B.7)   Please provide me with a copy of the contract between your company and the landowner/landholder that provides the necessary contractual written authority for the issue and enforcement of your Parking Charge Notice - Notice to Keeper.   6. Signage.   If it is your case that a contract has been breached or that a contractual sum is now due, please send me photographs of the signs that you display and upon which you seek to evidence that a lawful and legally enforceable contract was been entered into. Please ensure that the photographs show the terms and conditions in a clear and legible manner. Please provide me with a diagram showing the locations and layout of those signs at the car park. Also provide evidence that the wording is in plain and intelligible language and in sufficiently large print as to be legible to a driver at the car park’s actual entry point. The small print on the signage does not allow the driver of any vehicle to read the terms and conditions of the car park until they are already in the car park and have been photographed by the Automatic Number Plate Recognition camera. There is no opportunity to make a decision not to enter the car park after reading the signs. As the wording of the signage forbids parking without a permit, then there is no offer to park and therefore no contract. The Claimant’s signage is forbidding in that it states in capital letters “ENFORCEMENT IN OPERATION 24 HOURS” Any breach of terms and conditions will result in the driver being liable for a charge of £100. It therefore seeks to offer parking there via a parking charge breach of terms and conditions, contrary to the finding in PCM-UK v Bull. As the judge said in PCM-UK v Bull  “However, in my judgment, there was never any contractual relationship, whether one categorises it as a licence or simply some form of contractual permission, because that is precisely what PCM were not giving to people who parked on the roadway” As you know in that instance as I believe you are aware, a trespass may possibly have occurred, but that meant only the landowner could claim, not the parking company.   7. Summary I look forward to receiving your acknowledgement within 14 days and as there are no ‘exceptional circumstances’ your comprehensive reply within 35 days (in accordance with the BPA AOS Code of Practice B.22.8). I will then be able to make an informed decision as to how I deal with your Parking Charge Notice – Notice to Keeper. If you reject this challenge or fail to address the issues that have been raised then, in accordance with the BPA AOS Code of Practice 22.12, please ensure that you enclose all the required information (including any necessary ‘IAS code’) so that I may immediately refer the matter for their decision. If you fail to follow any of the procedures outlined in the BPA AOS Code of Practice or your legal requirements under the Protection of Freedoms Act, or the requirements of the Practice Direction on Pre-Action Conduct then I will make a formal complaint to the DVLA Data Sharing Policy Group, D16. I may make further representation to the Information Commissioner under GDPR regulations for any potential breach of use of my information.   Please Note: Unless you have specifically requested it and received my express permission, you do not have my authority to disclose or refer this letter or any other communication from me to any other person or organisation.   Yours Name here  
    • Without reading into the issues you discuss in your post, not sure of the legal position here.   But what you can do, is ask the DWP for a written statement of reason confirming the legislation they have applied to decline your benefit claim and also how they have applied this legislation in your case.    When you contact them asking for the written statement of reason, ask them to note that you will be submitting a mandatory reconsideration and will be providing further information, once you have the written statement of reason from them.
  • Our picks

    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 31 replies
    • Hermes lost parcel.. Read more at https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/422615-hermes-lost-parcel/
      • 49 replies

Lowell Telecom account in default reported on credit report


Recommended Posts

I am new to this site but it is exactly what the Dr. ordered. Brilliant self help. 

 

Lowell is reporting a default in the amount of £674.00 for a Telecoms supplier.

It gives an address that I lived at until

  • Moved in June 2014  out Dec 2014.
  • Account start date was 15/07/2013
  • Default 10/12/2015
  • This date not possible because I did not live at or have a land line in December of 2015.
  •  

Lowell is reporting account as of April 2016.

nothing from the telecoms supplier on the report.

 

I do not have any documents cornering this account.

I need to get docs to challenge the credit report.

 

what are the steps I should take?  

have read other posts about SAR.

should I ask  BT to provide me with a SAR first.

 

Also interesting twist to credit reporting, I have been reading GDPR on credit collectors.

