Jump to content

  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • 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
      • 162 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 Finance For Hsbc

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5777 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


Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 



Recommended Posts

About 6 years ago I had an account with HSBC, and an overdraft facility (i think, but only for £100 if i remember rightly). I was ironically enough working for Baines and Ernst at the time, a debt consolidation company in Manchester.


I ended up leaving here and as I received my final pay into my account, I decided to draw it all out (it wasn't that much!!) and spend it on some things we needed for our home.


However, the same day as I had drawn the money out, Baines and Ernst decided they had overpaid me and took the money back out of my account, therefore causing me to go above my overdraft limit. Not receiving any money into this account, I didn't know until I had received a letter from HSBC demanding the account to be brought up to date.


I angrily rang them and said I didn't know that people were allowed to take money out of my account without my permission (and it didn't have an overdraft facility on it or anything). They said if they had paid money in they had to the close of business to take the money back. I was that annoyed I stomped my feet and told them that there was no way I was paying for what I classed as their mistake, and asked them how they expected me to seeing as I no longer had an income.


I didn't hear a thing, then out of the blue, 6 years later ot there abouts, a letter came from Lowell Finance to tell me that they had taken over the debt. I angrily phoned them and said if I was liable for it why had HSBC not contacted me since I disputed it 6 years before? Again, being the push over that I am, I had to agree to pay it back. At the end of the day its only £10 per month I have to pay them, but its the cheekiness of it I cant get over.


Is there anything I can do for this or do I have to just grin and bear it? I have to admit to being in quite a bit of debt, although I am starting to get there. I just don't feel its fair that people seem to take advantage of me when I am at my lowest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You could try just ignoring them, or challenge them to take Court action. It's highly unlikely that they will actually do anything because it costs them money to take you to court. If you contest it, which you should do given the situation, it may end up costing them more money than the debt is worth.


Remember, Lowell are a private company trying to make a few quid at the expense of others. They bought this "debt" for about 20 quid, and a court case will cost them at least double that, with no guarantee they get anything back at the end. They'll try and scare you into paying up.


For all their threats and snotty letters they have no real authority, although they like to give that impression.


Tell them to take a hike.



Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

....and as a PS,


I forgot to say don't buckle when you start getting letters from Hampton Legal, which you undoubtedly will. Lowell Financial and Hampton Legal are one and the same. They use the company name Hampton Legal in the hope the word 'Legal' will be enough to pressure you into submitting. Keep the letters - they could be useful if it becomes necessary to defend any (unlikely) court process.


Remember, they have no real authority. It's all scare tactics.


All the best.



Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yer then it gets passed to their actual litigation dept who are called Hamptons legal, so everything tallies up when they actually do issue proceedings on you like they do with thousands a month



They must be losing a hell of a lot money spending pounds chasing pennies, but that's the mentality of Lowells. Yes, Hamptons and Lowells are the same company, and perhaps someone in "Hamptons" has the nouse to spot when they're in danger of actually losing out. How else could they survive chasing disputed cases such as this, where the amount is so small??


It only needs the backbone to argue your point over these disputed matters when/if it goes to court, and receiving that letter saying "District Recorder (or whoever) has directed this case to be struck out" is a very satisfying feeling.


In truth, very few people actually have action taken against them for small amounts, for the obvious reasons stated.


Gravitas, didn't you get your bonus this month?? You seem to be quite determined to defend Lowell in particular judging by your posts.....regardless of whether they are right or wrong. Very similar to another guy I know; Steve23 ;-)



Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
Yer then it gets passed to their actual litigation dept who are called Hamptons legal, so everything tallies up when they actually do issue proceedings on you like they do with thousands a month
As far as I can see Hampton legal just issue the same EMPTY threats as the guys and gals on the Lowell and Red Debt desks. The only difference in the threats is the different headings on the begging letters. Hampton Legal are not actually a firm of solicitors but merely a trading style of the Lowell Group. If they try to pass themselves off as solicitors that would be against the law. Everyone knows Lowells solictors are a well known London firm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can I CCA them when I never signed an agreement that I am aware of? What will that achieve?


If they can't produce evidence of the debt ........ there is no debt:). The onus is on them to prove it exists.... and if they can't - tell them to take a hike ... :D

Nemo me impune lacessit



Advice & opinions given by johnnymitch are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.



If you think I've helped you please feel free to tickle my star :-D

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?

  • Create New...