Lowell crawls from under their stone again

[westendwendy]

This is an old Egg debt of approx 4K that was passed to Lowells about a year ago and I think the last payment was made some time in 2004,so a way to go until SB.

 

I started to deal with it with the help of fellow caggers but got so bored with the constant stream of mail from Lowell,Hamptons,Red that in the end I just filed the letters away neatly and totally ignored all of them,naughty I know, but they seemed to be going round in circles so I just left them to play.

 

I hadn't heard anything for a couple of months but today I came home to find a letter from Red who are now threatening a Stat Demand.

 

My question is, if they seriously intend to issue a SD,why didn't they just do it or is this yet another scary letter?

 

I don't know much about SD's other than they can lead to bankruptcy but I don't own a house,have no assets other than my car which I have to use for work so I'm just wondering what the worst case scenario would be.

 

I know that I should send them a CCA but how long could this be delayed?

[cashins]

My question is, if they seriously intend to issue a SD,why didn't they just do it or is this yet another scary letter?

 

I don't know much about SD's other than they can lead to bankruptcy but I don't own a house,have no assets other than my car which I have to use for work so I'm just wondering what the worst case scenario would be.

 

 

Most of them are - which is why the OFT got sh*ty about them.

 

If you do get one, don't ignore it.

 

Good news is most can be fairly easily defeated- and with a bit of luck you can get costs too. (Judges tend not to like SD's either as they are often seen as trying to short circuit the proper court process)

 

David

[spitfire650]

Fortunately most of the Lowell staff from the directors down to the telephone monkeys have the IQ of a root vegetable and are all poorly trained and ignorant. Most do not have even a basic understanding of the Consumer Credit Act. They rarely do anything more once they have exhausted their collection of standard threatening letters will then start offering you “never to be repeated” discounted settlement figures in reducing amounts. Once you get one of these letters you can safely assume they have thrown in the towel.

 

It is very unlikely that they will have any documentation to support the claim against you and if the original account fell under the Consumer Credit Act, your first step should always be to request a copy under Section 77/78. You will find the template letter at

http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/581-cca-request-letter

 

If they are unable to provide a copy of an enforceable agreement they are prevented by law from taking any further action. Usually they are unable to produce anything at all. If they persist with their pestilence after that point you should report them to the Office of Fair Trading and Financial Services Ombudsman, both of which have an interest in their dubious activities.

 

In the very rare cases where they do start court action, or issue a statutory demand, they will back off immediately if a defence is filed and you will find yourself in possession of a costs order against them. Ironically however, as you will see from numerous posters who have obtained judgments they are not that quick in paying their own debts, and usually necessary to commence enforcement action to obtain payment!

 

In short there is no need to pay these sponging parasites a penny. They have supplied you with nothing and even if the original creditor was owed money, they have long since received a substantial tax credit from writing the account off. If the account is not already statute barred, it soon will be, at which point any reference to it will drop off the credit reference agency files.

 

Good luck!

[zazen.warrior]

*do not surely

[westendwendy]

Sorry,I meant tp post the latest letter,here it is:

 

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v140/Westendwendy/CAG/STATDEMANDTHREAT.jpg

[ScabHunter]

What I think is happening here is that Clownell are probably aware that the alleged debt is fast approaching the statute barred stage, and that they have to pull out something pretty frightening before that happens.

 

A Statutory Demand is issued with the intention of following through with a petition to make someone bankrupt, and in doing so, recover the balance of the alleged debt. Or, at least that is the theory. Let's apply this theory to the current situation and see if it makes sense.

 

In the first place, it costs nearly £1,000 to petition for someone's bankruptcy. For this to be worthwhile, the alleged creditor has to be sure of getting a return. They have to be sure that the alleged debtor is in a position to pay. This means, in at least 90% of cases, that the alleged debtor will need to own property. Even then, the alleged creditor will need to ensure that there are no other priority debts for a much higher sum which would take away their benefit from forcing a sale.

 

In this case, you own no property. You mention a vehicle, which is needed for work. An Official Receiver will not usually take a vehicle which is needed for work. In cases where the vehicle was worth a lot of money, the Receiver could force its sale and order the purchase of a cheaper one. Only you know whether you have been riding to work in a Rolls-Royce or Derek Trotter's Reliant Robin, but I would suspect there is unlikely to be enough value to justify Clownell paying to make you bankrupt.

 

So, if the facts don't add up, what is going on? Put simply, what is going on is an abuse of court process. Any Statutory Demand issued in this situation would have the sincerity of an aging Don Juan and the genuineness of a Wedgwood toilet bowl. They have no more intention of petitioning for your bankruptcy than Irn-Broon had of making the banks responsible for their own profligacy. They are merely using the Insolvency Rules as a convenience, and we all know what people do in those.

 

It is nothing more than an attempt to frighten you into parting with your money.

