Alex_Delarge V's Lowell/HSBC **WON**

[Alex_DeLarge]

Account now in default as I have not received anything.

[Alex_DeLarge]

Well it only lasted a week, today I recieved a letter threatening court action and a possible CCJ, also this is my last chance to pay etc etc.

 

They say I have not made my last payment of the amount we agreed back in august, except the amount they have put is more than the amount we agreed (this is the reason I found CAG and how this all started), I did not agree to the payment amount going up after 3 months and then canceled the D/D and promptly sent of the CCA request which they have aknowledged reciept of.

 

Surly if the account is in default on their part thay are not allowed to threaten me with CCJ'S, Court, and hound me for money, is this a last ditch attempt as they cannot get the CCA.

 

Whats the next step on my part?

[Alex_DeLarge]

Can anybody help me with this please?

[Brassed off]

Sounds like a standard nastygram from Lowells Alex.

If they have received your CCA, it’s probably a scare tactic because they haven’t got the Agreement.

Just wait and see what other tosh they come up with

The 12+2+30 will be up on 22nd February and if you haven’t received a full reply to your CCA request, you can report them to Trading Standards for chasing an unsubstantiated debt.

Post back if you receive anymore correspondence and we’ll find a nice "bog off" letter to send to our friends in Leeds

[Alex_DeLarge]

Cheers for that Brassed off, just needed a bit of reassurance. Will post if anything more arrives, no doubt it will.

[Alex_DeLarge]

And it has, a few days ago an almost identical letter arrived, the usual rubbish about the last chance to repair my credit file etc. I am not even going to write to them reminding them of the fact the account is in default.

 

If anything arrives after the 22nd of Feb then I will be reporting then to Trading Standards, but for the time being I'm not even going to waste my time with them.

 

I mean what kind of idiots send confirmation that they are in reciept of your CCA request, then once it has defaulted (on their part) start sending out the old threat-o-grammes. Mind you from what I have read its not like they are even going to get in any trouble for it, so why waste my time telling them its not allowed, I think they already know and do it anyway.

[Curlyben]

Hang tight til the 22nd then we'll hit em

[Alex_DeLarge]

Monday morning and another letter, same as the others.

[Alex_DeLarge]

Well recieved a threat-o-gramme from them today (from Robert Kennedy the pre-litigation advisor), apparantly I have not honoured the agreement I entered (funny, dont remember signing anything), and from what I remember they put the monthly ammount up without asking if I could afford it then failed to supply me with a copy of my CCA.

 

Now I have the opportunity to pay a reduced amount blah, blah, CCJ, blah Baliffs, blah. Yes we have heard it all before so I will not waste any further time repeating the drivel.

 

To get to the point the 12 + 2 + 30 days was up on the 22 of Feb, I was not at all surprised to recieve this letter, in fact I expected a couple more.

 

So which letter is it now???

[Alex_DeLarge]

Please

[ODC]

Just report their sorry asses to TS (dont forget to send a copy to Leeds TS)

 

Lowells are the so called professionals so they know they are in default of your request for a CCA. Its not your duty to remind them.

 

Should you feel like writing to the Muppets here is a Curly ben special

 

Dear Sirs,

 

 

Account no xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

ACCOUNT IN DISPUTE

 

 

Re: my request under the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

Thank you for your letter dated **********, the contents of which are noted

 

You attention is drawn to the fact that this account is subject to a serious dispute. On xx/xx/2007 I requested ********supply me a copy of the credit agreement covering this account pursuant to the Consumer Credit Act 1974 section 78. To date ******** have failed to comply with my request and have totally ignored my written reminders sent via recorded delivery of this fact. Without production of the said agreement I am unable to assess if I am indeed liable for any alleged debt to you or *******, nor does it give me any chance to evaluate whether any original agreement was ‘properly executed’ as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974

 

 

For the avoidance of any doubt I have included section 78(1) and 78(6) of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, which states…

 

78 Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement

(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of [£1], shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

(a) the state of the account, and

(b) the amount, if any, currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and

© the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.

(6) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement; and

(b) if the default continues for one month he commits an offence.

 

 

 

Clearly as no agreement was supplied on request, this in no way complies with the requirements of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 and I now draw your attention to section 78 subsection 6 which states If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement;

 

Clearly this is a situation as described in s78(6) Consumer Credit Act 1974 and the debt is unenforceable at this time. In addition, I draw your attention to section 127 (3) Consumer Credit Act 1974 which states

 

127(3) The court shall not make an enforcement order under section 65(1) if section 61(1)(a)(signing of agreements) was not complied with unless a document (whether or not in the prescribed form and complying with regulations under section 60(1)) itself containing all the prescribed terms of the agreement was signed by the debtor or hirer (whether or not in the prescribed manner).

