Jump to content
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times. ×


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • lookinforinfo
      MET CCTV PCN Starbucks closed - Southgate Park CM24 1PY

      By lookinforinfo · Posted

      You will probably get a couple more reminders followed by further demands fro unregulated debt collectors with even increasing amounts to pay. They are all designed to scare you into paying.  Don't. It's a scam site and they do not know who was driving and they know the keeper is not liable to pay the PCN. Also the shop was closed so they have no legitimate interest in keeping the car park clear. So to charge £100 is a penalty as there is no legitimate interest which means that the case would be thrown out if it went to Court.  Keep your money in your wallet and be prepared to ignore all their letters and threats. Doubtful they would go to Court since a lot more people would not pay when they heard  MET lost in Court. However they may just send you a Letter of Claim to test your resolve.  If yoy get one of those, come back to us and we will advise a snotty letter to send them.  You probably already have, but take a look through some of our past Met PCNs to see how they are doing.
    • Jaksmyboy
      IVA failure-DCA chasing-advice please

      By Jaksmyboy · Posted

      Hello, been a while since I posted on here, really hoping for the same support an advice I received last time :-) Long, long story for us, but basically through bad choices, bad luck and bad advice ended up in an IVA in 2016. The accounts involved all defaulted, to be expected. In 2018, I got contacted by an 'independent advisor' advising me that I shouldn't be in an IVA, that it wasn't the solution for our circumstances and that they would guide us through the process of leaving the IVA and finding a better solution. I feel very stupid for taking this persons advice, and feel they prey on vulnerable people for their own financial gain (it ended with us paying our IVA monthly contribution to them)-long and short of it our IVA failed in 2018. At the same time the IVA failed we also had our shared ownership property voluntarily repossessed (to say this was an incredibly stressful time would be an understatement!) When we moved to our new (rented) property in August 2018, I was aware that creditors would start contacting us from the IVA failure. I got advice from another help website and started sending off SARs and CCAs request letters. I was advised not to bury my head and update our address etc and tackle each company as they came along. Initially there was quite a lot of correspondence, and I still get a daily missed call from PRA group (and the occasional letter from them), but not much else. However, yesterday i had a letter through from Lowell (and one from Capital One) advising that they had bought my debt and would like to speak with me regarding the account. There will be several.of these through our door i suspect, as we did have several accounts with Capital One. Capital One have written to us with regular statements over the last 5 years, and my last communication with them was to advise of of our new address (June 2019), I also note that all of these accounts received a small payment in Jan2019 (i'm assuming the funds from the failed IVA pot). Really sorry for the long long post, but just thought id give (some of) the background for context.... I guess my question at the moment is.....how do I respond to Lowell...do I wait for the inevitable other letters to arrive then deal with them all together or individually...? Do I send them a CCA?  Many thanks
    • Malocclusion
      MET CCTV PCN Starbucks closed - Southgate Park CM24 1PY

      By Malocclusion · Posted

      hi all just got the reminder letter, I have attached it and also the 2nd side of the original 1st pcn (i just saw the edit above) Look forward to your advice Thanks   PCN final reminder.pdf pcn original side 2.pdf
    • NewsBot
      Singapore air offers to pay turbulence victims

      By NewsBot · Posted

      The airline said it was offering to pay $10,000 to those who sustained minor injuries.View the full article
    • NewsBot
      BMW China parts probe expanded by US Senate panel

      By NewsBot · Posted

      The Senate Finance Committee wants answers from BMW over its use of banned Chinese components by 21 June.View the full article

  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.

      BankFodder posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • Big Motoring World Enfield /Blackhorse - done over on car - @BigMotoringWrld

      ATJ posted a topic in Vehicle retailers and manufacturers,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,

    • A2Dominion - Housing Association property flooding - damning ombudsman report

      WanTToMoveOn posted a topic in Residential and Commercial lettings/Freehold issues,

      Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
      WanTToMoveOn

      Picked By

      WanTToMoveOn,

    • Post in Suing a parcel delivery company when you don't have a direct contract with them – third-party rights Copy of judgment available

      BankFodder posted a post in a topic,

      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
      BankFodder

      Picked By

      BankFodder,
    View All

  • Recommended Topics

Twitter X - Include the @company's twitter name in your post title – here's why…
The UK Stands With Ukraine - 'Slava Ukraini'
Parcel delivery insurance is prohibited under section 57 – Consumer Rights Act – Read about It Here and in The Times.

Lowell Portfolio Ltd.

cymosa

By cymosa
in Debt Collection Agencies

 Share
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 6206 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

cymosa

cymosa

Posted
Posted

I had a letter from Lowell Portfolio in February alluding to the fact that they might make me bankrupt. I then received a Statutory Demand under the Insolvency Act 1986. They claimed they had bought the debt by way of debt sale agreement claiming £5,500. The Statutory Demand was completed in a slap-dash manner, Lowell Portfolio claiming to be a Government Department or Minister of the Crown. My defence to the demand included a paragraph regarding unfair terms regulations (reconfigured from the Consumer Action website) in line with the claim for bank charges, re Wilson versus Lowe 1896.

