Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Is the letter headed Letter of Claim/before Claim or similar? If not, it sounds like more of the threatogram chain. If you're not sure, post up an anonymised copy of the letter and we'll check. HB
    • So guess what, we have received a final demand letter for £100. It states if payment is not made by 11/06 they will have no option but to forward the case to their litigation dept with a view to commence County Court Proceedings. So just wondering if anyone has any advice. Do we ignore this? or do we need to take action? Thanks 
    • hi dx, thanks for helping just re-reading everything this morning and I must have missed this one from uncle in his thread "What you should not do, is not contact the Banks and simply default on payments. "  are you in disagreement with this based on your last sentence?
    • Thanks for the reply and clarification, that might just explain why in my case contact has pretty much ceased. Though with such companies it doesn't mean they won't ever threaten to return to court as a tool to force one's hand if they feel they are not self informed on their chances etc.  But concerning how last year they tried to use the CCJ to get a charging order and the court granted an intirum order on our mortgage using the CCJ that would have been a good 2-3 months beyond the 6 years, should the court not have checked the age of the CCJ in the first case or would they always grant an interim order simply off the back of a CCJ being produced without even checking the age of it?.  Had I not defended that action at the time they may well have got a default using a CCJ older than 6 years which could be a concern going forwards. At the time when I contacted the court to question the paperwork for a final order application the clerk suggested people don't get informed when companies apply for interim charging orders, they are automatic if a claimant has a CCJ and people only get contacted once a date for a final order application goes through. kind of begs the question if such companies can continue a seemingly backdoor method to attempt default action if un-defended if the initial application doesn't need to check the age of a CCJ?.
    • Hello!  Wondering if someone can help with this.  I suspect not but worth a go.  I appreciate the "contract is with the seller" line, which is what Evri has fed me but wanted to see if someone with experience in these things could suggest anything else I could do here.  I appreciate there are many topics about lost parcels - My parcels weren't lost, until the driver walked up to my door with them and then decided to make them lost/stolen... I'll summarise what has happened.  Wednesday of last week - Evri delivery driver stole / walked off with 3 of my parcels.  -  Arrived outside my properly, took photos (3 separate photos as its 3 separate deliveries) of the tops of the parcels (pointlessly zoomed in on just the labels, couldn't see anything else, other than a small piece of the pavement and a little weed, which doubly confirms it was outside my door as I can see the same plant), marked the order as delivered and walked off with them.  He's marked on the Evri GPS marked that he was outside.   -  3 different deliveries, from the same company (same boxes etc.), but 3 separate tracking numbers. -  Went through the Evri bot which opened a case on each tracking number.  I then phoned them and left a voicemail explaining what had happened. -  24 hours later had a canned response asking me if the packages had turned up and to check around etc..  I responded explaining again what happened and that they've definitely been taken. -  4 days later,  this morning, I get a response telling me to ask the merchant to refund me. I've responded to this message with a long email, repeating what I said, that I believe the driver has stolen these packages and that he took those suspicious top down shots of the packages, marked them as delivered without ringing or knocking etc.  I've said that I expect them to investigate further, but I gather they won't. In my several messages to them initially and later, I told them I don't care about a refund and wanted the parcels.  They contain some sentimental stuff, nothing of high monetary value, hence me going to this trouble.  I only paid £25 for the contents. I did contact the merchant when this first happened and they asked me to wait a few days.  They ended up refunding me despite me asking them not to and that I wanted them to escalate it with Evri because this appears to be a case of theft.  They didn't seem bothered - Refunded me and told me to go back to Evri and escalate it with them? So - Is there any way to compel Evri to conduct a proper investigation with this driver?  Search for my parcels? I have quite a lot of deliveries handled by Evri (not out of choice) - They used to have a fantastic chap and I rarely had any issues.  He has been replaced by a new guy and I believe the route is handled by this same guy who I believe has taken my packages.  Naturally, I fear this is going to happen again in the future if no investigation occurs. Appreciate any assistance - Thanks for reading. Al.  
  • 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

Lowell Financial CCA Letter Mumbojumbo reply


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

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5823 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'm just not convinced it's a genuine Lowell employee. I just can't believe anyone would be thick enough spend all day in a stressful call centre situation trying to effectively steal money from people, and then try to convince those who know better that what they are doing is completely 'honourable' and justified.