 

This is backed by case law from the Lords of Appeal in Ordinary (House of Lords) the highest court in the land. Your attention is drawn to the authority of the House of Lords in Wilson-v- FCT [2003] All ER (D) 187 (Jul) which confirms that where a document does not contain the required terms under the consumer credit act 1974 the agreement cannot be enforced.

 

 

To clarify s61(1) states

 

(1)A regulated agreement is not properly executed unless—

 

(a) a document in the prescribed form itself containing all the prescribed terms and conforming to regulations under section 60(1) is signed in the prescribed manner both by the debtor or hirer and by or on behalf of the creditor or owner, and

(b) the document embodies all the terms of the agreement, other than implied terms, and

© The document is, when presented or sent to the debtor or hirer for signature, in such a state that all its terms are readily legible

 

In addition the prescribed terms referred to in section 60 CCA1974 are contained in schedule 6 column 2 of the Consumer Credit (Agreements) Regulations 1983 (SI 1983/1553) and are inter alia: - A term stating the credit limit or the manner in which it will be determined or that there is no credit limit, A term stating the rate of any interest on the credit to be provided under the agreement and A term stating how the debtor is to discharge his obligations under the agreement to make the repayments, which may be expressed by reference to a combination of any of the following—

 

1.Number of repayments;

2.Amount of repayments;

3.Frequency and timing of repayments;

4.Dates of repayments;

5.The manner in which any of the above may be determined; or in any other way, and any power of the creditor to vary what is payable

 

 

Therefore based upon the Consumer Credit Act 1974 this debt as it stands is unenforceable and should this proceed to litigation, a court is precluded from making an enforcement order under section 127(3) unless a true copy of the signed agreement is produced..

 

At the point where this account entered into the default situation as described in s78 (6) CCA 1974 no other charges are allowed to be added until such time as ********* become compliant with my request. As ****** are still not in compliance with my request I insist that the following takes place with immediate effect

• All charges levied since ******** 2007 be removed from the account and further charges cease until such time as ******* comply fully with my original request or such time as a court makes an enforcement order
  
• All entries which refer to missed payments be removed from my credit file
  
• All collection activities by your company cease with immediate effect until ******** comply with my request from ********* 2007 or such time as a court makes an enforcement order

In addition, I draw your attention to the Office of Fair Trading’s guidance on debt collection

 

The OFT guidance which was issued July 2003 (updated December 2006) relating to debt collections and what the OFT considers unfair, I have enclosed an excerpt from page 5 of the guidance which states

 

2.6 Examples of unfair practices are as follows:

 

h. Ignoring and/or disregarding claims that debts have been settled or are disputed and continuing to make unjustified demands for payment

 

What I Require.

 

I require that you send me a true copy of the executed agreement as required by the Consumer Credit Act 1974. If you are unable to supply the requested documentation because no such agreement is in existence I require written clarification as such.

 

I require that you comply with my request within 7 days of the date of this letter. I will not correspond any further with you until I either receive a copy of the requested documents as laid down in section 78(1) CCA 74 or clarification that such agreement doesn’t exist. I am advised that should you persist in pursuing this debt ignoring the above information you will be in breach of the Administration of Justice Act 1970 section 40 as well

 

No other correspondence will be accepted

 

Should you attempt litigation it will be vigorously defended and the failure to supply documentation under the CCA 1974 is a complete defence to any legal action and your actions will be vexatious and unlawful

 

 

I trust this out lines the situation

 

Regards

[Alex_DeLarge]

Cheers ODC, if I don't have to write to them I won't. The letters from lowell don't scare me anymore so they can send as many as they like, its just more ammo for me if I need it later on.

 

Is there a template letter to TS, as from what I have read on here they are not always as well informed as the CAG and some times need bringing up to speed on consumer rights, which they shouldn't really.

 

I Am going to put the complaint in writing so a copy can go in my lowell file.

[Alex_DeLarge]

Well, I have just contacted the local trading standards, who have another comapany handling thier calls.

 

After a quick rundown of the situation regarding Low eels (get it Low eels, never mind) and being told I need to speak to OFT, I thought I would come on here and mention just how ill informed trading standards are (at the least the advisor I spoke to was).

 

I tried to tell him about the threats of the doorstep agent and how they have no right to call round without an appointment, which I would not be granting. I made it clear I was not talking about baliffs but doorstep bullys.

 

He told me they had every right, I told him if thats what you are telling other people who ring up then you are giving out the wrong information, and this is the very reason the DCA's are so successful as they prey on the ignorant and mis-informed. I quoted part of the letter template regarding doorstep calls " Furthermore, should it be your intention to arrange a “doorstep call”, please be advised that under OFT rules, you can only visit me at my home if you make an appointment and I have no wish to make an appointment with you.

