Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice is change. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been reading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. On mediation form you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee that you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.  
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
    • too true HB, but those two I referred for starters - appear to be self admitted - One to excuse other lockdown law breaking, by claiming his estate away from his consistency and London abode was his main home the other if he claims to have 'not told the truth' in his own words via that quote - to have mislead his investors rather than broken lobbying rules   - seem to be slam dunks - pick which was your law breaking - it seems to be both and much more besides in Jenricks case Starmer was director of public prosecutions yet the tories are using seemingly baseless allegations for propaganda and starmer is missing pressing apparent blatant criminality in politics
    • I am sure the resident experts will give you a comprehensive guide to your rights.  The responsibility lies with the retailer. I have dealt with Cotswold before for similar. And found them refreshingly helpful.   Even when I lost the receipt for one item I had bought in Inverness. The manager in Newcastle called the store. Found the transaction and gave me a full refund. 
  • 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 claimform - old morses club doorstep Loan ***Claim Discontinued***


dave466
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 760 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

Name of the Claimant ? Lowell portfolio

 

Date of issue –27/08/20

 

Particulars of Claim

 

1) The Defendant entered into an agreement for a Morses account under reference xxxx ('the agreement')

 

2) The defendant failed to maintain the required payments and the agreement was terminated.

 

3) The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 05/09/19 by Morses club and notice given to the defendant.

 

4) Despite repeated request for payment, the sum of £715.00 remains due and outstanding. AND the claimant claims 

 

a) The said sum of £715.00

b) Interest pursuant to s69 count court acts 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.157, but limited to one year, being £55.79

c) Costs

 

What is the total value of the claim?  £900.79
 

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ?  Not 100% sure
 

Have you changed your address since the time at which the debt referred to in the claim was allegedly incurred? No
 

Did you inform the claimant of your change of address? N/A

Is the claim for - a Bank Account (Overdraft) or credit card or loan or catalogue or mobile phone account? Doorstep loan/morses
 

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After 2007
 

Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Home visit
 

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? Yes showing as lowell 

Start 02/07/18

Default 02/06/19

Looked through all closed too and nothing for this account.

 

Has the claim been issued by the original creditor or was the account assigned and it is the Debt purchaser who has issued the claim. Debt collector/solicitor

 

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? I believe so

 

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? Not sure

 

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? Not sure

 

Why did you cease payments? Financial difficulties

 

What was the date of your last payment?  Not sure

 

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No
 

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? No

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

so same as all your other claims for now:

 

pop up on the MCOL website detailed on the claimform.
[if mcol is not working return after the w/end or the next day if week time]
.
 register as an individual
 note the long gateway number given
 then log in
.
 select respond to a claim and select the start AOS box.
.
 then using the details required from the claimform
.
 defend all
 leave jurisdiction unticked
 you DO NOT file a defence at this time

[you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 ]
 click thru to the end
 confirm and exit MCOL.
..
 get a CCA Request running to the claimant
https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332502-cca-request-consumer-credit-act-1974-updated-january-2015/
 leave the £1PO blank and uncrossed
..
 get a CPR 31:14 request running to the solicitors [if one is not listed send to the claimant]
..

https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/332546-legal-cpr-3114-request-request-for-information-when-a-claim-has-been-issued/
..
type your name ONLY

no need to sign anything
.
you DO NOT await the return of paperwork.
you MUST file a defence regardless by day 33 from the date on the claimform [1 in the count]
 

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

  • dx100uk changed the title to Lowell claimform - old morses club doorstep Loan

Yeah I have done that thanks.

But i have just realised I have sent the cca to lowell solicitors address for sending documents and payments. Does this need to be sent to the lowell claimant address instead?

Thanks 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wouldn't worry same room next desk.

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

  • 3 weeks later...

Today I have recieved a letter from lowell with a copy of the notice of assignment.

 

The letter also states that they confirm my aos and that a request has been sent to their client to obtain a copy of the documents I have requested, but be advised they can not control the timeframe in which it takes for those to be provided.

 

Regards 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Defence due Monday 28th Sept by 4.00pm .....irrespective of their missive.

 

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

std reply in most lowell claimform threads

changes nothing.

 

you file your defence on time regardless. by 4pm monday

 

 

 

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

Why wait until Saturday...your not going to get any response:becky:

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

 

1) The Defendant entered into an agreement for a Morses account under reference xxxx ('the agreement')

 

2) The defendant failed to maintain the required payments and the agreement was terminated.

 

3) The agreement was later assigned to the claimant on 05/09/19 by Morses club and notice given to the defendant.

 

4) Despite repeated request for payment, the sum of £715.00 remains due and outstanding.

 

 

AND the claimant claims 

a) The said sum of £715.00

b) Interest pursuant to s69 count court acts 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.157, but limited to one year, being £55.79

c) Costs

How does this look guys?

 

DEFENCE

 

1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.

The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

2. Paragraph 1 is noted. I have in the past had an agreement with morses but do not recognise this specific account number or recollect any outstanding debt and have therefore requested clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 77 request which the claimant is currently unable to comply with and therefore unable to prove its basis of claim pleaded within its particulars

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a Default Notice pursuant to the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

4. On receipt of the*claim form, the Defendant sent a request by way of a section 77 pursuant to the consumer credit Act 1974 for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has yet to comply and remains in default of said request.

 

5. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and;

b) Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for and;

c) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87.1 CCA 1974.

d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

 

6. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

7. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

pers id not be using the word agreement 

 

Paragraph  is noted and accepted I have in the past had financial dealings with [insert Original Creditor].I do not recall the precise details or agreement and have sought verification from the claimant etcetc

 

what about the letter of claim (PAPLOC) did they send one ..better if you can nail that down too.

 

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

Thankyou.

 

So this is now good to go mate?

 

DEFENCE

 

1. The Defendant contends that the particulars of claim are vague and generic in nature.The Defendant accordingly sets out its case below and relies on CPR r 16.5 (3) in relation to any particular allegation to which a specific response has not been made.

 

2. Paragraph 1 is noted and accepted I have in the past had financial dealings with Morses in which I cant recall the precise details of any agreement and have therefore sought  clarification by way of a CPR 31.14 and section 77 request which the claimant is currently unable to comply with and therefore unable to prove its basis of claim pleaded within its particulars.

 

3. Paragraph 2 is denied. I have not been served with a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87 (1) the consumer credit Act 1974.

 

4. On receipt of this claim I sent a CPR 31.14 request and a section 77 request for sight of any documents referred to within the Claimants particulars to establish what the claim is for. To date they remain in default of both requests. Therefore the claimant in their none compliance to my requests have frustrated my attempts to clarify their claim .

 

5. It is therefore not accepted with regards to the Defendant owing any monies to the Claimant and the Claimant is put to strict proof to:

 

a) Show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement and;

b) Show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for and;

c) Show the nature of the breach and evidence by way of a Default Notice pursuant to sec 87.1 CCA 1974.

d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim.

 

6. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the Claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed.

 

7. By reasons of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you've had 7 court claims and are far more familiar than me....

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

Are you positive that you have had a Notice of Assignment ?   Worth challenging if your not .

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

Okay well I have just again edited your defence above....okay to submit now.

 

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

Typical...its almost as if they know what hour your going to submit your defence......scan redact and upload here for opinion.

 

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

read upload scan to one multipage pdf please

 

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

Appears to be good...and its only 2 years old so you would expect so.

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...