 

Lowell Portfolio failed to attend the Insolvency Hearing. The judge made reference to the fact that I had "a reasonably good chance of success" regarding the claim of £5,500 being a penalty. Because Lowell Porltfolio did not attend the hearing the judge threw the Statutory demand out. Hope this helps others.

 

Graham

Link to post
Share on other sites
ICO

ICO

Posted
Posted
I had a letter from Lowell Portfolio in February alluding to the fact that they might make me bankrupt. I then received a Statutory Demand under the Insolvency Act 1986. They claimed they had bought the debt by way of debt sale agreement claiming £5,500. The Statutory Demand was completed in a slap-dash manner, Lowell Portfolio claiming to be a Government Department or Minister of the Crown. My defence to the demand included a paragraph regarding unfair terms regulations (reconfigured from the Consumer Action website) in line with the claim for bank charges, re Wilson versus Lowe 1896.

 

Lowell Portfolio failed to attend the Insolvency Hearing. The judge made reference to the fact that I had "a reasonably good chance of success" regarding the claim of £5,500 being a penalty. Because Lowell Porltfolio did not attend the hearing the judge threw the Statutory demand out. Hope this helps others.

 

Graham

 

 

Hi there !!!

 

Just a quickie and sorry if I sound stupid, but did you attend court to have the SD set aside ???And that is when it got thrown out as Lowell didn't show ???

 

I had an SD sent via second class post around the same time !!! Same sort of stuff included in mine !! I didn't apply to have it set aside as they sent it to the wrong address too !!! Nor have I acknowledged it . . .

 

Have you heard anything from Lowell since the SD ????

Link to post
Share on other sites
thinksmart

thinksmart

Posted
Posted

Been there too! My hearing for setting aside comes up soon. Same shody form filling. Pretty sure Lowell Portfolio won't attend as they have no case but they are ignoring all my letters. Have advised them that I will be seeking costs and loss of revenue from work and that I will also be suing them for harrassment and trying to embezzle money to which they are not entitled. No response appears to me to be their modus operandi. Here's a thought... not sure if it would be admissible but I'm wondering if it could be shown that they do this regularly and don't turn up to hearings then maybe they would be seen to be abusing the legal system, wasting court's time systematically and possibly even to be in contempt of Court. Any thoughts? Anyone else out their experienced similar? Might be fun to endanger their credit licence!

Link to post
Share on other sites
cymosa

cymosa

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Hi there !!!

 

Just a quickie and sorry if I sound stupid, but did you attend court to have the SD set aside ???And that is when it got thrown out as Lowell didn't show ???

 

I had an SD sent via second class post around the same time !!! Same sort of stuff included in mine !! I didn't apply to have it set aside as they sent it to the wrong address too !!! Nor have I acknowledged it . . .

 

Have you heard anything from Lowell since the SD ????

HI,

Yes I applied to have it set aside.

Graham

Link to post
Share on other sites
cymosa

cymosa

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Been there too! My hearing for setting aside comes up soon. Same shody form filling. Pretty sure Lowell Portfolio won't attend as they have no case but they are ignoring all my letters. Have advised them that I will be seeking costs and loss of revenue from work and that I will also be suing them for harrassment and trying to embezzle money to which they are not entitled. No response appears to me to be their modus operandi. Here's a thought... not sure if it would be admissible but I'm wondering if it could be shown that they do this regularly and don't turn up to hearings then maybe they would be seen to be abusing the legal system, wasting court's time systematically and possibly even to be in contempt of Court. Any thoughts? Anyone else out their experienced similar? Might be fun to endanger their credit licence!

HI,

 

Haven't heard anything more from Lowell Portfolio since they didn't appear at court. I couldn't agree with you more. It is harrassment and a waste of court's time. I would've thought the courts themselves might have taken some action but am not familiar with court proceedings. I am in dispute with Capital One over PPI but judge said I would've probably been successful with Wilson versus Lowe argument. It's time Lowell Portfolio had some hassle.

 

Graham

Link to post
Share on other sites
Belaflat

Belaflat

Posted
Posted

To be honest, I think you all could have saved yourselves some money simply by ignoring these demands.

I am not knocking any of you though since before I found this site, I too would have been absolutely petrified at the prospect of being made bankrupt for what amounts to peanuts to these people.

There are plenty of people who have received them and heard no more as they are just a bluff in nearly all cases.

I had one from lowell ages ago followed by a "time is nearly up" letter with a reduced payment offer.

Never heard anything about that one since.

 

Out of interest, did these forms arrive by post or were they hand delivered by a process server and did the papers have a valid Court stamp on them.

 

If they were by normal post and unstamped, you could have safely ignored them.

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites
ODC

ODC

Posted
Posted
To be honest, I think you all could have saved yourselves some money simply by ignoring these demands.

I am not knocking any of you though since before I found this site, I too would have been absolutely petrified at the prospect of being made bankrupt for what amounts to peanuts to these people.

There are plenty of people who have received them and heard no more as they are just a bluff in nearly all cases.

I had one from lowell ages ago followed by a "time is nearly up" letter with a reduced payment offer.

Never heard anything about that one since.

