Lowell/Overdales Claim Form - old NewDay Card debt

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Received Claim Form from Northampton CC via Lowell Solicitors.

AoS filed a few moments ago.

Details of Claim Particulars;

1. The Claim is for the Sum of £979.69 due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a NewDay Ltd account with a reference of xxxxxxxxxxxxx

(note: checking the reference against credit file at the moment).

2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which has not been complied with.

3. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 03-04-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant.

4. Claim includes statutory interest under s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £68.07.

The claimant claims the sum of £1047.76

Can anyone assist please.

I suffered serious illness back in September of last year which has had severe implications on my memory  I have little to no recollection of this at all.

Further to the above, I have checked ClearScore and CreditKarma and there are not records of any such default with the account number listed on the form or that match the figures claimed for.

Could use some guidance please?

[dx100uk]

When was the last time roughly you used the card paid anything? Within 6yrs?

[SimplyBeyondWords]

I genuinely can't remember.

I am not disputing having the card and suspect it is likely that last payment was during the Pandemic but I really can't remember and as I can't find any reference to an account with the account number they have stated or even the amount on my credit file/s I am bewildered.

[dx100uk]

Which means it was defaulted more than 6yrs ago and thus falls off. Just because you had the card and used it doesn't mean you owe it. Throw the morality card out the window, they did when they sold it on for peanuts. 

You need to send off CCA/CPR. Follow the rest of that court sticky. 

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Will do on Monday morning.

Do you think I should wait for their response (most likely lack of it from what I've read on here) or get on with Defence?

As I can't find reference to the account number they have quoted on either of the two credit files checked and also, I had access to Experian back in Dec and downloaded a copy of my report before cancelling and there is nothing in that either, not sure if I should put them to proof to show it is not SB?

Sorry, lots of reading and may be a little confused.

Advice needed.

I have checked the credit files for this and can't find reference to it at all as per above but there is something I am very confused about;

Back in Oct of 2018 I had a CCJ issued against me for a bad CC debt (didn't know you existed then!!) and that CCJ does not show on any of my credit reports either!

This is where I am very confused.

Can it be possible that this account is not reported on my credit files too?

I am completely stumped with this one.

I can't find reference to the account number they have stated anywhere and NewDay search just seems to bring up Marble cards. 

I know you get a little frustrated with lots of posts (I've been reading on here!!  ) but I am completely flummoxed by this.

Sorry, doing a simple search of my email account and the last 4 digits seems to bring up an account with Amazon Mastercard via NewDay taken out Sept 2019.

Does not show on my credit files.

[dx100uk]

have you moved in recent times or changed surname?

dx

 

[SimplyBeyondWords]

No, same address for the last 13+ years and no to surname.

[dx100uk]

puzzling but thats all then.

dx

 

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Today received letter from Overdales.

They have enclosed a notice of assignment from previous so called owner of debt (Hoist Finance) dated 28/04/23. Without typing it all out it says that in Oct 22 Hoist Finance was acquired by Lowell Group. Account was "sold" to them.

Also, letter from Lowell with same date (28/04/23) saying that Lowell acquired Hoist and account was "legally transferred" to them.

Seems odd that both letters have same date on them only written differently. Hoist = 28/04/2023 and Lowell = 28 April, 2023.

No credit agreement enclosed or default notice. They've raised a request with the original creditor for copies of these.

Have to say, post is also getting better, Overdales letter has arrived on 5th March 24 and is dated 5th March 24. Must have been sent by Pigeon and flown in.

Next step?

Edited March 5 by SimplyBeyondWords
Next step

[AndyOrch]

Topic moved to Financial Legal Issues forum in view of the court claim.

Please complete the following then we have all the information at a glance.

Andy

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Hi,

Defence date is getting nearer. I've not done one before but adapted one of your templates, hope that's ok.

Would someone mind reading over it for me please?

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 may in the past have had an agreement with NewDay Ltd 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 78 request, to date both requests have not been complied with.

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

4. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1). A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales Solicitors dated 28/04/2023, but this was not the original or on formal letter headed paper as requested and also states “please see enclosed letter from Lowell for information on your next steps”. The letter also enclosed, headed on Lowell Headed Paper dated “28 April, 2023”. Their response to my request is dated 5th March 2024 and was received on 5th March 2024.

