Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • In short you never communicate with a Debt Collector, they have no power here at all. The snotty letter is only used to respond to a properly worded Letter Before Claim. The only time you would be recommended to contact the PPC is to send the snotty letter. You do nothing but keep the tripe they send you unless you receive a letter before claim.
    • Probably to do with the Creditor accepting the reduced payments claim as part of the IVA. - Thats my guess anyway.  As for the mount outstanding... 60k is incredible and im pretty sure a DRO wouldnt cover that much even after the new legislation.    For you @Alfy - Please stay headstrong and stop worrying. My viewpoint on debt with debt collectors is simple. You are a figure on a spreadsheet loaded into a database for them to run a collection cycle through.  They dont care about emotions or your situation, they just care about paying off their shareholders and trying to turn a profit.  They use varying tactics to increase the pressure on you to the point where you will break. People then fall for this an either cave in to DCAs before doing their own due diligence on the debts that are purchased or turn to IVAs like you have.    They are better ways to handle this and Im glad you feel better after a good nights sleep - I hope you can keep it up. 
    • Good afternoon,    I am writing in reference to the retail dispute number ****, between myself and Newton Autos concerning the sale of a Toyota Avensis which has been found to have serious mechanical faults.    As explained previously the car was found to be faulty just six days after purchase. The car had numerous fault codes that appeared on the dash board and went into limp mode. This required assistance from the AA and this evidence has already been provided. The car continues to exhibit these faults and has been diagnosed as having faults with the fuel injectors which will require major mechanical investigation and repairs.    Newton Autos did not make me aware of any faults upon purchase of the vehicle and sold it as being in good condition.    Newton Autos have also refused to honour their responsibilities under The Consumer Rights Act 2015 which requires them to refund the customer if the goods are found to be faulty and not fit for purpose within 30 days of purchase.    Newton Autos also refused to accept my rejection of the vehicle and refused to refund the car and accept the return of the vehicle.    It is clear to me that the car is not fit for purpose as these mechanical faults occurred so soon after purchase and have been shown to be present by both the AA and an independent mechanic.   Kind regards
    • Commercial Landlords are legally allowed to sue for early cancellation of the lease. You can only surrender your lease if your landlord agrees to your doing so. They are under no obligation even to consider your request and are entitled to refuse. You cannot use this as an excuse not to pay your rent. Your landlord is most likely to agree to your surrendering the lease if they want the property back in order to redevelop it, or if they wants to rent it to what they regards as a better tenant or at a higher rent. There are two types of surrender: Express surrender in writing. This is a written document which sets out the terms of the surrender. Implied surrender by conduct. (applies to your position) You can move out of the property you leased, simply hand your keys back and the lease will come to an end, but only if the landlord agrees to accept your surrender. Many tenants have thought they can simply post the keys through the landlord's letter box and the lease is ended. This is not true and without a document from the landlord, not only do you not know if the landlord has accepted the surrender, you also do not know on what basis they have accepted and could find they sue you for rent arrears, service charge arrears, damage to the property and compensation for your attempt to leave the property without the landlord's agreement. Unless you are absolutely certain that the landlord is agreeable to your departure, you should not attempt to imply a surrender by relying on your and the landlord's conduct.  
  • 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
      • 161 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
  • Recommended Topics

Diskmandave-vs-Lowell Finacial (CapOne)***WON***


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6143 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

I thought I should start my own thread on this!

 

 

1st, I got a letter from Capital One, sold 5 & 1/2 yr old debt to Lowell Portfolio 1 even though account is in the highest state of dispute.

 

2nd, stern letter from Lowell Financial demanding payment, "today".

 

3rd, put 1 & 2 straight into cross cut shredder...

 

4th, phone call from Lowell Financial, everso polite but *MUST* agree debt exists and agree a repayment programme!

 

5th, Tell Lowell, account is in highest state of dispute, Lowell agree's that for payment of £10.00 (S.A.R.) ALL PREVIOUS STATEMENTS will be sent.

Told Lowell's that account should not have been sold whilst in dispute...

 

5th(a) Still no previous statements received....

 

6th, CCA Request sent by Registered Post, and stating account is in the highest state of dispute.

 

7th, & most surprisingly.............!!! Reply by Lowell.........

 

(i) Letter to Lowell Finacial (Leeds), My letter to Lowell Financial:

 

Mr David Xxxxxxx,

4x YyYyYy XxGgVe,

Ashton Under Lyne,

Lancashire,

OLX XXX.