 

There is only an implied license under English Common Law for people to be able to visit me on my property without express permission; the postman and people asking for directions etc (Armstrong v. Sheppard and Short Ltd [1959] 2 Q.B. per Lord Evershed M.R.). Therefore take note that I revoke license under Common Law for you, or your representatives to visit me at my property and if you do so, then you will be liable to damages for a tort of trespass and action will be taken, including but not limited to, police attendance."

 

After my 10 minute explanation he has told me its a matter for OFT, why then has he gone on to give out the wrong information. And to finish he asked, "so do you owe the money or not" (where have I heard that before) I said that is irrelevent, its about Lowell commiting a summmary offence in relation to my CCA request.

 

How are we supposed to beat these people when the ones who are supposed to help us do not even know what they are talking about, thank God for the CAG is all I can say

 

So to sum it up he made some notes and thats probably the last I'll hear of it.

 

Contacted OFT who said put it in writing or an email, which I am doing.

 

Rant over.

[Alex_DeLarge]

Today recieved a letter from Haptons Legal, quoting courts cost and solicitors costs and interest charges etc etc, so have sent off the curly ben letter to them (recorded of course)

 

I noticed at the bottom of the letter in small print it said this: Hamptons Legal is a trading style of Lowell Financial Ltd. I know they are all one in the same but what is a trading style, never heard that one before, did they make it up?

 

I addressed it to Stephen Hunter and used the the Lowell address rather than the Hamptons Legal PO BOX address.

[Curlyben]

Yep Hamptons are Lowells legal sounding arm.

They have the same powers as Lowells.

Well you know you are getting to them when you receive a Hamptons letter.

Next you'll have one from RED debt threatening bankruptcy

[Alex_DeLarge]

ok, latest update. After sending off the advised letter to hamptons/lowells/etc last week I recieved a nice letter from the local Trading Standards office, letting me know that they are looking into it and they themselves have involved Leeds trading standards.

 

I now have a direct number and email for the person dealing with this and will be checking in with them on a regular basis to let them know if I have recieved anymore threat-o-grammes etc and also to find out if they are actually doing anything.

[PossVox]

...subscribing...

[Alex_DeLarge]

Today recieved the "NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE A COUNTY CORT CLAIM" letter, the one where they use the words "If" and "May" quite a few times and gives me 3 days to pay, also has the court cost etc on it.

 

This seems to be thier response to my last letter which reminded them that I had still not recieved the copy of my original CCA.

 

Its been nearly 3 months now since I made the CCA request. I have every letter they have sent me and every letter I have sent them. Trading Stadards are aware of what has been going on.

 

If this did go to court, and I sort of hope it does, I take it I would recieve notice and would have time to put a defence together based on the lack of a signed CCA, which I understand is an absolute defence.

 

This letter just looks like another threat-o-gramme, please advise.

[ODC]

This letter is bog standar Lowells Bovine Excrement. As yo have noticed its full of IFs and MAYs. There is no point in even answering it. As you have a complain ongoing with TS I suggest you pass it to them.

 

As for Court.

 

In the highly unlikely event of these clowns issuing a County Court Summons you would get plenty of time to prepare your defence. The fact that they have singularly failed to comply with your CCA request is in itself a complete defence to any Court action they MAY be foolish enough to attempt.

[Alex_DeLarge]

Thanks for the reassurance.

 

I would just like to say thank you to everyone who as helped me so far, I don't know where I would be without this forum.

[ODC]

Thanks for the reassurance.

 

I would just like to say thank you to everyone who as helped me so far, I don't know where I would be without this forum.

Probably paying a firm of shysters money they could not prove you owe or that they even had a legal right to collect:eek:

[mr.ton]

Today recieved the "NOTICE OF INTENTION TO ISSUE A COUNTY CORT CLAIM" letter,

 

Its also my intention to win the lottery..never happens though

[ODC]

Its also my intention to win the lottery..never happens though

IF you enter the Lottery you MAY win and IF a win is recorded against your name you MAY

a. instruct persons to go into a shop to seize goods up to the value of your win

 

b. get an attachment of winnings order for your wife and close family

 

c. not have to work any more so you will have no earnings to get paid to a DCA

 

d. you MAY wish to ring a DCA ten times a day and laugh loudly down the phone at them.

 

e. you MAY puchase several large houses with no charge on them

[Alex_DeLarge]

IF I won the lottery I MAY take out a few full page adverts in the national press informing people of their consumer rights in regard to DCA's, and not forgetting to mention the CAG

 

I bet I could cost them more than the adverts cost me.

 

I wonder how much a carefully worded full page advert is???

[Brassed off]

Very cheap if you leave it until the last minute and take "late space"