Jump to content

 

BankFodder BankFodder


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • 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
    • Hello and welcome to CAG.   Could you tell us what your contract says about overtime please? It will help us to advise you.   HB
    • Hi there,   I've been on a on call rota for some years now which as been a 1 in 3 weeks and been paid a weekly allowance for this service and overtime paid extra should I be called out. My employer now wants to change this to a 1 in 4 weeks which now leaves me out of pocket just for the on call payments a year.   Do I have an argument that i am effectively been force to take a pay cut and that i should be compensaited accordingly ?   thanks in advance for any advise.   Fred.      
    • hi again     the original supplier was AO but was out of warranty with them so hotpoint took it up.    the oven was replaced around January time, with us notifying them we was not happy fairly shortly after delivery.  hotpoint said the exact same model, which was delivered HUD61PS - but is only the same on model number. (Which I think is naughty as they changed a major function)       
  • Our picks

aaroh

Got SJP after GDPR

Recommended Posts

Honestly I will declare it

its all about me keeping my job and food on the table.

Just worried I could be marched off sight and that is that.

 

It was either I plead Guilty ( Get a criminal record) 

Plead not guilty and still (get a criminal record as i dont have a leg to stand on)

 

I was hoping for the best case scenrio, avoid the record avoid the embarracement. Gosh i hate stella rather bottle of red wine 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, aaroh said:

Now the after I sign my plea ill need to declare it to NSV about the offence hopefully its ok or ill lose my job.

 

Millions (literally) of people commit speeding offences every year. If every one of them lost their job as a result those millions would be unemployed. I know of few jobs where a single speeding conviction would result in dismissal.

 

Should you be unfortunate enough to be in this position again simply follow the process as laid out in the paperwork.

Don't get smart and start prattling on about your (mistaken) rights under GDPR or whatever.

 

As you have seen, by the time you've established your rights correctly you will face a court hearing.

You can ask for "photographs to help identify the driver" before you return your driver nomination form (though that does not stop the 28 day clock measuring the period in which you have to respond).

 

Don't ask for "evidence" as it may be taken that you are disputing the matter and out-of-court disposals (far and away the most favourable option) may not be offered. You have no entitlement to evidence unless the matter goes to court.

 

Most forces will provide such photos (though they don't have to) by giving you a link to follow.

They rarely help in identifying the driver because their purpose is to identify the vehicle.

 

Identifying the driver is your responsibility and if you fail to do so without a valid defence you commit a more serious offence which carries a hefty fine, six points and an endorsement code that will see your insurance premiums rocket.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Man in the middle said:

 

Millions (literally) of people commit speeding offences every year. If every one of them lost their job as a result those millions would be unemployed. I know of few jobs where a single speeding conviction would result in dismissal.

 

Should you be unfortunate enough to be in this position again simply follow the process as laid out in the paperwork.

Don't get smart and start prattling on about your (mistaken) rights under GDPR or whatever.

 

As you have seen, by the time you've established your rights correctly you will face a court hearing.

You can ask for "photographs to help identify the driver" before you return your driver nomination form (though that does not stop the 28 day clock measuring the period in which you have to respond).

 

Don't ask for "evidence" as it may be taken that you are disputing the matter and out-of-court disposals (far and away the most favourable option) may not be offered. You have no entitlement to evidence unless the matter goes to court.

 

Most forces will provide such photos (though they don't have to) by giving you a link to follow.

They rarely help in identifying the driver because their purpose is to identify the vehicle.

 

Identifying the driver is your responsibility and if you fail to do so without a valid defence you commit a more serious offence which carries a hefty fine, six points and an endorsement code that will see your insurance premiums rocket.

That is a fair point and noted thank you for your help. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats great just noticed though the SJP was served 6 months after the NIP was filed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Their obligation is to lodge the papers with the court within 6 months of the alleged offence.