 

Reference No: XxXxXxXx

 

08/01/2007

 

Dear Sir/Madam,

 

I refer to letters dated 25/12/2006 and 03/01/2007 which were both recieved today in

respect of a very old Capital One account. I am informing you that this account is still in

dispute and that it was indeed Capital One whom breached the agreement, not me. I trust

that you will not further attempt to collect any alleged outstanding amount whilst there is

a dispute still in force.

 

Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

I do not acknowledge ANY debt to your company. I require you to supply the

following documentation before I will correspond further on this matter.

 

1. You must supply me with a true copy of the alleged agreement you refer to.

This is my right under your obligation to supply a copy of the agreement under

the legislation contained within s.78 (1) Consumer Credit Act 1974 -

(s.77 (1) for fixed sum credit).

I enclose a cheque to the value of £1 in payment of the statutory fee. This is not to

be applied as any kind of payment to the disputed account.

 

2. A signed true copy of the deed of assignment of the above referenced agreement

that you allege exists.

 

3. You are notified that you are obliged to supply these documents, whether you are the

original creditor or not under S189 of the CCA 1974.

 

Non-compliance with my request is a criminal offence under the above Act and will

result in a report being submitted to the relevant statutory authorities.

 

As you are aware, a credit agreement that is not properly documented and signed by the

customer is totally unenforceable under the CCA and therefore is a complete defence to

any court claim that is issued.

 

Take note at this stage, that any legal action you may contemplate will be both

vigorously defended and contested.

 

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

 

 

XZXZXZ YVYVYVYVYVYV..

 

 

 

 

(ii) REPLY RECIEVED,

 

Dear "diskmandave",

 

16/01/2007

 

RE: Lowell Portfolio I Ltd

 

We are in receipt of your request for a copy of your credit agreement in this matter in accordance with Section 78(1) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

 

We are also in receipt of the prescribed fee from you.

 

We are requesting a copy of the agreement from your original lender with whom you originally entered into the agreement.

 

Whilst we will endeavour to reply to you with the required information within the prescribed "28 day period" under the Consumer Credit Act you'll appreciate this is dependant upon receipt of the information from the original creditor.

 

We will advise you further if it will take longer than the prescribed period and the reason to supply the required information.

 

We trust this meets with your satisfaction.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

Nigel Bearex(?) (closest guess!)

edit: Nigel Beaven

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------

 

Back to reallity now!

 

I'm just guessing that Lowell's haven't got either the CCA or the deed of assignment???!!!

 

So, what do I do next? Write back NOW, stating.......?.. What? Do I write

back NOW stating multiple Criminal Offences, or just wait for them to commit the 30 day CCA criminal offence???

 

? They shouldn't have bought the debt whilst it was in dispute, without a copy of the original CCA, and without a deed of assignment...?!!

 

I'm just guessing that i'm in a total win/win situation here...?

 

 

I do hope that this is of some help to anyone who has just got Lowell's chasing them!

 

In the mean time, can anyone suggest a letter that I send to Lowell's next?

I will keep it updated here...! :-):)

 

 

Best regards - Dave...(diskmandave)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 137
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Diskmandave this reply you got is standard and yes is more than likely they wont supply agreements i would personally leave it at that and wouldnt remind them especially not before the criminal offence has occurred. What you want to do then depends on what you want from this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Diskmandave this reply you got is standard and yes is more than likely they wont supply agreements i would personally leave it at that and wouldnt remind them especially not before the criminal offence has occurred. What you want to do then depends on what you want from this.

 

Thank You :)

 

But, haven't they committed criminal offences already? They haven't got either the CCA or the deed of assignment! And they've allegedly bought this debt from Capital One...? They're having to send (by their own admission) to the original creditor for the doc's that i've requested....

 

I appreciate your reply, is it from personal experience?

 

Thanks & best regards - Dave (diskmandave).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is, recently lowell bought some old debt from capital, i sent cca and i also got this letter you got, mines was sent some 15 days ago, they are in default but not created a criminal offence yet, i will review my situation once they go over this deadline or whenever they provide documents required, whichever comes first, hope this helps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes it is, recently lowell bought some old debt from capital, i sent cca and i also got this letter you got, mines was sent some 15 days ago, they are in default but not created a criminal offence yet, i will review my situation once they go over this deadline or whenever they provide documents required, whichever comes first, hope this helps.