The letter from Lowell also states, that “In October 2022, The Hoist Finance UK group of companies was acquired by the Lowell Group”. If this is the case then I respectfully point out that there are doubts over the authenticity of the Notice of Assignment dated as by the date of the letter sent, Lowell had already acquired Hoist Portfolio, as such, I am confused as to how a Notice of Assignment could be sent signed “The Hoist Finance UK Team” six months after Lowell had acquired Hoist Finance. I would like to respectfully point that to allegedly receive a letter of Notice of Assignment with the same date as the letter from Lowell does seem unlikely for the assignment to be exactly the same date as a letter of demand and its authenticity is doubtful.

5. On receipt of the claim form, the Defendant sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has failed to comply with such request and is yet to comply and remains in default of said request.

6. A further request made via CPR 31.14 to the claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim was also made. The claimant has not complied but has stated a request has been made to retrieve the documents, to date nothing has been received.

7. Extensive checks: There are no records of any such Credit Account registered with any of the main Credit Reference Agencies: Equifax, Experian, TransUnion, ClearScore and Credit Karma with account number: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX or with reference to Lowell, Hoist Portfolio or under the original Creditor Name: NewDay Ltd.

8. 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 the agreement XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 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 Original Default Notice pursuant to S.88 Consumer Credit Act 1974.

d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim given the above and failure to be in possession of the relevant evidence.

9. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed.

10. On the alternative, as 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.

11. 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.

[AndyOrch]

Cant really advise as we do not have all the history until you complete the link I posted previously

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Is this what you want to be completed?

Name of the Claimant ? Lowell Portfolio LTD

How many defendant's  joint or self ? Self

Date of issue –  15th Feb 24

Particulars of Claim

What is the claim for – the reason they have issued the claim? 

1. The Claim is for the Sum of £979.69 due by the defendant under an agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974 for a NewDay Ltd account with a reference of xxxxxxxxxxxxx

(note: checking the reference against credit file at the moment).

2. The defendant failed to maintain contractual payments required by the agreement and a Default Notice was served under s.87(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 which has not been complied with.

3. The debt was legally assigned to the claimant on 03-04-23, notice of which has been given to the defendant.

4. Claim includes statutory interest under s69 of the County Courts Act 1984 at a rate of 8% per annum from the date of assignment to the date of issue of these proceedings in the sum of £68.07.

The claimant claims the sum of £1047.76

 

What is the total value of the claim? 1207.76

Have you received prior notice of a claim being issued pursuant to paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) ? No

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? NA

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

When did you enter into the original agreement before or after April 2007 ? After 2007 - if in fact I held an agreement

Do you recall how you entered into the agreement...On line /In branch/By post ? Would have been online if I did

Is the debt showing on your credit reference files (Experian/Equifax /Etc...) ? NO

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 Purchaser - Lowell

Were you aware the account had been assigned – did you receive a Notice of Assignment? No

Did you receive a Default Notice from the original creditor? No

Have you been receiving statutory notices headed “Notice of Sums in Arrears”  or " Notice of Arrears "– at least once a year ? NoWhy did you cease payments? I don't even recall having the account

What was the date of your last payment? Not known

Was there a dispute with the original creditor that remains unresolved? No, but again, no recollection of account

Did you communicate any financial problems to the original creditor and make any attempt to enter into a debt management plan? NA

[AndyOrch]

 I will check the defence later.

[AndyOrch]

2 hours ago, SimplyBeyondWords said:

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. The Claimant has not complied with paragraph 3 of the PAPDC (Pre Action Protocol) 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.
 

3. Paragraph 1 is noted. I may in the past have had an agreement with NewDay Ltd 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 78 request, to date both requests have not been complied with.

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

5. Paragraph 3 is denied. I am unaware of any legal assignment or Notice of Assignment pursuant to the Law and Property Act 1925 Section 136(1). A copy of assignment was sent by Overdales Solicitors dated 28/04/2023, but this was not the original or on formal letter headed paper as requested and also states “please see enclosed letter from Lowell for information on your next steps”. The letter also enclosed, headed on Lowell Headed Paper dated “28 April, 2023”. Their response to my request is dated 5^th March 2024 and was received on 5^th March 2024.