 

You also have to ask the question of why they would spend £1,000 to make you bankrupt, when they could just issue a much cheaper claim in the County Court, get judgment, and bind you to the alleged debt for ever. If the latter option was available to them, would it not make a lot more sense? The problem for them, of course, is that to get Judgment, you need to have paperwork.

 

Ah! I suspect we have just found their Achilles heel. No paperwork, would you believe?

 

I would very strongly suggest making a CCA request if you have not already done so. This will serve two functions. Firstly, if Clownell were silly enough to issue a Statutory Demand, their default would be a complete defence against it. Secondly, it will almost certainly be all you need to tie this alleged debt up until it is safely over the SB line.

 

If you aren't familiar with Statutory Demands, I would read up on them, and how to get them set aside. I would have my defence ready in advance just in case the attack came. Not only to see it off, but also to give myself the greatest chance of hitting them for costs to make them pay for their abuse of the Insolvency Rules. Judges, as a whole, hate this abuse of process, so you've always got a good chance of getting costs awarded.

 

Let us know if you need links to some useful threads.

 

Of course, if they do issue a Statutory Demand, you should report their pathetic backsides to the OFT as mr. ton so eloquently suggests. The OFT don't like this abuse either.

 

One suspects this is Clownell's last desperate attempt to make you quake in your boots before the white flag is raised. Be prepared, though, just in case.

 

SH

[42man]

Wendy....I would certainly send off for a copy of your agreement....if you have no dispute at this stage, then they could potentially serve one on you.

[PGH7447]

there misive says 10 days I thought it was 18 to get set aside

 

Oops my mistake I was reading DRed's idle threat to pay within 10 days, silly me

[westendwendy]

Thanks for your replies,a lot of them are along the same line of thought as mine - basically scare tactics again - I'll give them ten out of ten for trying but that's about all they will get out of me.

 

My car is about ten years old so worth very little and I have a friend who was made bankrupt a few years ago but she was allowed to keep a car that was only five years old so I think I can discount that bit.

 

I think my best course of action is to CCA Lowell as 42man suggests,at least that will put a spoke in their wheel for a while.I've just been putting it off just to see how far they would go but as they keep telling me,they won't go away so this might give them a push to either put or shut up.

 

Thanks again for your replies,I need all the ncouragement I can get.

[ScabHunter]

There is not a snowball's chance in hell that Clownell will petition for your bankruptcy - they would lose money on the deal.

 

Still, a Statutory Demand could still be issued. If it was, it would be a clear abuse of court process.

 

Sending off the CCA request now is definitely the right move. It is extremely unlikely that Clownell will be able to find any paperwork before the alleged debt goes SB. If they did manage to do this, it is highly likely to be unenforceable. Have you seen the thread by pt2537 covering old Egg agreements?

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/legal-issues/188093-egg-credit-agreements-what.html

 

If Clownell did issue a frivolous Statutory Demand, which is still possible, you would have a complete defence if they were in default of your CCA request. If it happens, apply to have it set aside, and apply for your costs. Any half-decent judge would be angry at Clownell's blatant abuse of the insolvency court process and would award you costs.

 

It probably won't happen anyway, but if I was in your shoes I would want to be prepared. I would have my set aside application ready and waiting just in case a SD came through the door.

 

There are plenty of good threads where people have had Statutory Demands set aside. I would read a few and work out how you would fill out the forms. It is not complicated once you understand the principle.

 

SH

[westendwendy]

I sent off for the CCA as advised on October 19th and arrived home to a letter from Red:eek:

 

Only to find it was a full and final settlement offer:rolleyes: ,no CCA, no nothing.

 

So I'm still waiting:(

[cerberusalert]

Send the in Dispute letter http://www.consumerforums.com/resources/templates-library/86-debt-collectors/571-failiure-to-provide-a-copy-of-the-agreement-within-the-prescribed-timescale then you will have an absolute defence against anything they throw back at you.

[ScabHunter]

So, they've passed it to the monkey on the opposite desk.

 

dRED is presumably so named because RED is the colour of DANGER!!! They aim to FRIGHTEN YOU into submission!! Just like Crapbot who have now copied this idea with their alter-ego FIRE (Further Irrelevant Rubbish Emitted). Pay us MONEY or you will BURN IN HELL!!!!!

 

The truth, of course, is that a full and final settlement offer is usually a good sign. If they had compliant paperwork and could get judgment for the full amount, why would they settle for less? They are hardly renowned for their generosity.

 

If you want to accept their generous offer, here is my template from last year -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/104668-cabot-windywoo-4.html#post1813490

 

SH

[yubnub]

 

If you want to accept their generous offer, here is my template from last year -

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/debt-collection-industry/104668-cabot-windywoo-4.html#post1813490

 

SH

 

That is genius!