 

I wish you the best of luck :):):)

 

Regards - Dave (diskmandave).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes seen that but truth be told they arent going to get these documents required and are going to create a criminal offence, then if they get say 5% of what they bought paying up they will make more money than what the debt actually cost them, some people have actually requested any monies paid to that account to be returned as there is no agreement, personally my debt was the wifes credit card and its approaching 6 years now, only a small amount.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes seen that but truth be told they arent going to get these documents required and are going to create a criminal offence, then if they get say 5% of what they bought paying up they will make more money than what the debt actually cost them, some people have actually requested any monies paid to that account to be returned as there is no agreement, personally my debt was the wifes credit card and its approaching 6 years now, only a small amount.

 

So, really speaking, a stern letter after offence has been committed, (or even now, see all above), will get debt written off? I'm still peeved that the original CapOne account is in the highest state of dispute and they've dared to sell it!

 

Best Regards - Dave (diskmandave).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its never written off just legally unenforceable until they produce the documents required to substantiate the debt this remains the case.

The point is after 12 working days they are in default and even if they find the documents after this time but before the 30 days are up you can tell them no as they defaulted, they would need to go to court to legally enforce the debt which they may, but it adds more weight to your chance of them not doing this if they commit a criminal offence then find the documents as the judge would take a rather dim view of them regarding their handling of data and can fine them £2500 or even imprisonment, this i believe is what most people will do when non-compliance is after the 30 days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its never written off just legally unenforceable until they produce the documents required to substantiate the debt this remains the case.

The point is after 12 working days they are in default and even if they find the documents after this time but before the 30 days are up you can tell them no as they defaulted, they would need to go to court to legally enforce the debt which they may, but it adds more weight to your chance of them not doing this if they commit a criminal offence then find the documents as the judge would take a rather dim view of them regarding their handling of data and can fine them £2500 or even imprisonment, this i believe is what most people will do when non-compliance is after the 30 days.

 

Thanks so much for your replies! This is all new to me! I'm so fed up after nearly 10 years of hell and near nervous breakdowns that i'm actually going to bed now and not being able to sleep through pure excitement, rather than absolute dread!!!

 

The 2 debts that currently i'm contesting are Lowell and BLS Collections, and from what you say, are now both in "default". I'm not currently paying

anything to Lowell (Cap-One), but, BLS i've been paying £8.00/M for ages!

Should I stop paying BLS? What I need to know is, what do you mean when U say, "in default?". When the CCA request is in default, what does that mean to me???

 

Best Regards - Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It does take some time to request statements and agreements from the original creditor so it buys you a lot of time. When Lowell buy debts its not practical to get the agreements and statements shipped over as lowell own hundreds of thousands of debts

Link to post
Share on other sites

whilst in default you are disputing the debt until they provide the documents required, you should not pay them whilst this situation remains, although you should put it by incase they turn up with documents and threaten to have it legally enforced as you would be expected to pay what you missed, however as i said earlier if this is after 30 days then the choice is yours.

  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's 12 days now from the date the letter was signed for, or 14 days from the date on the letter (12+2), i'm guessing either way it's now in default? I'm guessing that the letter can be deemed served on the day it was signed for?

 

Do I write and tell them they're in default or just let the clock keep ticking?

 

Regards - Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Sandrock, if you have entered into any sort of arrangement to pay, keep going til the 12 days have passed and they are in default, so you can then stop paying.

If no arrangement is in place, then personally I wouldn't pay anything til they prove the debt.

Saxon

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is just a thought, should I be putting in a S.A.R - (Subject Access Request)

to Capital One as well? Because more than 50% of the alleged outstanding debt is charges.

 

I'm sure I read somewhere that now they've sold the debt that they're not allowed to credit it to the sold account???

 

Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Update: Lowell Financial are now in default of my CCA request :p

 

But whilst checking my free trial Credit Report, and I don't want to digress to much, my file is clear but there's 3 X "unverified reason" by Camelot Group PLC and the address matches that of The National Lottery head office!!! :eek: I do remember "looking" at playing the lottery online method but what on earth are they doing a credit search on me for?! :confused: :idea:

 

Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone know why Camelot are in my credit file?

 

Update: Lowell Financial are now in default of my CCA request :p

 

But whilst checking my free trial Credit Report, and I don't want to digress to much, my file is clear but there's 3 X "unverified reason" by Camelot Group PLC and the address matches that of The National Lottery head office!!! :eek: I do remember "looking" at playing the lottery online method but what on earth are they doing a credit search on me for?! :confused: :idea:

 

Dave.

Link to post
Share on other sites

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6143 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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...