The letter from Lowell also states, that “In October 2022, The Hoist Finance UK group of companies was acquired by the Lowell Group”. If this is the case then I respectfully point out that there are doubts over the authenticity of the Notice of Assignment dated as by the date of the letter sent, Lowell had already acquired Hoist Portfolio, as such, I am confused as to how a Notice of Assignment could be sent signed “The Hoist Finance UK Team” six months after Lowell had acquired Hoist Finance. I would like to respectfully point that to allegedly receive a letter of Notice of Assignment with the same date as the letter from Lowell does seem unlikely for the assignment to be exactly the same date as a letter of demand and its authenticity is doubtful.

6. On receipt of the claim form, the Defendant sent a request by way of a section 78 pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974, for a copy of the agreement, the Claimant has failed to comply with such request and is yet to comply and remains in default of said request.

7. A further request made via CPR 31.14 to the claimants solicitor, requesting disclosure of documents on which the Claimant is basing their claim was also made. The claimant has not complied but has stated a request has been made to retrieve the documents, to date nothing has been received.

8. Extensive checks: There are no records of any such Credit Account registered with any of the main Credit Reference Agencies: Equifax, Experian, TransUnion, ClearScore and Credit Karma with account number: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX or with reference to Lowell, Hoist Portfolio or under the original Creditor Name: NewDay Ltd.

9. 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 the agreement XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX 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 Original Default Notice pursuant to S.87 Consumer Credit Act 1974.

d) Show how the Claimant has the legal right, either under statute or equity to issue a claim given the above and failure to be in possession of the relevant evidence.

10. As per Civil Procedure 16.5 it is expected that the claimants prove the allegation that the money is owed.

11. 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.

Just a few tweaks as above.

 

 

.

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Thx & noted

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Letter of reply today.

states;

"We are requesting copies of agreements with NewDay with who you entered into an agreement along with statements and DN. Whilst we endeavour to provide evidence of the debt ASAP you appreciate this is dependent on info from original creditor".

Interesting bit;

Notwithstanding above; our client is aware of likely costs that will be incurred if the matter proceeds further, which would be added to the outstanding debt. Our client is willing to settle for either;

One Payment of £900 or £1200 in two payments. If paid they will notify court etc etc etc.

How can we contact you (like I would tell them to phone me!!!).

Sounds like no paperwork rubbish to me and it might be surprising to them that it doesn't show on any Credit File anywhere.

Thoughts??

[dx100uk]

std begging letter everyone gets at this time in a claim.

read other lowell claimform threads here

use our enhanced googlesearchbox

always best to keep reading up not vanish and do nothing for 2 weeks so you are aware of the court process, whats to come, whats next and how to react or not.

but never do anything without checking here 1st!

dx

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Respectfully DX100 - not disappeared anywhere and doing plenty of reading, as per my thread above.

Just not always from here (as in home, not other site - I've also read on here people taking advice from other sites and failed - evidence enough?!  ).

Advice appreciated though.

[dx100uk]

good well done

std letter.

n180 next if they are brave

keep a watch on MCOL for the court stating they have been sent out.

 

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Just for purposes of keeping this up to date.

Received DQ direct from Overdales - gist of it being going for Mediation (they say CC will send own copy of DQ - blah blah).

Checked MCOL - nothing has been sent or updated by the Court in regards to Mediation as yet.

Their letter dated 20/03/24 which just happens to be the same date as their begging letter (comment 17 of thread) - clearly they had made their mind up as to where this was going before they had even acknowledged the defence.

[dx100uk]

simply intimidation tactics.

let 'em get on with it.

dx

 

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Just a quick Q.

I am sure I read somewhere of a timeframe for them to decide if they want to go to mediation but can't for the life of me find it now, can't find the thread (or am I imagining it?).

After they received Defence, how long do they have?

I'll write things down now as I come across it.

IGNORE - I read it on the acknowledgement from the CC. Apologies for additional post.

[dx100uk]

that timelimit is pretty immaterial sadly at present.

we've seen cases of recent whereby 6mts has been allowed without the use of an N244 to lift a stay.

CCBC recently changed name and became CNBC with new online portals , all of which create humungous delays in processing of paperwork recently.

start to cheer if the 2mts mark passes, but at present all bets are off.

dx

 

[SimplyBeyondWords]

Just to keep this up to date. DQ sent out today according to online portal.