I have not seen any comments on using this as a tool/argument to dispute credit reporting.

This would be correct since the originator of the data is NOT Lowell. 

 

Any one tried this angle?

any advice is appreciated.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and Welcome to CAG

 

I have moved your thread to the correct forum ...please continue to post here.

 

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 OTHERS

 

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

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

a debt buyer cant register nor change the default date issued by the original creditor when or before they sold the debt.

 

so your target would be BT.

 

 

but its weird they've done so some 12mts after you left the property though.

unless Lowell have fudged it which not unheard of

eitherway

you dont owe the money. [till end of contract monthly sums] Ofcom are clear on this .

 

yep sar BT 1st lets see what gives

 

 

 

 

 

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
  • 2 months later...
  • 3 months later...

Lowell has written to me concerning this debt on the 23rd of Jan 2020.

letter states:

We have noted the contents of your letter and we understand that you have no knowledge of this account. We are able to offer the following information regarding the account.

• Agreement start date: 19/06/2014

• Application address: Flat 4, 3 Kempsford Gardens

• Tariff Description: Phone BB Hardware

• Disconnect Reason: Cessation by BT

• Original Creditor: BT Retail Consumer

• Mobile Number:02078351401 ( this is a landline )

• Client last payment date: 16/12/2014

• Client last payment value: 86.16 this is not £499.00

• Default date: 27/08/2015, this doesn't square with last pay date.

• Airtime Debt Value:257.94

• Early Terminate Fee:241.99, can they charge this?

• Billing Date:27/03/15

LOW105_230120 497503_

MACHINE

\ 116\247 \ lof2 \

Airtime Debt is for the services used and the Early Termination Fee is calculated to reflect the remaining months of your contract which remain unpaid from the date of your account closure.

We have requested from BT PLC a copy of the statements for the account to help clarify this matter for you. We will write to you further once we have received this documentation and in the meantime your account is on hold.

 

I obtain the SAR. it is attached: this is all they hold.

1. Can you explain the implications of the response  and the SAR as far as Lowell being able to collect the debt?

 

2. I responded to Lowell with this letter:

Lowell Financial Ltd.

4875

Dear Sir:

I write to you in response to your letter of 23 January 2020. Insofar that a relationship may have existed between myself and BT I cannot recall this account (Agreement) and request that you supply me with a copy of the Account/Agreement and other documents listed in the bullet points of your response.

I  deny any breach  of the purported agreement. You have failed to supply me with a copy of the agreement requested . I have never received any evidence that you are the legal owner of the debt, by assignment, sale and purchase agreement or otherwise. I have never received and am unaware of any legal notice of assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to Law and property Act 1925 Section 136(1). This document is not referenced in your response.

I deny that I have failed  to maintain the required payments to BT. It is denied that I have failed to respond to demands for payment sent by you and/or its agents. Lowell is put to strict proof that any such demands have been sent to me by you.

a). Lowell appears to  admit it is the assignee of a debt, it is denied that the Lowell has the right to lay a claim due to contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act 1925. 

b). It is further denied any funds are due Lowell  because the Lowell appears to have sold this debt to another firm in 2019.  Lowell must therefore show how it has legal right, either under statue or equity to collect this sum from me.

I  deny owing any money to Lowell  and you are required to produce evidence to support your claims that this sum is in default, due and owning this includes:

a. Show how the I  entered into an Agreement.

b. Show how I  have reached the amount claimed for.

c. Show that I  failed to maintain the required payments and the service was terminated as claimed.

d. Show that the statute of limitations on this alleged debt has not passed.

7. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4) it is expected that Lowell must  prove the allegations that the money is owed; having been provided with written requests for information under CPR 31.14 and to date have failed to provide any such documentation as detailed in its response letter. 

8. Notwithstanding the above should the alleged amount claimed include an early termination charge(s) amounting to the entire balance of the remaining contract. OFCOM guidance states that any Early Termination Charge that is made up of the entire balance if the remaining contract is unlikely to be fair as it fails to consider the fact that the provider no longer has to provide and pay for their service.  You state that the balance due includes £241.99. You must remove this from any collection efforts, and I dispute that this and all other balances are owed by me.