 

But the more I think about it..........:mad:

HOIST BY THEIR OWN PETARD.

 

Blimey it works....:-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Most DCA's take the the moral high ground. They are brainwashed in to thinking that they are superior and the debtors are the lowlife. I am absolutely convinced the mole is a genuine employee. I would not be surprised if the mole was quit high up in the organisation. They are running scared and the actions of the mole justify that. If we keep the pressure on and get continued public support we can see an end to the underhand tactics and malpractices of these people. Non compliant CCA request applied for after 26 May is now an offence under new legislation and we should hit the DCA's hard with this. After the oneshow the TS's would have to take a more proactive stance. The mole knows the end is nigh for his immoral earnings and his post are of a desparate man about to lose his job. :cool:

Fight the injustice's of life with joy in your heart and abandon bitterness as it will destroy YOUR soul. Just at the foot, of a very steep learning curve. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very unlikely that Mole-Inside is the genuine article as Lowell employees run the risk of dismissal if they are found to be posting on these sites, :)
There have been several 'visitations' to this site by the Leeds Losers. All short lived I hasten to add. It would appear that the truth is hard to stomach for the DCA Threat Monkeys

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Hoist by their own petard."

 

"victim of their own scheme" Sounds good to me dannyboy. ;)

Fight the injustice's of life with joy in your heart and abandon bitterness as it will destroy YOUR soul. Just at the foot, of a very steep learning curve. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just found this about Lowells

 

SAFE - Struggle Against Financial Exploitation Ltd. - INFORMATION CONFUSION

 

 

Isn't it nice to think we worry them soooooooo much they have to come on here and try to give us wrong information.

 

I wonder how many DCA Monkeys have dreams of being used by a Dominatrix? Usually people like that enjoy being dominated outside of their "stressful" jobs!

 

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fortunately the same sources that Lowell use to 'Trace' alleged debtors are available to anyone who wants to use them.

 

Im amused that if Lowells directors are not doing anything wrong why they should fear for their personal safety.

 

It seems alright for Lowells to use sytems to Trace people yet when the same people try to see where the directors of Lowell spend their ill gotten gains then they run crying. Two sets of rules eh?

 

Hope they dont get paranoid at every car thats behind them on the way home from the office.

 

Do these people really think that anyone actually cares about them enough to target them. What a sad life they mus lead. Still I suppose they could employ some of their highly trained Licensed Field Agents to guard them.

 

secret.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites

The records at Companies house can be purchased online for the princely sum of £1-00. Although the up to date records of Lowell Farcical show the Directors as living c/o Enterprise House older records show a different address for each of them should anyone be in the least bit interested. These records are available for anyone to view at their leisure. They are not secret, neither is the electoral list, the telephone directory, online estate agents nor various other records which can be located by a few keystrokes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just found this about Lowells

 

SAFE - Struggle Against Financial Exploitation Ltd. - INFORMATION CONFUSION

 

 

Isn't it nice to think we worry them soooooooo much they have to come on here and try to give us wrong information.

 

I wonder how many DCA Monkeys have dreams of being used by a Dominatrix? Usually people like that enjoy being dominated outside of their "stressful" jobs!

 

:D

 

 

I think it's quite cute that they ran off to the ICO quoting laws. All of a sudden the ICO means something to them! Maybe CAG should post a response that we don't recognise that law and will be sending out some crews to run them off the road? :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

What sort of world do you want your kids to grow up in?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So they must be living in the same fear that they engender into others by threatening doorstep visits. How ironic:D I feel so sorry for them:wink:

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone could collect their doorstep at any time:D.

BANK CHARGES

Nat West Bus Acct £1750 reclaim - WON

 

LTSB Bus Acct £1650 charges w/o against o/s balance - WON

 

Halifax Pers Acct £1650 charges taken from benefits - WON

 

Others

 

GE Money sec loan - £1900 in charges - settlement agreed

GE Money sec loan - ERC of £2.5K valid for 15 years - on standby

FirstPlus - missold PPI of £20K for friends - WON

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...