 

Out of interest, did these forms arrive by post or were they hand delivered by a process server and did the papers have a valid Court stamp on them.

 

If they were by normal post and unstamped, you could have safely ignored them.

 

Whilst not knocking anyone who fights with Clownells. I have used Belaflats plan myself. I ignore Clownells letters and threats and when they pass it to their paramiltary wing Hamptons Illegal I have done the same. I ignore their phone calls and pointless letters. Why??? you ask. The ALLEGED debt is small, and seeing what has happened here thay can never produce a CCA only an application form. The debt is almost certainly statute barred by now as we all know they bought a bunch of CApone debts that were nearing their sell by date. If in the very unlikely event they get their act together and I have to reply to them then with the advice I have learnt on here I will tie them up in so many knots that they will end up giving me money. They are W*****s and full of huff and puff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
thinksmart

thinksmart

Posted
Posted

Just to say that all of the "official" advice that I could find on the net (by whch I mean sites which advise on debt problems) was most definitely NOT to ignore stautory demands. I wasn't aware they they required an official Court stamp but will try to find more about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rory32

rory32

Posted
Posted

"Here's a thought... not sure if it would be admissible but I'm wondering if it could be shown that they do this regularly and don't turn up to hearings then maybe they would be seen to be abusing the legal system, wasting court's time systematically and possibly even to be in contempt of Court. Any thoughts?"

 

thinksmart, the term you are looking for is "vexatious litigant".

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
thinksmart

thinksmart

Posted
Posted

Hmmm the word vexed me for a moment there - thank goodness for dictionary.com! Who would be vexing whom though? Certainly Lowell Portfolio have proven to be most vexatious. I understand that when acting for oneself a Court gives a certain amount of leeway - enough perhaps to chuck in some details of their other abuses of the legal system.

Link to post
Share on other sites
ODC

ODC

Posted
Posted

Courts will give ordinary members of the public a great deal of leeway because they dont know the procedures etc

 

However they will clamp down hard on Clownells solicitors who shoul after all know better. They are very severe on VEXATIOUS LITIGATION which in the case of Clownells would not be the hardest thing in the world to prove.

 

Most DCA cases never see the inside of a court because they rely on their bullying to scare people into paying. The simple truth is that if they had the proper proof of the debt and all the paperwork they would have you in Court quicker than you could say Vexatious Litigation

Link to post
Share on other sites
rory32

rory32

Posted
Posted

If convicted of being a vexatious litigant you can not raise any legal action against anyone without the prior consent of a High Court judge. It's always worth a try!!

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rory32

rory32

Posted
Posted

If you require more info with regards to the implications of this term read here http://www.tsol.gov.uk/Publications/scheme_publications/internal_guidance/vexatious_litigants_policy.pdf

 

When I use this term solicitors suddenly don't want to speak to me, won't return my correspondence. And here was me think I was developing a pen pal :D

HAVE YOU BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY BY CREDITORS OR DCA's?

 

BEWARE OF CLAIMS MANAGEMENT COMPANIES OFFERING TO WRITE OFF YOUR DEBTS.

 

 

Please note opinions given by rory32 are offered informally as a lay-person in good faith based on personal experience. For legal advice, you must always consult a registered and insured lawyer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
thinksmart

thinksmart

Posted
Posted

 

Out of interest, did these forms arrive by post or were they hand delivered by a process server and did the papers have a valid Court stamp on them.

 

If they were by normal post and unstamped, you could have safely ignored them.

 

Belaflat, where did you pick up information on Statutory Demands that aren't stamped by a Court being safe to ignore? I can't find anything that would confirm this is the case.

 

Kind regards,

 

Thinksmart

Link to post
Share on other sites
Belaflat

Belaflat

Posted
Posted

Its a standard tactic of DCa's.

Generally, sent by second class mail and easily downloaded from the internet.

If stamped by a court, then a process server would be the normal method of delivery.

The London gazette also carries record of authorised stat demands.

 

I have had 3 now and when it is delivered by hand I will take note, and then check first to see if it has been stamped by a Court office, but until such time, I will ignore.

 

When delivered by normal mail, unless you acknowledge its delivery, how can you say it has been duly served when procedures state that all attempts at personal service must have failed before it can be sent by post.

 

Mine and others personal experiences and passing on the same, not offering definitive advice.

Of course I will pay you everything you say I owe with no proof.

Oooh Look....Flying Pigs

Link to post
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


Follow: @real_CAG

Navigation Links

Welcome
CAG Community Centre
CAG Library
Banks & Credit
Other financial Institutions
Retail
Non-Retail
Work & Social
PayDay and Short term Loans
Debt
Motoring
Legal

Latest

Our Picks


Help and Support

CAG Library
Questions about This Site
Change your notification sound
Change your profile picture - FREE!


Useful LInks

County Court Forms
MoneyClaim Online
CPR - Pre-Action Protocols
Civil Procedure Rules
UK Legislation
Youth Consumer Service

Reclaim the right Ltd

registered in the UK
reg.05783665
reg. office:-
262 Uxbridge Road, Hatch End
England
HA5 4HS

The Consumer Action Group

The National Consumer Service
×
×
  • Create New...