9. Show that I was residing at Flat 4 3 Kempsford Gardens on the alleged defaulted date of 27/08/2015 or any other date after 16/12/2014.  Alternatively remove any debt you allege is owed  because back billing and billing for unused services is not allowed.

10. Please explain Lowell reporting to the credit bureaus that the debt outstanding to BT is £674. The account number concerning 3 Kempsford Gardens Flat 4 which I hold is another account number which is BT xx7 start date is 15/07.2013.

11. The account number you claim is owed to you is an original account number BT xxx 07. You claim the start date on this account is 19/06/2014. Please explain the discrepancy between these two accounts including ownership of both accounts, and why there are two accounts you allege for the same address with different dates. Alternatively, if you have no explanation:

You must cease and desist from collection activity including reporting to the credit bureaus, pre claim letters and any other forms of collection activity with immediate effect. Please write to me confirming that you will take no further action. Failing this I will file a counterclaim and ask the court for costs.

Kind Regards

 

 

 I received the email below last night: "I can see that we also hold the following account details for you:

 

Account Number

Original Client

Original Client Reference

Current Balance

XXX192

Orange

xxx321

£285.91

XXX875

BT PLC

xxx207

£499.93

 

I can see that the above BT PLC account is currently on hold, as we are requesting information from BT PLC directly.

 

1. how long does BT have to respond? the date of Lowell letter was 23rd of Jan.

2. if BT doesn't respond within that time frame, what can I do to get the account removed from the Credit reports? .

3. how can I get Lowell to stop collection if BT doesn't respond?

what is also interesting is I have a letter from Lowell for the orange account and also a BT account, but the balance is £199.11 and the account number ends in 192. There are too many account numbers with different balances for the same address. any suggestions how I address this with Lowell?

 

Lowell writes:  

"The period for recovering your Orange account by court action has expired. We will not be issuing court proceedings to enforce payment. However, your debt still exists and legally we are within our rights to continue to ask you for repayment. With this being said, this account does not look to have a payment arrangement set up as of yet. How would you like to proceed with this account going forward? If you can let us know then we can look to assist you further".

 

If the time has expired to collect a debt from orange, how do they have a right to collect? seems the SOL runs for both.

how should I respond?

 

In the meantime, I have placed your Vodafone and Orange accounts on hold for the next 30 days to give you time to get back to us.

 

Can you give me some suggestions on how I unravel this and respond?

Thank you. 

SAR_BT.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

why did you enter into pointless letter tennis?

have you had a letter of claim or a court claimform?

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 debt was already defaulted by BT when they sold it on

Lowell cant change that nor are they harming your rating any further by continually reporting to it.

 

its on your file till the defaults 6th birthday, then it will vanish paid or not.

doesn't mean the debt is not still owed mind.

but that's down to Lowell to chance issue a letter of claim and then p'haps a court claim.

until then - ignore them..though neither of the above should you ignore

 

until then

no good you firing all your bullets as you have, as they'll know what your defence is.

we've not lost a Lowell telecom claim for ages now and they normally discontinue when fronted out.

 

your pointless letter tennis simply makes them think one more letter will scare you into paying.

 

 

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 debt was already defaulted by BT when they sold it on

Lowell cant change that nor are they harming your rating any further by continually reporting to it.

Incorrect, its a defaulted acct effects credit score.  

 

I cannot ignore the credit reports.

 

please answer my question.

1. how long does BT have to respond? the date of Lowell letter was 23rd of Jan. 

 

2. if BT doesn't respond within that time frame, what can I do to get the account removed from the Credit reports? .

 

3. how can I get Lowell to stop collection if BT doesn't respond timely.

 

1. Can you explain the implications of the response and the SAR as far as Lowell being able to collect the debt?

thank you. 

