Jump to content


Vanquis Credit Card - Lowell Claimform


Recommended Posts

Hello all.

A claim was issued against my wife by Lowell Portfolio, at the County Court Business Centre, back on January 13th 2021. Here are the particulars of claim:

 ·,

1) The Defendant entered into a Consumer Credit Act 1974 regulated agreement with Vanquis under account reference XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ('the Agreement').

2) The Defendant failed to maintain the required payments and arrears began to accrue.

3) The Agreement was later assigned to the Claimant on 23/09/2019 and notice given to the Defendant.

4) Despite repeated requests for payment, the sum of £3,767.11 remains due and outstanding.

And the Claimant claims

a) The said sum of £3,767.11

b) Interest pursuant to s69 County Courts Act 1984 at the rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue, accruing at a daily rate of £0.826, but limited to one year, being £301.37

c) Costs

 

Mrs Fish doesn't recall getting anything from either Lowell or Vanquis with regards to PAPLOC.

On January 15th 2021, both CCA and CPR 31.14 were sent.

 

On February 9th 2021, my wife issued the following defence:

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.

1. The Claimant has not fully complied with Paragraph 3 of the
PAPDC (Pre-Action Protocol) and failed to serve a letter of claim,
pre-claim, pursuant to PAPDC changes of the 1st October 2017. It
is respectfully requested that the court take this into
consideration pursuant to 7.1 PAPDC.

2. Paragraph 1 is accepted in as much as I have in the past had
financial dealings with Vanquis, however I do not recall the
details of the alleged agreement and have sought clarity from the
claimant by way of a CPR 31.14 request and a CCA 1974 s.78
request. I am unaware of what account or contract the claimant
refers to.

3. Paragraph 2 of the claim is noted, although I am unaware of any
Notice of Sums in Arrears or actual Default Notice being served
pursuant to s.87(1) of the CCA 1974 by the original creditor.
Therefore the assignee claimant is put to strict proof to evidence
the same.

4. Paragraph 3 of the claim is wholly denied. I am unaware of any
legal Assignment or Notice of Assignment allegedly served in
September 2019.

5. The Defendant submitted a request for documents pursuant to CPR
31.14. on 15th January 2021. The Claimant acknowledged receipt of
the request, but has failed to comply.

6. The Defendant submitted a request for a copy of the alleged
Agreement pursuant to s.78 CCA 1974 on 15th January 2021. The
Claimant has acknowledged receipt of the request, but has failed
to comply.

7. It is therefore denied with regards to the Defendant owing any
monies to the Claimant. The Claimant has failed to provide any
evidence of assignment/balance/breach requested by CPR 31.14,
therefore the Claimant is required to put to strict proof to:

(a) show how the Defendant has entered into an agreement with
Vanquis; and

(b) show and evidence the nature of breach and service of a
Default Notice pursuant to s.87 (1) CCA 1974,

(c) show how the Defendant has reached the amount claimed for; and

(d) show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under
statute or equity to issue a claim;

8. As per Civil Procedure Rule 16.5(4), it is expected that the
Claimant prove the allegation that the money is owed.

9. In the alternative, if the Claimant is an assignee of a debt,
it is denied that the Claimant has the right to lay a claim due to
contraventions of Section 136 of the Law of Property Act and
Section 82A of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

10. 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.

 

Since that time, we have received nothing of any worth from Lowell until we received the following email today:

 

Dear Mrs Fish

 

Claimant: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd

Defendant: Mrs Fish

Lowell Reference: .....

Claim Number: XXXXXXX

 

We refer to the above matter and our previous letter dated 16 February 2021, a further reconstituted copy of which is attached for your benefit.

 

Our client is now in receipt of documents from Vanquis Bank Limited (‘’Vanquis’’).  Please find enclosed within the following documents which have been provided to our client by Vanquis:

 

  1. A copy of the online application details; 
  2. The Credit Agreement inclusive of the terms and conditions associated with the account;
  3. a copy of the Default Notice sent to your current address dated 21 November 2017; and
  4. an itemised statement of account which details how the original balance of £3,767.11 accumulated. 

 

Vanquis has confirmed you made the application on 25 November 2013. Your application was then approved on 27 November 2013 at 15:19pm. 

 

The statement of account evidences the accrual of the original balance. For example, on 26 July 2016 the credit card was used to spend the sum of £28.82 at at Boots store in Amesbury. The statement of account also confirms that the last payment was received by Vanquis in the sum of £100.00 on 31 October 2017. 

 

As payments were not made in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement a Default Notice was served to your address dated 21 November 2017, which required you to remedy the arrears by 10 December 2017. As the arrears were not cleared and as no arrangement for repayment was made with Vanquis a cause of action accrued on 11 December 2017.

 

Our client remains keen to resolve this matter amicably and is willing to consider any payment proposals you may have. In order to reduce further litigation costs that would be incurred if the matter were to proceed to a hearing, our client has instructed us to reiterate a reduced settlement figure of £3,200.00 in full and final settlement of the Claim. 

 

If you are agreeable to reaching a potential settlement please contact our office to discuss our client’s offer. If we fail to hear from you within 14 days, we are instructed to proceed with this matter further to the County Court where a Judgment may be entered against you. 

 

You may wish to seek independent legal advice from your local Citizens Advice Bureau, or a solicitor or firm of solicitors of your choosing. 

 

We look forward to hearing from you.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

Lowell Solicitors Limited

 

 

 

 

And here are their attached documents:

 

Binder2_Redacted.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please read and complete the following.....copy the Q,s and responses back here for further advice.

 

 

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 Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

:lol:

whats the point in scanning pages of statements that are totally redacted....

 

what you have is a std letter lowells send to every defendant they issue a speculative claim against.

its telling that their offer to settle of £3200 has not changed since before even though they appear to have all the correct paperwork...

 

9/10 for whatever reason, lowells discontinue most vanquis claims here CAG. the CCA return doesn't actually prove she took the card out online, theres no IP information of the sign up PC used.... and ofcourse anyone can download those T&C's from here or even get them out of their filing cabinet and type her details at the top....

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought it was standard for lowells to send redacted documents as true copies. 

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you mean reconstructed.

 

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

Or even reconstituted :wink:

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 Topic please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok so to agree will will call the fakes. I just thought this was normal. 

 

Go back to them telling them to foxtrot oscar and send the real copies of documents not blank pages and you will make the courts aware of what they sent. 

In fact dont lose them as you can use it as evidence. 

OFT debt collection guidance

 

Please remember the only stupid question is the one you dont ask so dont worry about asking the stupid questions.

 

Essex girl in pc world looking 4 curtains 4 her pc,the assistant says u dont need curtains 4 a computer!!Essex girl says,''HELLOOO!! i,ve got WINDOWS!!'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

you don't play your cards nor enter into pointless letter tennis...

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...