The court can then issue the papers to you whenever they get round to them (though you might claim unfairness if there was a delay by the court that was so excessive as to be 'manifestly unfair' .....

 

Did they lodge the papers with the court within 6 months of the alleged offence?

How long was any subsequent delay by the court?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NIP was received on 7/08/2019

I returned it on 8/08/2018 along with GDPR.

 

The prosecution witness statement was signed the 18/01/2020

papers received 24/01/2020

allowing for deemed service of 2 days each way id say there an about 6 months 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was the date of the alleged offence and what was the date on the SJPN? Nothing else matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alleged offence 28/07/2019

SJPN Posting Date 17/01/2020

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually just calculated it again its just under 6 months by 11 days 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they definitely laid it before the court within 6 months AND their wasn’t an excessive delay at the court.... we aren’t talking “laid at the court at 6 months and a day” or “laid at the court at 5 months 27 days, and the court losing it for a year”...

 

No loophole there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed not. "Out-of-time" prosecutions are extremely rare.

 

With the introduction of the SJ procedure an automatic system was introduced which, simultaneously, produces a "written charge" (which is the document that effectively begins court proceedings) and the SJPN.

 

The written charge is usually transmitted electronically to the court office and the listing department returns a date for the matter to go before a SJ.

 

The SJPN is then populated with the hearing date and is sent to the defendant (together with an evidence pack).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Filled out the guilty please and means paperwork.

 

Having talked to a solicitor he advised we could goto the first stage whatever stage that is to obtain the evidence they wished to rely on and plead guilty.

 

I didnt like the gist of it seems like he was looking after a representation and soon the cost mounts up.

With all the reading up ive done over the days ive decided to make peace with it. 

 

Thank you all guys one final question though should i write anything in the guilty plea section?

Definately no sob story

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's very little point to be honest. Sentencing for speeding is quite prescriptive and there's rarely anything to be said that will influence the court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

do I have to submit means form i.e. income and expenditure?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. You should have been sent a form MC100. If the court has no details of your means it will probably impose a fine based on a default figure of £440pw Relevant Weekly Income.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

rather 440£ ..  so i dont have to! thanks for your help though.

 

Donation made!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody seems to have mentioned this even though it's in the thread title and people might search for it thinking it was a "cunning plan".  (Sorry if I have missed a mention).

 

Surely GDPR was a non-starter from the outset because the OP is asking for evidence of a (potential) criminal offence?  I'm certainly no expert, but I thought that was an exception to having to comply with a GDPR request?

 

It's a great pity (although perhaps not surprising) that upon getting a s172 request people don't seem to realise that they are just being asked to name the driver and they aren't being prosecuted for anything yet.  They'll see the evidence if and when they think they are not guilty and want their day in court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Made a guilty please fined 84+32+85=£201 and 3 points

I did however mention in the mitigation section though that " I did not realise asking for a photographic evidence would mean i would incriminate myself, It was clear this police force is not in line with others around the country."

 

Lesson learned 

Edited by aaroh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/02/2020 at 17:45, Manxman in exile said:

Nobody seems to have mentioned this even though it's in the thread title and people might search for it thinking it was a "cunning plan".  (Sorry if I have missed a mention).

 

Surely GDPR was a non-starter from the outset because the OP is asking for evidence of a (potential) criminal offence?  I'm certainly no expert, but I thought that was an exception to having to comply with a GDPR request?

 

It's a great pity (although perhaps not surprising) that upon getting a s172 request people don't seem to realise that they are just being asked to name the driver and they aren't being prosecuted for anything yet.  They'll see the evidence if and when they think they are not guilty and want their day in court.

Cunning plan or not a complaint has been made to ICO awaiting outcome.

Edited by aaroh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck but I can't see the ICO upholding a GDPR complaint that the police did not release evidence of an alleged criminal offence to the person alleged of committing that offence.

 

Let us know what the ICO says.

Edited by Manxman in exile

Share this post


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...