 

Not going to pay, not scared either. If they canot prove debt the report comes off 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Escaped said:

Incorrect, its a defaulted acct effects credit score.  - correct by the OC upon sale, Lowell simply updating doesn't harm the score anymore

 

I cannot ignore the credit reports. - why not?

 

please answer my question.

1. how long does BT have to respond? the date of Lowell letter was 23rd of Jan. - respond to what? ..your SAR = 30days.

 

2. if BT doesn't respond within that time frame, what can I do to get the account removed from the Credit reports? .- you can't 

 

3. how can I get Lowell to stop collection if BT doesn't respond timely.- you don't have too

 

1. Can you explain the implications of the response and the  SAR as far as Lowell being able to collect the debt? - they can ask or issue PAPLOC/courtclaim.

 

thank you. 

 

Not going to pay, not scared either. If they canot prove debt the report comes off

 

not surewhat sites you are reading, but you debt theories are woefully incorrect.

 

being unable to prove a debt doesn't mean its removal, only the OC can do that, and as you owed money, they defaulted you and quite correctly so.

anything after that date on your file has no effect on it.

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 misunderstood

how long does bt have to produce the requested d ocs here? 

 

Agreement start date: 19/06/2014

• Application address: Flat 4, 3 Kempsford Gardens

• Tariff Description: Phone BB Hardware

• Disconnect Reason: Cessation by BT

• Original Creditor: BT Retail Consumer

• Mobile Number:02078351401 ( this is a landline )

• Client last payment date: 16/12/2014

• Client last payment value: 86.16 this is not £499.00 

• Default date: 27/08/2015, this doesn't square with last pay date. 

• Airtime Debt Value:257.94

• Early Terminate Fee:241.99, can they charge this? 

• Billing Date:27/03/15

If no response within statutory time,  what can i do to get lowell remove credit report?

Can you explain the implications of the response and the  SAR as far as Lowell being able to collect the debt? - they can ask or issue PAPLOC/courtclaim. 

I attached the sar is this enuf info to prove lowell has any legal rights?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well what do you expect

they are a fleecing dca and should have been ignored from day 1

No-one said engage with them. 

 

Your target is/was bt.

They dont have to provide anything ...there must be some sort of debt to them. If that sum is incorrect so what?

 

Just because they cant provide paperwork doesnt mean the entry should be removed.

 

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
  • 10 months later...

We have the right to contact you about the debt we hold which is as follows, however we can remove this email from our system again if you wish:

 

Account Number

Original Client

Original Client Reference

Current Balance

xxxxx1368

Vodafone

xxxxx4850

£674.76

 

The Limitation Act and your account

We’ve noted your comments, however, Vodafone account ...... is not statute barred under the Limitation Act 1980.

 

This is because the full balance became due after you defaulted on the original agreement.

According to Vodafone, the Default Date was 10/12/2015 and the debt remains enforceable for 6 years after this date.

 

This account had an agreement start date of 15/07/2013 and was disconnected on 06/09/15.

It relates to phone number xxxxx08279.

The last payment on this account was made for £108.85 on 13/04/2015 before a default was applied on 10/12/2015 for the balance of £674.76. 

 

this account and telephone number is not mine.

I provided Lowell with evidence that at the time of the default, i was living in another country. 

 

The debt is comprised of an Early Termination Fee of £206.96 and had an Airtime Debt Value of £467.80. how do i dispute this? 

 

Airtime debt is made up of any usage and your monthly payments until the account was disconnected.

Early Termination Fees are charged as your account was closed prior to your contract expiry date as specified in the Terms and Conditions of the contract, as such you become liable to pay the full cost of the remaining line rental.

Does this help you to recognise the account? NO

 

Please be advised that we are unable to supply you with a copy of the deed of assignment as this account was purchased as part of a bulk of accounts and therefore the assignment will hold personal data in relation to our other customers.

Lowell are not legally obliged to provide this information.

 

Ok if this is the case, then how can they collect the debt. what do i need to ask for to dispute? 

 

The deed of assignment is an agreement entered into between the original owners of the accounts and Lowell Portfolio I Ltd.

The deed of assignment does not contain any specific details relating to individual customers whose debts are being purchased.

This contract is therefore not part of the information which you are entitled to.

 

A copy of the notice of assignment is attached to this email. i have included this in my post. 

 

I have requested a copy of a statement from Vodafone which may come in the form of a final bill. The account is on hold until the document can be provided.

 

Lowell are not applying any charges or interest to the balance.

 

Lowell is not obliged to provide an agreement for this account as telecommunications contracts (landline, mobile and broadband) are a service agreement and not a credit agreement, as defined by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. As this is not a regulated agreement under the Consumer Credit Act, there is no obligation to provide a copy signed agreement.

 

For telecommunications contracts, usage of the equipment is taken as acceptance of the terms and conditions of the contract. Telecommunications accounts can be obtained by telephone, online and by mail order, this means that a signed agreement may never have existed, so we wouldn’t look to request one from the original creditor.

 

There’s no obligation for Lowell to issue a new default notice, default warning letter or provide copies of the original default notice, suspension or termination notices issued by any original companies. i was asking for the original default letter and other supporting documents from them. if they cannot provide, surely they will stop collecting, Right? 

 

For further information relating to charges and payments made to Vodafone, you would need to submit a Data Subject Access Request direct to Vodafone. so should i send a SAR to Vodafone? 

 

Data Subject Access Request

If there’s some particular information you need, or you have a specific question about your account, let us know – we’re here to help and will contact Vodafone on your behalf.

 

However, if you want a copy of all the information Vodafone hold for the account, you would need to submit a data subject access request to Vodafone, in accordance with data protection legislation.

 

We also have details of the following accounts:

notice of assignment.pdf

how do i respond to this please? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

so this debt is now a vodafone one?

 

Lowell Telecom account in default reported on credit report - Telecoms - mobile or fixed - Consumer Action Group

 

you were told before to stop pointless letter tennis 

 

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 them until/unless you get a letter of claim.

so why did you tell us last time this was a BT debt ?

 

but the same advice applies as in that other thread..

a telecom provider can't issue a default notice so that date is pretty much immaterial.

its already defaulted so your file can't be harmed anymore.

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

Because they wrote to me last time and told me  I also had a BT debt. its now time barred. seems this is a new one. Its not my account. so i cannot ignore it. i need to ask them to prove its my account. in this case, since its not, i need your help yo ask for proof. thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Send an SAR now. There is nothing to lose

Link to post
Share on other sites

why is it the same £value as the old supposed BT one..exactly the same!

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

Hello

i cacluated the VF debt as follows:

£467 + ET fee £206.= £673.

old BT debt is £499.+ 119.= £619.

which part of the£value is the same?

what am i missing here?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Escaped said:

The last payment on this account was made for £108.85 on 13/04/2015 before a default was applied on 10/12/2015 for the balance of £674.76. 

Lowell stated the above

thats exactly the same as the bt thread

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

Show that I was residing at  Kempsford Gardens on the alleged defaulted date of 27/08/2015 or any other date after 16/12/2014.  

 

Alternatively remove any debt you allege is owed because back billing and billing for unused services is not allowed.

 

10. Please explain Lowell reporting to the credit bureaus that the debt outstanding to BT is £674.

The account number concerning 3 Kempsford Gardens Flat 4 which I hold is another account number which is BT xx7 start date is 15/07.2013.

 

11. The account number you claim is owed to you is an original account number BT xxx 07.

You claim the start date on this account is 19/06/2014.

Please explain the discrepancy between these two accounts including ownership of both accounts, and why there are two accounts you allege for the same address with different dates. 

 

i assume this is what you are referring to ?

this is posted under my BT query on CAG. 

if yes you are right.

they reported the BT debt as the same amount, Bait and switch.

 

what should i do about this?

i just sent a SAR request to Vodafone

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

ignore them until unless they send a letter of claim with a reply pack.

stop contacting powerless dca's inviting pointless letter tennis.

back billing does not apply to telecom debts

 

 

 

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

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...